to performe the Covenant Fourthly he caused all that were present in Jerusalem and Benjamin to stand to the Covenant and made all that were present in Israel to serve even to serve the Lord their God 2 Chron. 34. 32 33. that is all that were under his jurisdiction he kept them in such awe by his regall authority and penall lawes as they durst not but stand to the Covenant 10. THESIS As de facto 't is evident in the examples related besides divers others recorded in Scripture that good Magistrates did alwayes meddle for God and his truth against false worship and seducers so that they did it de jure and ought to do so is as clear from the approbations speciall testimonies promises rewards and blessings given by God of them made to them and bestowed by God on them for so doing There 's hardly any place mentioning what the Patriarchs Judges Kings Magistrates did in this kind but there 's some commendation some blessing some speciall testimony from God for so doing recorded in those places 2 Chron. 14. 2 3 4. Asa did that which was good and right in the eyes of the Lord his God For he took away the Altars of the strange gods and the high places c. So 't is said of Jehosophat Hezekiah Josiah they did that which was right in the fight of the Lord are highly commended have many blessings upon themselves and their Kingdoms and all for commanding by their Princely power their subjects to good and removing all false worship and the means of it God will not hide from Abraham the thing that he was doing concerning Sodom and the reason is given because he will command his children and his houshold after him to keep the way of the Lord. Iacob took away the strange Gods from his houshold and all that were with him and God manifests his approbation of it the terror of God was upon the Cities round about Iacob and they did not pursue after the sonnes of Iacob yea God gives such testimony to Princes and Magistrates suppressing false Prophets and false worships that he hath rewarded with temporall blessings wicked Kings for so doing as is evident in Iehu who for destroying Baal out of Israel though he departed not from the finnes of Ieroboam yet his children of the fourth generation should sit on the throne of Israel 2 Kings 10. 28 29 30. 11. THESIS Those Magistrates Judges and Princes even the dear servants of God who being in place of authority and power that out of carnall respects to wives children and other interests have suffered and tolerated Idolatry and other evils though they in their owne persons never practised much lesse commanded any such things nay disswaded from them and not used their power to restraine and hinder them have been both sharply reproved and severely punished by God for it King Solomon having power to hinder his wives from Idolatry and not doing it but suffering them God is provoked to bring wrath upon him and his family 1 King 11. 4 5 6 7 8 9. 10 11 12. to rend the Kingdome from him to stirr up an adversary unto Solomon Hadad the Edomite T is the opinion of many good Divines and that upon the first of Kings ch 11. and in answer to the Arminians upon that Article of falling from Grace that Solomon did not bring or admit Idols into the house of God neither did he command the people that either they should forsake the true worship of God or worship Idols neither can it be proved that he did in his owne person worship Idols This is only certaine that being bewitched by his Idolatrous wives he suffered them to build Altars and high places or at most commanded them to be built and this the word in the Hebrew vers 11. with thee not of thee implies as much for as much as this is done with thee implying done in his Kingdom and neer Ierusalem though not by Solomon himselfe Eli being a Judge because when his sonnes made themselves vile ht restrained them not redressed not their corruptions and abuses about the Sacrifices though he reproved and disswaded them from their wayes by many strong arguments therefore God brought fearfull ruine upon him and his house cutting off his arme and the arme of his fathers house c. as in 1 Sam. 2 3 4. chap. 't is laid down at large 12. THESIS Whereas the Patrons of Toleration except against the instances of the Judges Magistrates and Kings of Iudah and Israel as no sufficient proof for Magistrates power in suppressing falshood and commanding men to receive the truth because they were typicall Kings types of Christ as King of his Church and the Land of Canaan a typicall Land which no other Magistrates or Land beside ever were or are I desire that it may be remembred that other Magistrates Judges and Princes who were before the common wealth of Israel was erected and the judiciall lawes given and of other Common-wealths and Kingdoms did take away and punish Idolatry Blasphemy and command men under their power to worship God and some such examples are not only barely related in the Scripture but approved of Abraham Jacob and Job were before the time of Moses and Aaron before the judiciall Lawes or the Leviticall Priesthood for the Government and worship of the Jewish Church and Common-wealth were given For Abraham and Jacob that 's evident by the Book of Genesis and for Job that he lived in the time between Abraham and Moses is the judgement of many good Divines and Interpreters upon Job and that upon severall reasons given by them of which the Reader may read more in Bucolcerus Pineda Junius and Tremellius Mercerus Master Carylls Expositions on Job and divers others Now of Abraham and Iacobs commanding their children servants and all that were with them to keep the way of the Lord I have spoken of in the tenth Thesis And that in Iobs time and that out of the Land of Canam in the Land of Vz no typicall Land Idolatry and false worship were to be punished by the Magistrates is apparent by Iob 31 26 27 28. where Iob speaks of himselfe If I beheld the Sun when it shined or the Moon walking in brightnesse And my heart hath been secretly intised or my mouth hath kissed my band This also were an iniquity to be punished by the Iudge for I should have denied the God that is above the meaning of which place according to the judgement of the best Interpreters Mercer Merlinus Iunius Pineda and others is that Idolatry and worshiping the creatures as Sun Moon and the Heavens a worship much in use in the East where Iob lived was an iniquity worthy to be taken notice of and punished by the Judges so Mercer reads it digna est it deserves and ought to be punished by the Judges and then observe the reason for I should have denied the Lord that is above So that all false
very uncertain doubtfull other things absurd and untrue As first that to be a Type of Christ is a sufficient ground of a Politicall Civill power over the Church and that typicalnesse qua typicalnesse gives those persoâ—s a power who otherwise have none the contrary unto which is in severall Reasons proved by Doctor Stewart in the second part of his Duply to M. S. page 22. and never yet answered by M. S. or any other though M. S. and many of his Brethren have written upon that argument since Secondly that he who was Head of the State was Head also of the Church in a typicall way whereas many great Divines are of another judgement and show that the Kings of Judah and the civill judicatures were formally distinct from the Ecclesiasticall and that he who was cheif in the State over civill matters was not cheif Iudge and Officer in the Church in an Ecclesiasticall and Spirituall notion of which point Master Râ—â—herford and Master Gilâ—espie having written so fully lately I shall spare to speak any thing and referre the Reader to their learned Books entiâ—uled The Divine Right of Church Government Aarons Rod Blossoming Thirdly that the people of the Iewes were interchangably a Church and a Nation so that whoever was a member of the Church was a member of the Common-wealth and vice versa of which see the Book entituled The Antient Bounds or Liberty of Conscience seated page 60. Now Master Gillespie in his Aarons Rod blossoming Book 1. chap. 2. proves strongly that the Iewish Church was formally distinct from the Iewish State and that in seven particulars as in respect of distinct Lawes distinct Acts distinct Officers so in respect of distinct Members there being Members of the Church among them who had the name of Proselyti Iustitiae and were initiated into the Iewish Religion by Circumcision Sacrifice c. that neverthelesse were restrained and secluded from Dignities Government and Preferment in the Iewish Common-wealth and from divers matriages which were free to the Israelites Master SELDEN also in that learned Book of his De Jure Natur. Gentium lib. 2. cap. 4. lib. 5. cap. 20. speaks as much of those Proselytes Proselytus justitiae utcunque novato patriae nomine Iudaeuâ— diceretur non tam quidem ciâ— is Iudaicus simpliciter censendus esset quam peregrinus sempeâ— cui jura quamplurima inter cives Secondly how do they prove that Iehu Ioash Manasseh Asa Hezekiah Iebosophat Iosiah were Types of Christ and did execuâ—e typically the kingly office of Christ in his Church were Kings in an Ecclesiasticall notion an extraordinary way not ruling only for the Church but in the Church and over it as they say Moses Ioshua David Solomon were in their persons places and actions expresse types of Iesus Christ as 't is evident in the New Testament Pen-men also of Scripture besides Prophets as well as Magistrates and so were extraordinary men that every thing they did in Religion is not a binding example to Magistrates now as many Reformed Divines have showen against the Arminians and Erastians but that Asa Iosiah Hezekiah Iehosaphat were is gratis dictum not yet proved neither were these Pen-men of holy Scripture or Prophets extraordinarily inspired but these foure great Reformers as Kings were stirred up enquiring after and directed by Prophets as the Reader may finde clearly in the stories of them in the Chronicles and Kings Besides I finde not among Divines who have written of the Types of Christ or who grant Moses David Solomon to be expresse Types that they make Asa Iosiah c. to be Types Again of Types of Christ as Divines distinguish there are particular persons types of him as Adam Noah Isaac Joseph Moses Joshua Samson David Solomon Jonah and there are such rancks and orders of men as the First-born Kings Prophets c. Now though all of the first sort are speciall particular Types of him so that the speciall things done by them do typifie and set forth Christ in many particulars of his person actions and sufferings yet the rancks and orders of men as the First-born Kings Prophets may not be typicall in all the particular persons of those ranks and orders at least to the particular acts they do in those ranks and orders but 't is enough for many in those orders to agree in common as in being Kings and Prophets as Christ was there being some in all those orders and ranks appointed of God especially and peculiarly to be the Types which others are not and for whose sakes in those orders and ranks such orders of men were instituted by God to be Types of which many instances might be given with the Reasons thereof in some of the First-born Kings c. but I shall reserve the further handling of that to a second part upon this Subject Lastly supposing Asa Josiah and those godly Kings to be Types of Christ may it not be doubted whether Jehu Ieboash Ammon Ieroboam c. were Types of Christ and did execute his kingly office who yet were commended viz. the two firâ—t for destroying false worship and reproved for not doing it constantly besides could those Kings of Israel and Iudah who yet were lawfull Kings that apostatised from all the whole worship of God the Ceremoniall Law that ordained the Types that destroyed Gods service and the Priesthood made Priests of the lowest of the people be Types of Christ and I desire to be resolved or M. S. the Author of the Antient bounds of Liberty of Conscience stated whether any wicked men were speciall Types of Christ and whether all persons who were Types of Christ were not saved Thirdly suppose these Kings of Iudah were Types of Christ in setting on the Thron of David and ruling over Iudah in Christ the King of his Church coming out of their loines yet they were temporall Kings had Civill authority Now how does it appear that what they did in punishing idolatrous Priests commâ—nding their subjects to the true worship of God they did only as Types by vertue of that Notion and not as they were temporall Kings which must be proved before their examples can be made null and I am sure the Scripture no where faith that the Kings of Iudah and Israel in what they commanded in matters of Religion they did as Types of Christ and not as Civill Magistrates 'T is one thing to be a Type and another thing to doe such things meerly qua Types and what if Christian Magistrates leaning upon this broken staffe suffering all Herefies Blasphemies and Idolatries in their Kingdomes Christ at the last day when they stand before the judgement feat they objecting for themselves the Kings of Israel and Iudah were Types of Christ and all they did was by vertue of their typicall notion shal tell them no but as Magistrates entrusted by God with a power and authority how will they be then confounded will this distinction and notion
contemned Fourthly Whereas punishment by the Magistrate and cutting off by death under the old Testament in cases of Apostasie Blasphemie c is made a Ceremonie and type of excommunication under the new Testament cutting off of casting out and of eternal damnation I may truly Answer this is gratis dictum said but not proved and therefore might deny it without giving any reason and bid the Patrons of Toleration prove it but that the Civill Magistrates punishing delinquents under the old Testament was no Ceremonie nor Type I shall give these reasons 1. Ceremonies shadowes Typical things under the old Law were either of things past or things to come the remembrances of things already done or the Praesignifications of future things but Ceremonies and Types were not the signification of things present and existent Now excommunication and eternal damnation were at that time under the old Law when those commands of punishing with death the Apostate faise Prophet c were given and in use That excommunication and cutting off from the Church were in the Church of the Ieweâ— in the times of the good Kings and Magistrates punishing Idolaters c with the Civil sword let the Reader Consult Aarons Rod blossoming 1 Book 4. 5 6 7. chapt That there was Hell and eternall damnation under the old Law as well as the new both before those commands in Deut. 13. 17. were given and all along after many places of Scripture show as Isaiah 30. 33. 2 Pet. 4. Jude 5. 6 7 that mention Hell for the evil Angels Sodomites the unbeleeving Israelites that came out of Egypt and the wicked Kings of Israel and Judah and therefore that which Hagiomastix saith that cutting off from his People under the Law it exchanged for casting out from his people under the Gospel is very false for there was casting out from the Church as well then as now yea cutting off spoken of in the old Testament in many places means nothing else but casting out of the Church by excommunication for full proofe of which I referre the Reader to Aarens rod blossoming 1. Book cap. 5. pag. 55. 56 57 58 59 As also that passage is not true that the expression of cutting off where ever t is found in the Gospel is mâ—tephorical and allusive only for cutting off is used in the new Testament for cutting of by bodily death as in Gal. 5. 12. and else where the proof of which I referre to the 20. Thesis where I shall handle it fully Secondly The same things may be said with as much reason against bodily outward punishments for breaches of the second Table Adultery Murder Theft as against outward punishing for Apostasie c and if they hold not good against the second Table neither do they against the first Thirdly The Civil Magistrates punishing for moral transgressions is no Ceremonie nor Type acts of morall justice though they may sometimes be extraordinary yet they never were accounted Typical or Figurative but by such as would transforme all the Scriptures into an Allegory and Master Cotton answering such a like evasion in the Bloudy Tenet saith Did ever any Apostle or Evangelist make the judicial Laws of Moses concerning life and death ceremonial and Typical Time was when humane inventions in Gods worship were accounted superstition But now humane inventions in Doctrine may passe for currant Evangelical Divinity And in another place To make a judicial Law a figure without some light from some Scripture is to make a mans selfe wise above that which is written Fifthly the making these expresse commands of God concerning punishing Idolaters false Prophets Blasphemers types and figures of spiritual and eternal punishments of excommunication damnation c is by turning the Scriptures into an Allegory and forsaking their literal sense against the rules of interpretation given by the most Orthodox Divines as Augustine and others a making them utterly void and as opening a wide doore to all errors and foolish conceits that as often as men know not how to answer the Scriptures that crosse their Opinions and lusts and yet have a mind to keepe their Opinions they may still fly to this and say This Scripture is not to be taken litterally but mystically and Allegorically Beza in that judicious Tractate of his De Haereticis a Magistratu puniendis in Answer to Montfortius a grand Patron of Toleration in those times who in many places of his writings made use of this Invention that corporall punishment under the old Law as stoning was no figure of any bodily punishment to be now inflicted but of eternal to which we ought to leave Hereticks or else of that punishment which is inflicted not by a corporal sword but a spiritual the lively word of God writes thus For this was the speciall subtiltie of Sathan of old which yet not one almost of the ancient Fathers observed that when he could not cast the Scripture out of the Church wholly yet by vaine Allegories he made the whole Scripture unprofitable and fabuloùs so as truely there was not one peice of Scripture left free of being contaminated with these Allegories which very course also the Anabaptists and Libertines take at this day But this I would that they should at length show us out of what place of Scripture they have learned that invention and device of the shadowes and figures of the judiciall Lawes Per in Ceremonies and so in some Histories from the Authoritie of Scripture I acknowledge these things But of judicial Lawes or corporall Idolatrie which might shadow out spirituall I remember not that I have ever read any thing But for further satisfaction in this particular I refer the Reader to the Tractate of Beza page 156. 167. Sixthly supposing all Hagiomastix saith were true that those bodily punishments commanded by God under the old Law to be inflicted upon false Prophets Idolaters Seducers Blasphemers had been in some sense typical and Praesignificative of those greater and more spiritual under the Gospel yet it followes not that they are ceased now and may not be lawfully practised for they may remaine and be made use of though the other sense intended be fulfilled too there is a compound sense of some Places of Scripture litteral and historical figurative and spirituall as Weems in his Christian Synagogue second Book page 223. 224 225 226 227 228 showes in which cases when the spiritual is fulfilled eminently the literal is not abolished of which I might give many instances but shall onely name one viz. that of Deut. 25. 4. Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the Oxe which treadeth out the Corne. Now though the spiritual sense of that place be the not muzling the mouth of the Ministers who labour in the Gospel 1 Cor. 9. 9. yet the litteral sense holds stil that a man should forbeare to muzzle the mouth of the Oxe which treadeth out the Corâ—â— or at least t is not unlawfull to forbeare besides by the
to punish for Murther Adulterery Theft more then for Idolatrie Blasphemie Hereâ—ie 2. Hagiomastix brings in the Church again as well as the State surely he is for a Toleration of all Heresies Blasphemies c in the Church as well as the State to have no man punished for his religion with any censure of Admonition Excommunication or Non-Communion In his M. S. he was for spiritual censures but in these 3. yeers last past the man is well improved belike to reason against any Church censure as well as State Punishment And by the way I desire the Reader to observe whatever reason in the wisedome of God there might be that nothing is set down in the Gospels of Christs charging the State with sin for not proceeding against the Sadduces c that cannot be the reason to show the unlawfulnes of Magistrates punishing Hereticks because Hagiom confesses the same of the Church that Christ charged not the Church nor the Officers with sin for not proceeding against the Sadduces and yet I suppose Hagiomastix will not openly professe t is a good Argument that no Church censures may be used against any Heretick however I am sure many of his Compeers in handling the question distinguish of a Toleration and censures granting Ecclesiastical censures though denying Civil And I am sure if Christs never charging the church nor those that bore office in her with sin for not proceeding against the Sadduces be no good argument to take away all Church censures neither is it to lay wast all Magistrates punishing in such cases 3. Christ did to the Scribes Pharisees Sadduces speak and reason against their errors yea reproved and threatned them for those errors which also is granted by Hagiomastix in doing of which he did equivalently and really presse upon them the suppressing and punishing of Heresies in persons under their power whilst he spake to men in Authoritie and denounced the judgements of God because of them He that preaches to a Prince against Idolatrie and showes the evils that will come upon a King and his Kingdome for it preaches to him to restraine Idolatrie though he doe not particularly in expresse words call upon him not to suffer any man to practice Idolatrie and therefore Christ speaking to the Scribes and Pharisees the Rulers and Elders that knew the Laws of God how Magistrates in Israel were to punish false Teachers in speaking so against false Prophets Hereticks and Sectaries as Sadduces c that was a charging them such a thing being spoken to such men to doe their duties against them which by the Law was more then if private persons and being spoken to qua such as Scribes c was a commanding them according to their places to proceed against them For t is a rule among Divines that in many things recorded in Scriptures which are delivered only in common and in general they are to be taken by every one according to their relations and places by the Magistrates according to their relation the Ministers according to theirs and the People according to their Sphere of which many instances may be given in the new Testament 4. Supposing it could be proved Christ never reproved the Jewish Church and State for suffering the Sadduces c yet it followes not Magistrates therefore should tolerate Hereticks and Sectaries and that both because Gods declaration of his mind in other parts of Scripture though not in the Gospel is a sufficient as also because there might be some particular reasons proper to the Iewish State as that Christ saw the Iewish State and Magistracie it selfe that then was to be leavened and corrupted with those errors and opinions to be either Sadduces Pharisees Scribes Herodians and such like so that to have spoken against Toleration and for punishing Sadduces c had been to have spoken to the State not to have suffered it selfe as if one should preach to the Parliament now not to tolerate but to punish themselves So was it for Christ to have urged those commands in Deut. 13. c and those examples of Iosiah Nehemiah c upon the Iewish State then 2. That in the times of Christs preaching the Civil Power of the Common-Wealth of the Jewes was much weakned if not wholly taken away from them by the Romans of which I have spoken something before page 30. and doe now adde that the Iewes had no power at all of capitall punishments then and therefore to what end should Christ charge them with those Lawes of putting false Prophets c to death for full prooâ—e of which I refer the Reader to Master Gillespies Aarons rod blossoming Book 1. chapt 3. page 29. 30 31 32 33 34 35. who learnedly proves that point both from Scripture and the Testimonies of many learned writers who have written of the Iewish Antiquities and Customes and Answers the contrary objections 3. Christ knew that Church and Common-wealth were to be certainly shortly dissolved the Christian Church to be set up and though he warned the People of those errors and wayes and denounced the judgements of God against them yet because he knew the purpose of God was to destroy the Iewish Common-wealth he might not speake for that and the other Reasons forenamed to the Magistrates as otherwise he would of which the Reader may read more in pag. 30. of this present Book And now for putting a Period to this 17. Thesis and to all the Answers given by me to those evasions brought against â—hose old Testament Lawes of Deut. 13. Deut. 17. and the rest I shall briefly adde 3 things First To cleare a little further some passages of Deut. 13. Secondly show the slightnesse and weaknesse of Hagiomast exceptions against those old Testament Laws Thirdly Show the excessive pride and folly of the man in boasting and glorying in such poor weak things as he brings against the Vindicator of the Ordinance for preventing the groth and spreading of Heresies in Sect. 34. 35 36 37 38 39 40 41. First As I shall adde two places more out of Moses Law before omitted in the beginning of the 17. Thesis to prove the Magistrates power of punishing in matters of the first Table viz Deut. 19. 16 17 18 19. and Numb 15. 30 31. the former in case of Apostaâ—ie the latter in case of blaspheming God so to all I have said of Deut. 13. I desire the Reader to observe that God having in the former chapter commanded the worshipping of the ture God and forbidden that of Idols which unquestionably is morall this 13. chap. is fitly added to it as an appendix in which God gives direction for removing the impediments opposite to his worship commanded particularly he commands the Authors of Apostasie not to be hearkned unto nor tolerated but to be punished with death and for that end that such who are obstinaâ—e and will not be amended nor regard their own salvation may be hindred at least from being an impediment to the salvation of
other such ought to be restrained and if they commit Idolatry or other corruptions not so great or so grosse yet by way of proportion and equity such ought to be though in a lower kind and way And 't is evident by many instances that the Iewish Magistrates Kings and others as Iosiah Nehemiah c. did punish in a proportion though not with death those who violated the worship of God and the first Table though they were not guilty of Idolatry and Apostafie to worship other gods nor of worshipping the true God by Idols as by the golden Calves of Jeroboam And if that be good Divinity which M. S. the Father of that Evafion of Idolatry and Idolaters being the adaequate object of the coercive power of the Kings of Judah in matters of Religion hath pag. 89. of the same Book That God prohibiting all manner of violence oppression and hard measure among his people one towards another though such Lawes as those in the letter of them respected only Civil transfactions and dealings betweene men yet the equity and spirit of them extends to spirituals also men being every whit as liable to violence oppressionâ— and hard measure from men for their conscience sake as in any other respects or upon any other grounds whatsoever then from that command Deut. 13. 5 6 7 8 9. and from those examples of Asa Iosiah to inferre an equity of punishing other offences in the same kinde though not named in the letter must needs be better Divinity because every one cannot but conceive that the equity and spirit of a Law may upon better grounds extend to things in the same kinde and of the same nature from one spirituall thing to another from Idolatry to Wil-worship or Heresie then from civill things to religious which differ totâ— genere But setting aside M. S. Concession is there not all the equity and reason in the world from those commands forementioned though granting according to the letter of those Lawes no man should be put to death for any thing lesse then that kind of Idolatry with Apostasie worshipping false gods that those who worship the true God by graven Images by making likenesses of him and that corrupt the doctrine of Faith and Religion should also by the Magistrates bee punished as well by suppressing their Conventicles putting them out of places of power c. though not so much as the others Or is there any equity and proportion in this that God should command punishing with death the highest kinde the Magistrate can inflict for Idolatrie in worshipping strange gods and should forbid any punishment or restraint at all of Idolatry and corruption of his worship in the next degree to that According to degrees of faults to have degrees of punishments is of the light of nature and right reason but to have a higher degree of an offence to bee punished with death and all others not to bee punished at all is against the light of nature and all reason Le ts but look into the Scriptures for the violation of other commands of God as in the 6 7 and 8th Commandements and wee shall finde that where the higher degrees and violations had greater punishments the others went not scorfree For example when adultery was punished with death fornication was punished with fifty shekels of silver and witâ—â— paying of money according to the dowry of virgins Exod. 22. 16. 17. compared with Deut. 22. 22. 28 29. So when stealing of men was death stealing of oxen and sheep was restoring five and foure-fold Exod. 21. 16. Exod. 22. 1. Seventhly there is a great agreement between the false Prophets under the old Testament and the false teachers under the New between Idolatry under the old Testament and Heresies now many Heresies being grosse Idolatries as is evident by many Scriptures of the New Testament which lively parallels and resembles these to each other so that it cannot bee upon any good ground conceived that the first sort should bee punished with death and the latter not punished at all but I referre the fuller clearing of this to the 17. Thesis where upon occasion of opening that 13. of Deuteroâ—omiâ— I shall speak more 15. THESIS Besides the full concurrent testimony and judgement of the most learned Protestant Divines Calvin Philip Melancton Beza Peter Martyr Zanchius Bullinger Musculus Chemnitius Gerardus Bucanus Bilson Cartwright Professores Leydenses Voetius Triglandus that the care of Religion and Gods worship belongs to the Magistrate that God hath given him a power and authority objective and externall in Ecclesiasticall causes to look to Religion as to Civil Justice so as he is bound to see the true Religion and service of God set up and maintained in his Dominions being therupon generally by all Divines cal'd Custos Curator utriusque Tabulae God himself in the Scriptures showes at much annexing the care of Religion and keeping the Law the first Table as well as the second to the Magistrate Deut. 17. 18 19. God there appoints that the King over his people when he comes to the Throne of his kingdome should have a Copie of the Law written out of that which was before the Priests the Levites to be alwayes with him Now the Law there spoken of is meant the whole Law of God the first Table as well as the second that which concerned God as well as man because it was a Copie of that Originall which was kept in the Tabernacle for the Priests and Levites whose office was principally about matters of the first Table and then the end expressed in the 19. verse that the King might learne to feare the Lord his God to keep all the words of this Law showes as much that by the name of the Law must be understood the whole Systeme of the Divine Law so that by this place of Scripture 't is evident that not only the second Table of the Morall Law that contains justice and righteousnesse is committed to the Magistrate but the first also concerning the worship of God is given to his custody And as t is understood of the whole Law so the custody of the Law of God is not here a Custodia legum personalis privata meant only of a personall private keeping as the Pleaders for Toleration evade saying that the King in his person as well as others was to keep the Law but also and cheifly of a Custodia Officialis publica quod Rex curare debeat ut Lex Domini pure doceatur ut cultus instituatur a publike keeping out of office it being the Kings office to care that the Law of God should be purely taught and his worship set up and that it must be so understood consider these following Reasons First this King verse 15. was to be one from among themselves a Brother not a stranger who was to know the Law of God and to keep it personally as well before he was a King as after the Law of God being
committed to private persons equally as to Kings for their particular personall observation and therefore sure in this solemne injunction there 's something new and more required of Kings then was of them before or is of persons meerly private Secondly this was not done till just hee was placed in the throne so saith the text verse 18. The Law was committed to the King as a King at his Coronation which showes it had not reference to the Kings private conversation as a meer man but to his Princely function as a Magistrate which stood in commanding others not in guiding himselfe For no man is a King in respect of himselfe but in ruling his Subjects So Augustin saith of Kings As a man hee serveth God one way as a King another way As a man by faithfull living as a King in setting forth Lawes to command that which is good and remove the contrary So that Kings as Kings serve God in doing that for his service which none but Kings can doe This is also proved from 2 Kings 11. 12. compared with 2 Chron. 23. 11. where to King Jehoash in his solemne inauguration as soon as the Crown is put upon him the Book of the Testimony was given him from the high Priest that hee might know the care and publick custody of the Law was committed to him in his being made a King and in that the command of God with the practise accordingly together with putting the Crown on the head was to give the Law in the Kings hand it showes it was to command it to others and make others keep it And that this was the meaning of it in Jehoash and so in other Princes it may further appeare in that the people at that time being much corrupted in Religion and Jehoaida the high priest desiring much their Reformation and the Restauration of Religion as a meanes to effect it made a covenant between the Lord and the people and as the medium and meanes that that people should bee the Lords people hee brings in the King between them that hee should interpose with his authority to make them the Lords people verse 17. And Iehoiada made a Covenant between the Lord and the King and the people that they should bee the Lords people that hee should set up and maintain the true worship of God and bee for God to bring in the people Thirdly the ends expressed in Deut. 17. Of the Kings prolonging his dayes in his Kingdome hee and his children in the midst of Israel of his not turning aside from the commandement to the right or to the left of his learning to fear the Lord God and keeping all the words of the Law show 't is understood of a publike officiall keeping the Law for the Kings of Israel and Judah could not prolong their dayes in their Kingdomes nor their children enjoy good dayes after them if they suffered Idolatry Apostasie c. in their land though themselves practised it not as may bee seen in Solomon and the stories of the Kings of Israel and Judah neither could they keep all the commands of God there being many commands given to the Iewish Magistrates as is confessed but pleaded to bee Iudiciall and peculiar to them to see their people serve God only and to punish Idolaters and false Prophets Fourthly the practise of the good Kings among the Iewes not only keeping the Law themselves but causing others also as Josiah Hezekiah Asae c. and that from this Text and such like showes it was meant of a publick keeping the Law the diligent execution of their office serves for an evident exposition what God required at their hands And as I have proved that of Deut. 17. speaks of a keeping the Law ex officio as a publick custos so for the taking of another evasion brought by Mr. Goodwin in his Hagiomastix page 132. I desire the Reader to observe that God having given power and authority to the Magistrate to see the first Table kept the duties commanded to bee performed by all under his jurisdiction and to bee guarded against all disobedience and contempt from men it must bee understood in the use of such meanes and wayes God hath allowed the Magistrate as distinct from private persons or ministers viz. such as are proper to him and which God hath given him by virtue of his place to use Now those meanes qua Magistrate are in the exercise of his coercive power by Lawes and Edicts and by the use of the temporall sword given him of God to restrain and hinder such evills and to promote and further such good So Melancton when as the Magistrate is the keeper of the Lawes hee himselfe obeys them and compells others to obey them and defends strongly their authority Therefore he is armed of God with the sword The Minister hee restraines and punishes only with the word of God with preaching and excommunication without bodily force But the Magistrate being armed with the sword punishes those who are conâ—umaicous with punishments of the body Triglandus showes how Ministers Fathers of families Magistrates and all people are commanded to keep the Law and are keepers of the Law and then layes down the difference between all these in keeping the Law The Minister hee teaches whole Assemblies the true rule of holinesse admonishes and exhorts al to subject to the command of Christ and by the power of the keyes casts out from the communion of the faithfull impenitent and refractorie persons The father of a family teaches in his family the exercise of true piety goes before them in example and by his authority restrains his that they shall not turne out of the good way Now he who is Magistrate doth not teach but as a beleever out of the Law of love as other beleevers doe and as a Father of a Family his owne household But as a Magistrate with his coercive power he commands and forces all within his Territories that they shall not outwardly offend against the true Religion and worship of God And so all our Divines who have written of the differences between Civill and Ecclesiasticall power as 〈◊〉 Zâ—â—chiuâ— Amesiâ—â— Apolloâ—â—◠〈◊〉 do show the lawfulnesse of the Magistrates using outward force by pâ—nall Lawes and bodily punishments towards those persons and things whereof God hath given them power I will quote one passage out of Amesiâ—â— Between the Magistrates and the Ministers of the Church there is this difference T is the duty of Magistrates by Civil means and coercive power to procure the common good as well spirituall as bodily of all those committed to their jurisdiction 1. Tim. 2. 2. but of Ministere by Ecclesiasticall means to procure the spirituall good of those committed to them And another out of Bilson Ministers may teach but not command perswasion is their part compulsion is the Princes By all which it appeares the Magistrate having power in matters of Religion as the
but as they are Magistrates so that 't is their part to care by their authority that the Sabbath be sanctified that is that Religion bee preserved and the exercises of piety take place in their Countries and Territories and further know what the office of a Magistrate is in matters of Religion both in respect of persons and things and that in the severall particulars let him read learned Zanchius on the fourth Commandement particularly in these pages 651 652. 659 660. and especiaâ—ly 788 789 c. the fifth Common Place De Officiâ— Principum in Religione of the office of Princes in Religion And therefore seeing Magistrates have the care of Religion and Gods worship committed to them being by God appointed to be keepers of the first Table as well as the second among other particulars laid down in the word and branched out by Divines wherein the Magistrates power in matters of Religion stands this must needs be one a power of suppressing false Religions and Heresies and punishing those who by all wayes and meanes go about to destroy the true If the Magistrate be Custos primâ— Tabula he is also Vindex primae Tabulae If the Magistrate have a power of commanding the true and using coâ—rcive meanes to bring his people to it then sure he hath of hindring the false as he that by Law hath the power of keeping the peace hath a power also of suppressing tumults riots râ—uâ—s and the reason is manifest because the one cannot be kept without the other the Physitian who hath a power given him over bodies for their health hath a power over sicknesses corrupt meats poyson and all that would destroy the health and life He who hath the power of keeping a Garden and the precious flowers and fruits in it hath a power of plucking up weeds taking Mouls Snails and such like that would spoile all He who may justly command may justly punish and he that may lawfully punish may certainly command All learning will tell us that contraries be consequent to contraries If Magistrates may lawfully command and establish that which is good then they may forbid and abolish the contrary evill of which see more in Bilsons Difference between Christian subjection and unchristian Rebellion part 2. p. 278 279. And therefore we see Josiah and other Princes who established the true Religion by their kingly authority caused the people to stand to it removed and punished also all persons and wayes contrary thereunto Hence I conceive t is that maxime is generally received among Divines Magistratus est Custos ac vindex utriusque Tabulae the Magistrate is the Revenger of both Tables as well as the Keeper 16. THESIS Magistrates qua Magistrates by vertue of their office as Magistrates simply every of them though Turks Heathen and wicked as well as Christian and Orthodox have an authority right power from God Jure divino in matters of Religion to command for God and his Honor and to forbid and suppresse the contrary The Magistrate in generall being by his proper place the Minister of God Rom. 13. Gods vicegerent governing men in the roome of God even so far as his power and jurisdiction extends is bound to care in matters of Religion As now Parents qua Parents have by the morall law of God a power and a duty lying upon them to command their children to good and to forbid evill and have a rod given into their hands to those ends although being Heathens or wicked for the present they know not or will not exercise it in teaching and bringing them up in the Christian Religion and fear of God So is with Magistrates the Authority and right every of them hath by being a Magistrate who by his place is for the punishment of evill doers and the praise of them that doe well however to the due and right exercise of this a good will and true knowledge out of the word of God may be required Zanehius in his Mâ—scellaniet de Magistratu 167. 169. and De Ecclesiâ— militantis Gubernatione cap. 26. pag. 553 554. showes that every Magistrate as well wicked as godly not Christian as Christian hath this power and so doth Spalatensis in his sixth Book fifth chapter De Republica Ecclesiastica but for the better understanding of it I shall lay downe this twofold distinction First that Heathen Princes so farre as the light of nature teaches them and right Reason are to make Lawes in matters of Religion and whereas the * light of nature leads on straight to the knowledge of one God and Supreme Deity and dictates this God to be just holy good perfect c. and to bee worshipped with reverence they should command so farre remove Idolatry the worship of birds four-footed beasts and creeping things promote the worship of the true God punish blasphemies and wicked opinions contrary to the nature of God and that out of their proper office of being Princes as the immediate Ministers and Vicegerents of God on earth Hence we read in many Writers as Plutarch Aristotle Plato and others that Heathen Princes have made Lawes for God and his worship and have punished Atheists Epicures Blasphemers and Sacrilegious persons and as any of them have come to more knowledge of God and Religion by any extraordinary work of Gods providence or by living among them of the true Religion as the Jews before Christs time and Christians since though not fully converted yet still according to their knowledge and means they were bound and many of them have gone on in promoting the true Religion and forbidding the contrary as the King of Niniveh Darius Nebuchadonezor and Aurelianus at the request of the Church punishing Paulus Samosetenus the Heretick But now if beside the light of nature and dictamen of naturall reason Princes have the light of faith the knowledge of Christ and the Scriptures of Heathens come to be Christians or being borne in Christian Common-wealths have from their child hood beene brought up in the faith of Christ then also out of their kingly office they should throw downe all things contrary to faith and the true worship of Christ and positively by outward acts promote and command the outward worship of God have a care of the Ecclesiasticall Discipline and of all the parts of Religion that they may be preserved Of which the Reader may be further satisfied in the writings of that learned man Marcus Antonius de Dominis Archbish of Spalato Secondly though the care of Religion belongs to al Princes yet in a speciall manner upon speciall obligations the Christian â—aith belongs to Christian Magistrates and Princes whom God hath given to be nursing Fathers and nursing Mothers these have not only a remote power but the next power which they may bring into act by reason of the knowledge of Christ and many helps and this many Reformed Divines affert of the Christian Magistrate in the handling of this question of the
seven Precepts Juris Noachidarum seu Naturalis as they are called among which Idolatry and Blasphemy De Cultu extraneo De maledictione Nominis sanctissimi seu Numinis were the first Nay further he proveth that every Gentile which had not received those seven Precepts was to be punished with death if he stayed in the Jewes Territories and particularly in divers places of that Book showes that Idolatry and Blasphemy were punished by death upon all that lived in the Iewish Common-wealth though they were not Proselyti Justiciae and on those words Levit 24. And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord he shall surely be put to death writes thus Id est sive fuerit Proselytus sen peregrinus sive indigena aut civis ex eo quod blasphemaverit nomen Domini morte plectendus est yea he saith that the Gentiles or Proselytes Domicilii were punished more severely then the Iewes in this case of Blasphemy not only for blaspheming the proper name of God but the Cognomen All which showes clearly these punishments were not inflicted upon the Iewes qua Iewes and qua a typicall people in a typicall Land c. but upon them as the nature of such crimes calling for such punishments and that 't is the Magistrates duty to restraine in Iews or Gentiles in all under their jurisdiction Idolatry blasphemie c. Thirdly the reasons and grounds of these Lawes and commands with the use and end of them upon which they are inforced are of common reason and equity that concern us under the New Testament as well as the Iewes I doe not finde one Ceremoniall or properly Iudiciall reason given of any one but all of them are laid downe either absolutely and simply without any reasons at all or else upon such reasons as are morall and perpetuall and I judge that in all commands which are not typicall and ceremoniall and so some other thing apppointed to come in upon the abolishment to make good their perpetuall end and use assigned that rule of Divines holds universally true Ratio immutabilis facit praeceptum immutabile which by the way may serve to answer the Evasions of Minus Gelsus Senensis and of Hagiomastix bringing instances in Circumcision and such like which the Scriptures declare expressely to be abolished having substituted Baptisme and other ordinances in their roome but have not said one word in the like kind of the commands in question besides that Christ the substance of those shadows is come and so they are of no further use at all And indeed Acontius though a great Libertine doth confesse that Law in the 13th of Deuterenomy of the stoning of the false Prophet and Seducer is not confined only to the time before Christ having no place at all under the Gospel and to the ground and conjecture as Acontius calls it of that opinion he saith that the reason set downe in the same is against it viz. All Israel shall beare and feare and shall do no more any such wickednesse as this is among you which reason certainly abides alwayes so that although this Law had exspired yet notwithstanding by vertue of it the Magistrate hath a right and power of making another like it as he hath of making Lawes against Murtherers Adulterers and other flagitious persons Fourthly Before these Lawes in Deut. 13. and Deut 17. for punishing Idolaters were given by Moses yea before Moses time or any Common-wealth among the Iewes was erected in other Countries remote from the Land of Canaan Idolatry in worshipping creatures deserved punishing by the Magistrate as I have showed already fully in page 13 14. of this Book yea the particular kind of Idolatry instanced in Deut. 17. 3. of worshipping the Sunne or Moone which among the Israelites was to be punished by death if it had been found in Job in the Land of Vz he had beene worthy of punishment from the Iudges for it Job 31. 26 27. 28. And other Princes not Iewes as Artaxerxes Nebuchadonezar c. made Lawes and Edicts for punishing those that blasphemed the God of heaven and transgressed his Lawes as the Scriptures testifie Now the Lawes properly judiciall that were the Iewes civill Lawes simply belonging to them as such a people in such a Countrey were in use only among themselves and not practised by other Nations and Countries but such Lawes and Customes used among them that were observed universally among all Nations or by divers Nations though not of all strictly speaking were not Iudiciall Lawes but the Lawes of Nature and Nations though according to the Discipline of the Iewes that is what was received in the Church and Common-wealth of the Iewes and accordingly accounted by them as the Law of the world of all men and ages or the Law of many Nations common to them with those Nations of all which the Reader may be further satisfied in that learned Peece of Mr. SELDEN'S De jure Naturali Gentium juxta disciplinam Ebraeorum and particularly in the Preface of that Book where he sheweth the reason of that Title and gives the summe of his work and undertaking and in his first Book And among the Iawes of Naturall right as distinguished from the civil lawes of the Jews or simply Israeliticall those commands of punishing for strange worship and Blasphemie are reckoned by the Jewes themselves as the Reader may find in the first book de Jure Naturali Gentium cap. 10. 2 book cap. 1. 12. 3 book cap. 1. Fifthly The Spirit of God under the New Testament Hebr. 10. 28 29. speaking according to the common equity and justice of the matter and not according to a Politicall law peculiar to one Nation saith of the despisers of Moses law that died without mercy under two or three witnesses that they were worthy of it as appears by the comparative Of how much sorer punishment suppose ye shall he be thought warthy Every comparative implying a positive The sorer punishment that he is worthy of who hath trodden under foot the Son of God supposes the other worthy of the sore punishment inflicted upon them by Moses law for despising it Now by Moses law in this place the breach whereof deserved capitall punishment must needs be meant sins against the first Table rather then against the second and that because the scope of the Apostle is to warne the Hebrews against Apostasie and falling off from the Christian religion for which end he brings these words among others and therefore would speak ad idem Beza upon 〈◊〉 place saith that the Apostle speaks not of the transgression of any one command but of the apostasie and totall defection from the true Religion of which Moses in Deut. 17. 2. had spoken So Calvin upon this text The law under Moses did not punish with death all sins or transgressions committed but Apostasie The Apostle had an eye to that of Deut. 17. 2. of stoning him that served strange gods And Pareus
upon Heb. 10. 28 29. shewes that temporall death from the Magistrate for of that he speaks not of Gods judgements was justly inflicted by Moses law upon capitall transgressions as Blasphemie Apostasie and therupon infers from the lesse that much greater punishment must abide Apostates who despise the Gospel Infert à minori tanto gravius supplicium manere defectores illos Si legis contemptoribus supplicium mortis quo nihil est in hoc mundo acerhius justè irrogabitur utique supplicium quovis morte atrocius Apostatae Evangelii contemptores incurrent And 2 Heb. 2. in those words For if the word spoken by Angels was firm and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward the Apostle shews that the law of Moses given by Angels Gal. 3. 19. Act. 7. 30. had the breach and transgression of it justly punished mediately by the Magistrates to whom the execution of the laws was cōmitted by God which just punishment is there cheifly understood of transgressions against the first Table Sixthly Granting that 13. of Deut. with the other Texts of Scripture named to be judiciall politicall lawes of the Jews yet they may binde the Christian Magistrate under the Gospel Indeed the Ceremoniall law being given for certain uses and for a certain time till the comming of Christ upon the arising of this Sun all these shadowes vanished away as being but of one time But now the Judicial lawes however delivered to one Nation yet were not of one time never tied to one time only so that had the commonwealth of the Jewes continued untill this day excepting a few things belonging to the vindication of the ceremonies which would have ceased with the ceremonies they would have used their Political lawes still in regard the Gospel neither changed nor took away any of them as Beza observes in his Tractate de Haereticis à Magistratu puniendis p. 154. And for the better understanding and proving that the Judicial lawes under the Old Testament are still in force I shall lay down two or three distinctions 1. The judicial law may be considered so far as concerns the distinction of the Iewes from the Gentiles and the typical signification of the kingdome of Christ or only so much as belongs to the forme of Civil government Now the judicial law according to the first acception is absolutely and simply abrogated but secundum quid in part and some kinde only in the latter that is Whatever was in the judicial law of particular proper right peculiarly concerning the Jewes as of inheritances not to be transferred from one Tribe to another of the Tribe of Levi having no inheritance among the other Tribes Numb 18. 20 24. of the emancipation of an Hebrew servant or handmaid in the seventh yeer a mans marrying his brothers wife and raising up seed to his brother the forgiving of debts at the Jubile marrying with one of the same tribe with other such like all of this kind is ceased But what was of common right common to other Nations with them according to the common law of nature of which sort are lawes concerning the punishment of Moral transgressions and other such that all remains and is in force Of which distinction the Reader may find more in Piscator's Appendix to his Observations upon the 21 22 23 chap. of Exodus Bullinger and in Altingius his common places par 1. loc 7. de lege Dei p. 112. Lex judicialis simpliciter abrogata est quoad distinctionem Judaeorum à Gentibus typicam regni Christi significationem secundum quid verò quantum attinet formae gubernationis civilis Nam quod juris in ea fuit particularis Judaeos peculiariter concernans qualis fuit lex de officio Levitarum item alia de haereditatibus de tribu in tribum non transferendis id omne cessavit Quod autem juris suit communis secundum legem naturae omnibus communem sancitum cujusmodi sunt leges de paenis scelerum aliaeque id totum manet 2. The Iudicial lawes may be considered according to their substance and equity or according to many accessories circumstances forms manner of them Now though the Magistrate under the Gospel is not bound unto these lawes simply that is to every circumstance and particular of them for form manner time and place as for example not to the same kinds and formality of punishments set down in those lawes for those forms are accessions of the law and therfore out of the nature of persons times places and constitution of common-wealths mutable Yet he is bound to the substance equity of them so as not to derogate from the right of those lawes Of this distinction the Reader may find much said by Cartwright in his 2. Reply to Dr. Whitgift p. 98 99. Beza de Haereticis â Magistratu puniendis p. 154 155. Tremellius and Junius in their Preface before the five Books of Moses Thirdly these Lawes may be lookt upon as containing doctrine from God of punishment i. e. that those who seduce blaspheme God c. be restrained yea and by death in severall cases or else as in their latter according to the great rigor and severity expressed in them as in Deut. 13. c. by smiting the inhabitants of the City with the sword destroying it utterly and all that is therein and the cattle thereof with the edge of the sword and by gathering all the spoyle of it into the midst of the street thereof and burning with fire the City and all the spoyle of it every whit in not sparing them though they should have truly repented in enjoyning the sonne the wife of a mans bosome to bring forth the father husband and to stone them with stones Now though to the degrees and measures of punishment the severity and utmost rigor the Magistrate is not now tied yet to the thing in cases of Idolatry seduction false prophesying speaking lies in the name of the Lord he is bound and in some cases of grosse and high Idolatry and Blasphemy committed presumptuously to inflict capitall punishment of this distinction also let the Reader consult these Authors And of this question that the Iudiciall Lawes of Moses in the sense now given doe yet last and are in force besides the Resolution of many great Divines in the case Beza Calvin Cartwright Tremellius and Junius Bullinger Zinchius Peter Martyr Henricus Altingius and more especially Piscator who by eight Arguments proves the Question in controversie besides answering two and twenty Arguments brought against it I shall desire the Reader to observe these few Reasons 1. The Iudiciall Law differs from the Decalogue the Law of the ten Commandements in this that whereas the Decalogue comprehends in a few words all righteousnesse and equity in all kind of duties to God and man the Iudiciall explains only that part of righteousnesse and equity which stands in those things of which judgements
are appointed and therefore seeing the judicialls prescribe the equity of judgements which is a part of the Decalogue we must be bound to that as we are to the rest of the Decalogue viz. so farre as they containe a generall equity though we are not tied to the formes of the Mosaicall politie Now Christ saith Matth. 5. 17. he came not to destroy the Law but to fulfill it which words are comprehensive of the Judiciall Law as for the substance a part of the Moral Law the Iudicial being indeed an Appendix and a more particular explication of that part of the Morall Law concerning matters of Iustice and judgement and therefore must be understood by Christ to be established 2. Though there be many pregnant proofs in the New Testament for abolishing the Ceremoniall Law yet we nowhere read in the New Testament of making void the Iudiciall Law concerning the punishing of sinnes against the Morall Law in the number of which are Idolatry Heresie Blasphemy Now these Iudiciall Lawes being the Lawes of God and by his revealed will once settled they must needs so farre forth remaine as they appeare not by his will to be repealed They who hold the Magistrate under the Gospel is not bound to punish for such sinnes must prove from the Scripture those Lawes of God revoked and cancel'd which none of the Patrons of Toleration have ever yet done 3. The substance and equity of the Iudiciall Law remains in that Christ and his Apostles make use of transfer and prove by some Iudicial laws divers things under the New Testament Christ makes use of a Iudiciall Law concerning punishment Matth. 5. 38 39. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth viz. that of poena talionis Exod. 21. 24. and frees it from the false glosse and interpretation of the Pharisees in which he teaches the Iudiciall Lawes of Moses understood in their right sense are to be observed in the New Testament For if Christ in that Sermon of which this is a part would teach the Decalogue belonged to Christians by his vindicating it from the false interpretations of the Scribes and Pharisees then it followes hee meant to teach the Iudiciall Lawes of Moses concerning the punishment of Morall transgressions belonged to them also because he vindicated also one of them of which particular with the proof of the consequence the Reader may finde more in Piscators Appendix to Exodus The Apostle Paul 1 Cor. 9. 9. 1 Tim. 5. 18. among other proofs brought by him from fimilitudes fetched from the common use of men that the Minister of the Gospel ought to be maintained of the Churches charge whereas they might object those were but humane reasons he alleadgeth as the eternall Law of God one of the Iudiciall Lawes of Moses which was that a man should not muzle the mouth of the Oxe which treadeth out the corne where 't is manifest he doubteth not to bind the conscience of the Churches unto the equity of that Law which was judiciall likewise from the 13. verse of those that minister about holy things and wait at the Altar living of the things of the Temple and being partakers of the Altar hee concludes that they which preach the Gospell should live of it Now this maintainance of the Priests albeit in the manner of provision it be held by many ceremoniall yet as it was a reward of their service due by men as the punishments also if they failed in their duties was meerly judiciall So the equity of that judiciall Law Exod. 22. 2. Of the smiting of a theife in the night that he dye is approved by Christ Matth. 24. 43. So Christ and Paul both transferre that judiciall Law of having two or three witnesses in judgement Deut. 19. verse 15. to bind Christians in their Ecclesiasticall censures and judgements Matthew 18. verse 16. 2 Cor. 13. verse 1. 1 Tim. 5. verse 19. By which instances and some other particulars that might bee given 't is evident that in those judicialls to all the circumstances whereof we are not bound wee are notwithstanding bound to the equity of which the Reader may read more in Cartwrights second Reply to Doctor Whitgifts second Answer pag. 98 99 100. 4. That God appointed under the Law Blasphemie Apostasie Idolatry Prophecying lies in thename of the Lord to bee punished by the Magistrate proceeded from Gods holinesse justice infinite hatred of such sinnes and from their nature being so contrary to his nature so derogatory to his honour and glory high treason against the Supreme Majesty so destructive to the precious soules of men so dangerous to Common-wealths and Kingdomes as the Scriptures in divers places where these Lawes of punishing are set down assignes these causes and reasons Now I would know of the Patrons of Toleration whether under the Gospel these finnes of Blasphemy Apostasie c. be not as much against Gods holinesse justice glory as pernicious and damnable as they were under the Law yea and in some respects more as being against the Declarations of the Sonne of God Hebr. 2. 2 3. and a treading under foot the Sonne of God and counting the bloud of the Covenant an unboly thing which being granted punishment by the Magistrate must needs continue The rule of just and unjust in God and in his Law is alwayes the same and immutable It is as equally just to punish evill things as to forbid evill things and therefore the right and Law of punishments is also immutable Where and of what things the causes are perpetuall there also the right is eternall and immutable but the grounds and causes why such offences were punished as Gods justice holinesse glory c. are perpetuall and eternal God is alwayes like to himselfe the morall transgressions of men doe alike at all times displease him no good reason can be given why the Majesty of God should be of lesse account with us then heretofore among the Iewes and therefore by the like reason to be punished now as well as then But the further proof of this the Reader may finde in some learned Divines Beza de Haereticis à Magistratu punieâ—â—â— 155. and in Tremellius and Juniâ—â— Preface before the Books of Moses 5. The Iudiciall Law concerning the punishments of â—iâ—kednesse for the substance viz. that it should be punished remains under the Gospel because it comes within the nature of the Morall Law and was prescribed to the Iewes not quae Iewes or a people peculiarly taken into Covenant but qua men subject to the Law of nature as other Nations were For the proof of which besides the judgement of divers learned Divines Philip Melanctoâ— Peter Martyr Zanchius Aâ—tingius the reason of common right from the proper peculiar right of the Iewes is known and distinguished by these following particulars 1. If the same things have beene also found to be concluded and by civill sanction established by other Law-givers from the light of nature 2. If
found to make for the defence and preservation of the obedience of the Decalogue 3. If appear as usefull and necessary now for the glory of God the salvation of mens soules the peace safety of the Church and State as then Now all these do most clearly appear in punishments of sins immediately against God as Apostasie Idolatry Blasphemy c. For first these commands are of the light of nature thaâ— he who is in place and power should forbid and punish the speaking evill of God This sentence as Melancton writes is preacht to all men yea to all reasonable creatures every one in his place ought to forbid and hinder the manifest reproaches and dishonours of God And therefore Magistrates ought to forbid and punish Epicurean speeches worships of Idols profession of wicked doctrines Many Common-wealths among the Heathens have made Lawes against Epicures and Atheistâ— who have openly held there was no God or that there was no providence of God Peter Martyr in his Common Placeâ— that Heathen Princes used to care for Religion and have punished men even to death for the matters of Religion Thus Socrates was condemned at Athens for no other cause but for teaching of new gods I and for with drawing the youth from their old worship of the gods Zanchius on the fourth Commandement writes that by the Law of nature all Princes among the Heathen judged that the care of Religion belonged to them The Athenians judged so the Romans also and thereupon made Lawes and punished for violation of religion Beza gives three instances of punishments inflicted by heathen Magistrates upon three cheif Philosophers for matters of Religion Socrates Theodorus Protagoras the last of which was by the Athenians banished out of their Territories and his books burnt for writing contemptuously of the gods in these words De diis neque ut sint neque ut non sint habeo dicere Musculus in his Common Places speaking of Magistrates having the care of Religion saith the wise men among the Heathen acknowledged it and that the truth of this opinion was so manifest as that it could not lie hid from the Heathen it was jus gentium dictated by the light of nature and therefore ought to be much more acknowledged and embraced by us who in the knowledge of God go farre beyond not only the Gentiles but the Iewes Master Selden in divers places of that learned Book De Jure Naturali Gentium proves that those commands De Cultu Extraneo and De Maledictione Nominis sanctissimi seu Numinis were Jus Naturalis common to all men were indeed the cheif and first Heads of the Law of Nature and that in those precepts viz. for the negative part all the Gentiles who lived or but passed through the Land of Judea were punished by the Magistrate for Idolatry and blasphemy as well as the Iewes and that from Lawes common to the Iewes with the Gentiles though the kinds of the punishments viz. this or that as whether stoning c. were not of the same nature but more proper to the Iewes yea he showes it was an opinion held by some learned men that it was not lawfull for any Gentile to speak evill of and blaspheme his God which hee worshipped as the God of his Countrey and saith it was founded upon those words Levit. 24. 15. Whosoever curseth his god shall heare his sinne the blaspheming the name of the Lord being spoken of after in the 16. verse as if it were distinct from that in the 15. verse In which forme of speech divers learned men both Rabbins Fathers and others would have forbidden to all the sonnes of men not only speaking evill evill of the most holy and only God but also the speaking of those gods which they had chosen to themselves So as none of the Gentiles might blaspheme their false God which yet they had not renounced without the violation of that Law Whosoever curseth his god shall beare his sinne Master Burroughs in his Irenicum though he be for a Toleration in a great measure as in things controversall and doubtfull amongst godly and peaceable men and that with a liberty of declaration of difference of judgement and some different practise page 55. yea brings such Arguments for that Toleration that if they prove any thing they prove a generall Toleration yet confesses page 23. of that Book T is the dictate of nature that Magistrates should have some power in matters of Religion The generality of all people have ever thought it equall It hath ever been challenged of all Nations and Common-wealths The Heathens would never suffer their gods to be blasphemed but punished such as were guilty thereof by the power of the Magistrate Socrates was put to death for blaspheming their multiplicity of gods And Master Burroughs in page 19. of the same book affirmes that Principle That Magistrates have nothing to doe with matters of Religion is abhorring to nature Is it not an abhorring thing to any mans heart in the world that men suffer that God to be blasphemed whom they honour and that nothing should be done for the restraining any but to aske them why they doe so and perswade them to doe otherwise There hath ever been as great a contestation amongst people about Religion as about any thing Exod. 8. 25 26. Pharaoh hade Moses sacrifice in the Land But Moses said it is not meete so to doe for we shall sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians Lo shall we sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians before their eyes and will they not stone us Though they had leave of the King yet the people would not endure it By which place of Scripture 't is evident that the Egyptians who were heathens by the light of nature would not endure the dishonour of their gods to see those creatures they worshipped for gods to be killed as Oxen and Sheep the principall sacrifices of the Hebrewes but they would kill the Israelites for so doing And lastly Master Prynne in that late Book of his The sword of Christian Magistrates supported doth largely and excellently show that by the light of nature in all ages Heathen Magistrates have made Lawes against and punished such whom they esteemed Atheists Hereticks Blasphemers of their Gods or oppugners of their established Religion and that with no lesse then Capitall punishments unto which Book from page 14. to 19. I referre the Reader where he shall finde many examples of Heathen Kings and Nations recited and shall conclude this with that saying of Seneca De Benefic lib. 3. cap. 6. Violatarum Religionum aliubi atque aliubi diversa pâ—na est Sed vbique Aliqua as well as of homicide paricide poysoning Secondly the Magistrates sword in matters of Religion in punishing Blasphemies Idolatries Heresies hath been found by good experience in all ages to make greatly for the defence and preservation of the first Table to stirre men
Kings As also because those reasons and ends appointed for punishments of the second Table as to take away the evill as that others shall bears and feare c. which showes punishments are acts of love are given for a ground of punishing Idolatry false Prophesying c. yea set downe more expressely in those commands then in the others with other reasons too as of turning thâ—t away from the Lord thy God which implies also love to God and our Brethren What followes hence then Therefore those preceps which God hath given Magistrates of punishing Offenders Hereticks subverters of Religion are not abrogated by the coming of Christ because by that meanes the glory of God and the safety of our neighbour are preserved Commands to Magistrates for punishing in matters of Religion being no more against Christian charity then punishment of Traytors seditious persons theeves c. and therefore as they are not abrogated by the coming of Christ so neither are these The old Anabaptists as Bullinger shows at large in that excellent book of his who were against Magistrates punishing in matters of Religion and that al those commands in Deut. 13. c. were meerly Mosaical and abrogated held as wel those commands for punishing murtherers theeves c. to be abrogated and that among Christians no offences should be punished with prisons mulcts death but only Excommunication and among other reasons they gave this because it was against brotherly love which they urged equally against bodily punishments for transgressions against the second Table as they did for punishments against the first and indeed Lucas Osiander with others who write against Anabaptists for denying that Christians may be punished with outward punishments for any offences show they bring the same Arguments as that in Matthew 13. of the Tares c. which the Patrons of Tolaration doe now against the Magistrates coercive power in matters of Religion but Bullinger showes very well at large that those commands given in Exod. Deuter. Levit. of punishing capitally in some transgressions against the first and second Table were according to the Law of love and that by the same reason by which the punishing by the Magistrate in matters of Religion is against Christian charity the punishing of theeves seditious and flagitious persons will bee so to And Bullinger askes the question whether it had not beene more agreeable to love if in the beginning of the tumult of Muâ—ster in West-phalia a few seditious knâ—ves had beene put into prison and according to their demerit punished then that whilst no man is punished for his conscience such a horrible slaughter of many should follow and the Anabaptists should farre and 〈◊〉 destroy all with fire and sword Secondly that the Magistrates punishing of Apostates and false Prophets is approved of for the times of the Gospel I shall speak to it fully in the 19. and 20. Thees and therefore will not anticipate my selfe onely say this that in Zac. 13. v. 2 3. a Prophecie of the times of the Gospel we finde the same thing almost the same words which are in Deut. 13. 6. Thirdly t is the dictate of nature t is of the law of nature and of all Nations to punishâ—men for violations in Religion as well as for matters of life and goods I will not here enter into a large discussion of that question what 's requisite and how many ingredients go to make a thing of the Law of nature and how Jus Naturale and Jus positivum differ I shall referre the Reader in this question to many learned Tractates and Discourses of it by the Schoolmen and Casuists to Popish and Protestant Divines particularly to Amisius Cases of Conscience Book 5. first Chapter De Jure Voetius Theses De vecat Gentium part secund De Jure Justitia Dei. Master SELDENS De Jure Naturali Gentium first book throughout especially the third and eight chapters Master Burges Vindiciae Legis 6. 7. and 8. Lectures Master Cawd Master Palm Sabbatum Redivivum cap. 1. pag. 11 12 c. I will build only upon that which all learned men who have written of the Law of nature grant viz. that to hold there is a God and that that God is to be adored and worshipped is of the Law of nature yea it is principium juris naturalis Musculus in his Common Places de lege nature p. 36. and de legib pag. 139. showes t is of the Law of nature to have a sense of a Deity and that this Deity is to be worshipped and feared So that from the beginning among all men some Religion hath alwayes beene received So Purchas Pilhrimage chap. 6. p. 26 27. Among all the lessons which nature hath taught this is deepliest indented Religion The falshoods and variety of Religions are evidences of this truth seeing men will rather worship a Beast stock or basest creature then professe no Religion at all It is manifest then that the Image of God was by the fall depraved but not uttrerly extinct among other sparks this also being raked up in the ruines of our decaied nature some science of the God-head some conscience of Religion Now all those Nations whom the Law of nature instructed to beleeve and worship a Deity it instructed also not to suffer their God and the Religion they embraced to be openly blasphemed and spoken against and I doe not beleeve any instance can be given of any Nation or body of people among the Heathen formed into a Common-wealth who punished not A theists and Blasphemers of their Gods The best Writers and Historians among Heathens and of Heathens as Cicero Seneca Plato Aristotle Plutarch Livie Justin Diogenes Laertius Caelius Rhodiginus Diodorus Siculus Herodotus Xenophon assure us of Lawes and punishments enacted by Princes and States in matters of Religion And other Historians who write Histories of the World of all ages and times as Sir Walter Rawleigh Purchas c. give us many instances in this kind among all sorts of Religions and people Whence 't is that so many learned men Zanchius Musculus Peter Martyr Beza with divers others finding lawes and punishments of this nature so common and generall among Commonwealths and Kingdomes and that in so many examples recorded in the old and new Testament and in other Authors make punishments by Magistrates for violation of religion to bee of the light of nature as they doe the knowledge of a God and that hee is to bee feared and worshipped Bullinger in his fifth book against the Anabaptists fifth chapter in answer to the Anabaptists affirming the commands of punishing in matters of religion belong to Moses sword are mosaicall from which Christians are now freed saith that this coercive power was not by Moses then instituted as being never before and as a ceremoniall law which should cease in the time of Christ but from the beginning this law as natural and necessary was appointed by God For all the old Magistrates
in matters of the first Table to be any otherwise meant by Musculus then in his sense of the abrogation of the Decalogue formerly expressed 2. The reasons of those commands expressed in the 13. and 17. chapters of Deut. concerning putting to death false Prophets Apostates c. whether taken from the nature of the things themselves to which drawn or the nature of the persons guilty Seducers or the common condition of the sons of men shall feare and do no more so c. or the end of punishments putting away evill to which of them soever we look they have been were and are stil the same always of a like nature and force both before the commands were given by Moses in Moses time and now under the Gospell and therefore the reasons of those lawes being perpetuall and universall not abrogated by Christ neither are the lawes themselves of which though I gave a touch of it in pag. 50. yet I shall here further cleare it T is a rule given by many Divines in such sentences as these Tale praceptum qualis ratio praecepti Ratio immutabilis facit praceptum immutabile Vbi ratio legis redditur moralis ibi â—ex ipsa est moralis Officia illa omnia sunt moralia et immutabilia quae rationes morales immutabiles habent sibi annexas Now though this rule is liable to Exceptions and holds not universally as in Levit. 11. 44. Some speciall determination may be confirmed by a generall reason and the immutable nature of the law-giver hath its place and vertue in appointing mutable commands Yet where the reasons of a law ex natura rei not meerly ex instituto are perpetual and universal and the duties following from those reasons founded thereon the special inward and proper reason of such a command being morall and perpetual there alwayes it followes that law is morall and perpetual of which the Reader may bee further satisfied in Ames Cases Consc lib. 5. cap. 1. Quaest 9. and his Medulla l. 2. c. 12. Now the speciall inward and proper reason of that command Deut. 13. so shalt thou put the evill away from the midst of thee is juris moralis naturalis and therefore so is the command itselfe For a conclusion of this that these lawes of punishing Idolaters false Prophets c. were not properly judiciall lawes nor abrogated by Christs comming le ts take notice that that distinction of the judiciall law from the morall viz. the morall law was given of God publikly declared by his voice twice writ in tables of stone but the judiciall was afterwards delivered to Moses and by Moses to the people without any such solemnity is no exact nor perfect one For many of the laws not expressed in the Decalogue but delivered afterwards among the judiciall as about restoring the pledge of weights and just measures of giving the hire to the laborour and many other such like are no more judiciall or lesse morall then thou shalt not steal Yea such commands are transferred to the times of the Gospell as that of Levit 19. 17. to Matth. 18. 15. and Luke 17. 3. and therefore though these commands of punishing Blasphemers Apostates false Prophets c. bee not expressed in the Decalogue but added after yet they may bee no more judiciall then the third and fourth Commandement And therefore the most accurate distinction that is given by Divines between judiciall lawes properly so called and those lawes numbred among the judiciall is this those were properly judiciall lawes which had a singular respect to the people of the Jewes so as the reason cause and foundation of them was placed in some peculiar condition of that people But those lawes which were wont to be reckoned among the judicials and yet in their reason had no singular respect or relation to the condition of the Jewes more then to other people all those are of morall naturall right common to all people of which distinction with some other particulars about the nature of the judiciall law and how farr it binds Christians under the Gospell I referre the Reader to Ames Cases of conscience the fifth Book chapt 1. De Jure and to Zepperus explanation of the mosaicall lawes chap. 5. who shewes two extreams of men in that point one in the excesse holding all the judiciall lawes promiscuously in force others in the defect holding them all and wholly abolished but holds the middle way between both viz. what ever in the mosaicall lawes hath an immutable and perpetuall reason and nature by common right immuâ—ably and alwayes as by an adamantine chaine binds all men in all times and places But whatsoever hath an implied reason and condition of change does no longer bind the consciences of Christians Zepperus also in his first Book chapt 12. of the mosaicall lawes answers at large the places brought by Minus Celsus Senens and others out of Musculus Luther Calvin Zanchius and others for the abrogation of these lawes showing they are understood only of those things that peculiarly belonged to the commonwealth of the Jewes and as given by Moses to the Israelites and not of such judicialls which either in the law of nature or Decalogue have their reason founded Now of this latter sort are all those commands for the substance of them for punishing the false Propheâ— Apostate c. as appears in the nature of those laws and the reasons of them for what singular respect or relation to the condition of the Jews hath taking the evill away fearing and doing no more so turning away from the Lord their God more then to the condition of Christians Thirdly As to Hagiomastixs affirmation page 43 that to prove by the law of God in the old Testament Deut. 13. c. that false Prophets Blasphemers c. may be bodily punished under the New Testament is all one as if a man should go about to prove that the man Moses is now alive by this argument viz. because hee was alive under the old Testament I answer 1. Moses is alive under the new Testament as God said in the bush to Moses I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob so God is the God of Moses as well as of Abraham c. Now God is not the God of the dead but of the living Matth. 22. 32. compared with Mark 12. 26 27. 2. Though Moses body be dead and buried by God in a Sepulcher that no man knowes of yet his Doctrine may be alive t is a grosse non sequitur that their Doctrine must be dead and buried whose bodyes are dead for then Davids Doctrine in the Psalmes the Prophets Doctrine yea the Evangelists and Apostles Doctrine should be dead they being now all dead as well as Moses and so all proofes brought for any Doctrine from Davids Psalmes the Prophets the new Testament may be thus evaded by saying we may go about to prove David the Prophets
Evangelists and Apostles are now alive by this arguments because they were alive some of them thousands and others of them many hundred yeares agoe Thirdly besides this false consequence t is evident upon many grounds that Doctrines are alive doe bind when the Publishers and writers of them are dead yea they are written for that end that they may teach and bee a rule when the men who writ them are dead that being dead by these they may yet speak as the Apostle â—om 15. 4. tells us yea many things are spoken and written to be a rule of direction to the Church intended to take place rather after their death then in their life time as the Prophecies of the Prophets and some Prophecies also of the Apostles so that it may be said as Zâ—ch chapter 1. verse 6. Your Fathers where are they and the Prophets do they live for ever But my words and my Statuâ—â— which I commanded my servants the Prophets did they noâ— take hold of your Fathers though Pen-men and writers of Scripture die yet their words and Doctrine take hold and place when they are dead Fourthly by this reason of holding Moses is now alive if the law of God in the old Testament binds it will follow that all Moses Doctrine the ten commandements and all he writ in the Pentatench Genesis c. are void as well as these commands about punishing false Prophets c. for they were made known and written by Moses when hee was alive and to bee found in his Books together with these lawes termed judiciall So that the Antinomian may as well say the same against the morall law under the Gospell when the ten Commandements are pressed and the Socinian and Anabaptist against those commands to put to death murtherers which now Master John Goodwin doth against these lawes in Deut. 13. c. that men may as well prove the man Moses is now alive by these commands because he was alive under the old Testament as bring those places of Scripture written by Moses to prove the morall law in force and those commands who so sheddeth mans bloud by man shall his bloud bee shed Fifthly whatever Hagiomastix by way of scoffe hath spoken thus of proving as well Moses may be now alive t is evident besides the new Testaments Confirmation in many places of the Evangelists and Epistles of the old Testament being in force in the dayes of the Gospell of which I shall speak in the 18. THESIS and so will pare the Reader here it by name particularly ratifies the Doctrine and Authority of Moses writings and proves and urges severall things upon men under the Gospell from texts taken out of the five Books of Moses as these places in the new Testament unanswerably show Matth. 23. 2 3. Matth. 28 29 31 32. Mark 12. 26. Luke 16. 29 30 31. Luke 24. 27. John 1. 45. Acts 3. 22. Act. 26. 22. Acts 28. 23. Rom. 9. 7 9 15 16 17. Rom. 10. 6 8. Rom. 13. 8. 9. Ephes 6. 2. 3. yea severall particulars of the judiciall lawes are brought to prove duties required in the new Testament as page 56 57 60. of this Book showes and lastly Moses Authority and writings are of such sacred account under the new Testament that in the Pâ—â—lation the Book that concludes and shuts up the Canon of the new Testament the Book that speaks of things that shall be in the Church of the new Testament till the end of the world Moses his name and writing are joyned with the Lamb and that to be made use of by the most eminent and faithfull servants of God that have gotten the victory ever the beast and over his Image and over his marke and over the number of his name these standing on the sea of glasse having the harp of God sing the song of Moses the servant of God and the song of the Lamb saying great and marvellous are thy works Lord God almighty c. So that all these things being laid together I suppose by this time every ingenuous Reader must needs see that by this Answer to Deut. 13. c. Hagiomastix intended rather to spread a table of mirth for himselfe and his Church to feast on then to give any satisfaction to the Reverend Author of the Vindication of the printed Paper entituled an Ordinance for the preventing of Heresies c. and the rest of the Presbyterians Fourthly as to that answer of Hagiomastix p. 48. 49. they that will have the ancient law for putting Blasphemers Idolaters to death to be now in force must consequently hold t is in force not simply only as to the inflicting of death upon the offenders but in all other particulars commanded by the same Authority as not be killed after any maÌ„ner nor with any kind of death but with stones not only the seducer but the seduced themselves though whole cites not only the inhabitants but the cattel also with divers other particulars named in that of Deut. 13. For if men will urge this law as being still in force they make themselves debters to urge the execution of the whole in all the particularities and circumstances thereunto belonging For who hath any power to make an Election or Reprobation amongst the Commandements of God where God himself hath made none I reply it followes not t is no good consequence that all circumstances accessories particularities must bind because the substance of a command binds or that the substance and summe of a command must be taken away because some circumstances formes and particularities are not in force To argue a thing it selfe abolished because the modus of it binds not alwayes or that the substance and essentials must cease because divers accessories circumstantials and formes wherewith it was clothed most suitable to such a time Countrey condition of such a people are ceased is a fallacie a dicto secâ—ndum quid ad dictum simpliciter which all Logitians know is no good reasoning If I or any other Presbyterian had argued thus such a mans bond binds not now or this is not such a man hee is dead because his apparell haire place of abode with some other such accessories are changed antiquite altered we should certainly have spread a table of mirth for the Independents and therfore I judge for Hagiomastix thus to reason shows no great strength and I doe desire Mr. John Goodwin but to rub up his old Logick of the nature and difference of Substance and Accidents and then I know he will confesse though for him to confesse any thing as manifest as the light wherein he is mistaken in writing is as rare as a black Swan that Accidents may be varied and taken away salva substantia And that I may show the weaknes of this reasoning that this 13. of Deut. is therfore not in force because then the manner of punishing with stones and the person tempted to Idolatry though never so deare stoning him with divers other
substance there may well be a great change of accessories accidentals formes and manner of proceeding which neverthelesse give no ground for the taking away things and commands themselves but only clearly show there may bee a cessation of all such forms accessories manner of proceeding which were peculiar to that time and people And if wee do but observe and consider the composition of most of the mosaicall lawes how they are mixt of morall judiciall and ceremoniall how lawes judiciall have something morall and something ceremoniall in them and ceremonials have something judiciall and morall in them and how that those things which in their nature are moral and perpetuall have yet somewhat judiciall and ceremoniall annexed to them of all which we may be further satisfied in Zepperus his explanation of the mosaicall lawes we may easily conceive how in these mosaicall lawes a command the thing it selfe may be binding for the substance and yet severall particulars accompanying as being properly judiciall and ceremoniall may cease among which now the form and kinds of punishments the extent with rigor and severity of punishing to the cattell the making the city a heap for ever c may be reckoned And that these are but accessories and appendixes of these lawes for punishing Idolaters false Prophets which therefore may not bind though the commands for the substance be still in force may appeare thus because inflicting death simply upon Apostates false Prophets c is commanded without any of these accessories of destroying the cattel and making the city an heap c as these places Exod. 23. 20. Deut. 17. 2 5 6. and Deut. 18. 20. snow which is worthy to be taken notice of besides in the commands to punish those who offer up their children to Molech and that Blaspheme God Levit. 20. 2. Leuit. 24. 16. the inflicting of death upon them is required but none of those particulars mentioned Deut. 13 15 16 17. In the new Testament also though the punishing by death according to Moses law of Apostates be approved of as in page 52 53. of this Book I have showen and severall judiciall Lawes for the substance ratified page 56 57. yet the formalities accessories with all particularities of such Lawes never are spoken of and lastly though severe punishment by the Magistrate the substance of that command in Deut. 13. be both before Moses Lawes as in Jobs time and after Moses times by Artaxerxes Nebuchadnezzar Darius in cases of Apostasie Idolatry Blasphemie approved of yet there is not a word spoken of destroying Cattell the whole Cities c. And to stop Hagiomast mouth for ever I wish him to consider this that by vertue of commands under the old Testament Apostates false Prophets Idolaters may be now put to death and yet the Magistrates under the Gospel not bound to destroy whole Cities cattell nor fulfill the rest of his inferences For it will appeare by many instances in the old Testament even in that time of Administration of the Covenant wherein the 13. of Deut. was written that the Magistrates held not themselves bound to à ll those particulars of destroying all the inhabitants cattell c. though they inflicted punishments yea death upon some Idolaters and Apostates as these instances fully show viz. in Moses Exod. 32. commanding in the worship of the Golden Calfe three thousand to be slaine not all the people nor the cattell Numb 25. 2 3 4 5. commanding for the bowing downe to the gods of Moab the heads of the people to be hanged up not all the people neither the cattell to be killed in Eliah killing the Prophets of Baal only 1 Kings c. 18. not the people in Asa entring into Covenant that whosoever would not serve the Lord the God of Israel should be put to death and in deposing Machah his Mother for making an Idoll in a Grove 2 Chron. c. 15. but not entring into Covenant to destroy all the Cattell and the Cities where such persons lived in Josiah sacrificing all the Priest of the high places in Samaria that were there upon the Altars 2 Kings chapt 23. but not sacrificing the people nor the cattell and so in others which might be given And therfore if Magistrates under the old Testament though all thought it their duty to punish◠Idolaters and Apostates were not tied to all the particulars in Deut. 13. then certainly the Magistrates under the new are lesse tied to those accessories and formalities of that Law by all which t is apparent those things laid down in Deut. 13. 15 16 17. are only accessories accidentals of that cōmand of punishing with death those that goe after other Gods and not of the nature and essence of it yea holding only in some particular cases time but not generall to the Iewes themselves which in what cases and how I shall forbearespeaking of now for feare of inlarging this part beyond its proportion intended And for a conclusion of this the consideration of this mixture and composition of the Lawes of God under the old Testament is exceeding usefull for this purpose viz. that thereby wee may judge more easily of the mutabilitie or immutabilitie of them whether they be temporary or perpetuall and so whether they bind all men or only some In commands alledged out of the old Testament this is to bee carefully lookt into whether they be meerly and purely morall or ceremoniall or judiciall or whether mixt and compounded and how of what lawes mixt If the command bee pure and simple the thing is evident where morall is binds where ceremoniall or judiciall it binds not But if it bee mixt of judiciall ceremoniall and morall or of ceremoniall and morall the morall remains and is in force by all which wee may see the weaknes of Hagiomastixs inference that if that command in Deut. 13. does at all bind Christians it must binde in every particular there spoken of for what 's morall in Deut. 13. abides and yet what 's properly judiciall and ceremoniall is taken away look as that were no good argument against the fifth commandement being in force under the new Testament because then what was judiciall and ceremoniall in it as containing the promise of the Land of Canaan and a blessing in it c. must remaine under the Gospel so neither is this of Hagiomast For as a command morall may have somewhat judiciall mixed with it so may a command judiciall have much of morall in it but now what judiciall lawes and how mixed are temporary and changeable and upon what rules and grounds and what judiciall lawes are immutable and perpetuall and how to bee known I referre the Reader for satisfaction to Zepperus explanation of the Mosaicall Lawes 1. Book chapt 7 8 9 12. And as for those commands in question of Magistrates punishing in cases of Apostasie Idolatry Blasphemie they are upon all occasions reckoned by learned Divines among the immutable and perpetuall as by Zanchius De Magistratu Quaest Secunda
p. 170 171. Beza De Haeretiâ—is a Magistratuâ— puniendiâ— p. 152. 154 155. and by Zepperus in his explanation of the mosaicall judiciall laws first Book c. 10. page 72. and 4. Book chapt 2. p. 243. where hee makes the lawes against the false Prophet teaching publikely the private Seducer the publike defection of the whole City c to bee appendixes of the first command and of common right and particularly in the third chapter of that fourth Book proves by severall Reasons the punishing of false Teachers Hereticks Blasphemers ought to bee perpetuall which learned Authors notwithstanding grant the kinds of punishments the particular forms of those lawes and as they were given of Moses to bee constitutive of the Jewes pollicy to be changeable and not binding The kinds of punishments are taken away Christ would not have the Gentile Magistrate to be bound to those lawes for the kind of punishments which were given to the Jewish Magistrates but notwithstanding punishments in generall are not taken away but commanded In the constituting the kind of punishment there seems a peculiar reason to have been had of that Nation There were certaine peculiar things in those lawes that doe not now belong to us which particulars being taken away there are two things by vertue of those lawes remaine First that defection from the true Religion and seducing to tha defection should be punished by the Magistrate noâ— Secondly that Capitall punishment should be inflicted according to the greatnes of the Blasphemy and wickednesse upon factious and seditions Apostates For of such account ought the Majesty of God to be among all men in all ages of the world that whosoever shall despise and mock at that be who speakes evill of the Author of life is most worthy to have his life taken away So Zanchius De Magistratu Quaest secunda page 170. 171 172 and Beza De Haereticis a Magistratâ— pâ—niendis page 154 155. speake and therfore according to that three-fold distinction laid down page 53 54 55. of this Treatise this law in Deut. 13. may be in force 1. according to the substance and equity of it according as there is a common right in it common to other Nations with the Jewâ— and secondly as it contains a Doctrine made known by God for punishing such offences though wee Christians are not tied to the particular formes of that command according to the Mosaicall law or politie nor as it was given by Moses to one people nor to the utmost vigor and severity of it expressed in every particular which being in force under the Gospel but in this sense thus far fully makes good that which t is brought for the Magistrates coercive power under the new Testament to punish false Prophets Apostates c neither does the abating somewhat of the rigor of the Law sutable to the Mosaical Paedagogie or the relesiang of the particular forms of that Law the kind and manner of punishing abrogate all punishment and restraint For we may easily conceive and wee often see it in experience the rigor and utmost severity of a Law in regard of some circumstances abated and yet not all punishment neither the substance of it taken away and indeed if wee consider what the judiciall Law concerning punishing in criminall matters is as t is laid downe by divers learned men Beza Zepperus Amesius viz. that law which doth peculiarly explicate that part of righteousnesse and equitie concerning executing justice and judgement or the most accurate determination and fit application of the naturall right according to the speciall and singular condition of that people it must needs follow that though those circumstances which were proper to that speciall estate of the Jewes are ceased as of necessity they must the State of the Jewes being changed yet the things themselves as abstracted from their relation to the Jewish Church and state cannot be abolished as being naturalis juris which still doe hold forth to us the best determination of naturall right as Amesius speaks as the changing of the fashion forme and proportion of a mans clothing and apparell cannot alter a mans substance and person so neither can the forms and manner of the judiciall Law by which it was fitted for the Jewes condition as a garment is to a mans body take away the Law it selfe so that judicias being â—othing else but naturals and morals clothed for a time after such a manner to fit the nature and manners of such a people that time and people being passed away the substance viz. what 's naturall and morall must needs remaine Fifthly as to those other inferences added by Hagiomastix page 50. 51 52. to the former that if the obligation of the Mosaicall Law for putting Blasphemers Idolaters c to death was intended by God to continue under the new Testament why was the Apostle Paul so farre from enjoyning a beleeving brother to detect or to put to death his Idolatrous wife that hee doth not permit him so much as to put her away from him if the Law in question was to continue in force under the Gospel then was every person in an Idolatrous state and kingdome whilst it remained Idolatrous bound to seeke the death one of another yea to destroy one another with their own hands Yea the civil Magistrate was bound to sentence all his subjects that practised Idolatry to death without exception and to make a bloudy desolation throughout all his dominions then were beleevers in Idolatrous states and kingdomes upon their respective Conversions to the Christian faith bound to accuse their neighbours being Idolaters and Blasphemers round about them before the Magistrate especially if hee were a Christian and to require the execution of this Law of God upon them to have them put to death I answer M. Goodwins Ifâ— Thens proceed either out of the grosse ignorance of the state of the question of Toleration and scope of Deut. 13. or elsefrom a designe to delude and abuse the people with a show of some reason which though hee knowes in his conscience very well hath no waight at all yet he thinks will serve to mislead his followers who takes shadowes for men For whereas the question about punishing men with death or other severe punishments in cases of Idolatry and false Doctrine is understood by all Divines who write of the Controversie in case of Apostasie and defection meant of those who have once known and received the Christian faith and not of Jewes Turks and Pagans of Magistrates also in their owne jurisdiction and Territories not others and when it may bee with the safety and for the good of a Nation and Kingdome not to the manifest destruction and ruine of a Kingdome as he may find in the writings of many learned men who have writ upon the Question Calvin Beza Zanchius Bullinger Danaeus Musculus Gerardus Baldwins cases of conscience Zepperus Videlius Voetius Master Rutherfurd c and is evident
cases too hard and difficult for them are commanded to goe higher to some superior Court and Assembly as those words cleerly show thou shalt arise and get thee up into the place which the Lord thy God shall chuse This place afterwards was Jerusalem as t is said Psal 122. 5. there were set thrones of judgement and in Ierusalem did Iehoshaphat set of the Levites and of the Priests and the chiefe of the Fathers of Israel for the judgement of the Lord and for Controversies 2 Chron. 19. 8. 9. 10. Ainsworth upon the place writes that by the Iudge that shall be in those dayes is understood the high Councell and Senate of Iudges which were of the cheif of the Fathers of Israel as they who are called Priests verse 9. are called verse 12. Priest so many Iudges are called Iudge only as among the Priests one was cheife so among the Iudges one was Prince 2 Chron. 19. 11. The Hebrew records say when any doubt aâ—ose in any case to any one of Israel hee asked of the judgement Hâ—ll that was in his Citie if they knew they told it him if not then hee that enquired together with the Synedrion or with the messengers thereof went up to Jerusalem and inquired of the Synedrion that was in the Mountaine of the Temple if they knew they told it them if not then they all come to the Synedrion that was at the door of the Court yard of the Temple if theâ— knew they told it them and if not they all came to the chamber of hewen stone to the great Synedrion and enquired and Interpreters generally understand these verses of Iudicatures and Courts in Israel and of the lower Courts going to the highest the great and high Synedrion Now I find no command noâ— example recorded in Scripture of any of the Iewish Courts Ecclesiast or Civil enquiring by Vrim of morall transgressions of what sort they were and what punishments the Committers of such sins should have but still they determined according to the Law and Iudgements Ezek. 44. 24. I never read of the high Synedrion either in Scripture or any other writers of it that they were wont to give their Answer by Vrim and Thummim If we observe those instances in Scripture of enquiring by Vrim wee shall see they are inquiries made of particular persons by the Priest not by a Court and of the high Priest not as sitting in Court nor as alwayes at Ierusalem nor of Criminall cases but of going in and out to warre and such like and whoever doth but consult with the Annotations of Ainsworth Diodate and Luther English Divines the Commentaries of Lyra Piscator and others on this place will confesse t is quite another thing is here spoken of then the judgement of Vrim 3. Amesius in his Cases of Conscience in his Answer to that question whether that Law Deut. 17. 12. of putting him to death who would not hearken to the Iudge and the Priest was just resolves it was and faith the equity of that Law will easily appeare and among other reasons gives this because that place speaks of disobedience in those things which out of the Law of God are cleerly and manifestly determined verse 11. so that wee see Ames judgement in the resolution of that case is that the Answer of the Iudge or Priest was made out of the Law of God and not by Vrim and it seems that learned men never dreamt of any such thing in this Deut. 17. for among all his reasons he mentions no such thing and certainly if that were the meaning of the place which Hagiomastix puts upon it that had been such a strong reason for the equity of putting those to death who would not hearken to the Priest giving them councell immediately and infallibly from God as that Dr. Ames could not have omitted it For if Mr. Goodwin who is so kind and charitable to all Atheists Antiscripturists Blasphemers Idolaters c in his Queries upon the printed Paper entituled an Ordinance against Heresies and his Hagiomastix as that he would have no coercive power made use of against them doth yet grant there was an equity in that Law that sentence of death should passe on such that would not hearken to the Priest speaking immediately and infallibly from God and saith that for his part if the Inquisitors now can give any satisfying account of any sentence awarded against Blasphemers Hereticks that comes by infallible Revelation from God hee shall thinke it equall and meet that hee that shall doe presumptuously and not hearken unto it should be put to death then Dr. Ames who was fully for the Magistrates coercive power in matters of Religion and for putting Blasphemous Hereticks to death could not have forgotten this reason Fourthly on Deut. 17. 8 9 10 11 12. is founded by the judgement of many great Divines that which is called the Councell the great Sanhedrin at Jerusalem the Seventy Spanhemius in his third part Dubiorum Evangelicorum page 800. 801. showes that by the command of the Law this very place Deut. 17. 8 9. to this supreame Tribunall of the Synedrion were referred all things whatsoever that could not be determined of the inferior Courts or were doubtfull and had tried the severall judgements of the inferior judges Gersom Bucerus in his Dissertat de Gubernat Ecclesiae page 62. quotes this Deut. 17. 8. 9. for the generall Convention at Ierusalem to which the hardest things were brought which could not be determined in the lower judicatories Walaeus in his Tractate de Discrimine muneris politici Ecclesiastici brings this place to prove the Synedrion or Colledge at Ierusalem that if among the Iudges or Priests in the lesser Cities and Townes there fell out some things of greater moment or if any one would not rest in their sentence the cause was devolved to higher Iudges who after Davids time had their Synedrion at Ierusalem as the cheife Metrapolis of Iudâ—â— Mr Gillespie in his Aarons rod blossoming 1. Book 3. chapt writeâ— thus T is agreed upon both by Iewish and Christian Expositors that this place holds forth a supream civill Court of Iudges and the Authority of the civill Sanhedrim is mainly grounded on this very text And as the high civil Synedria is founded here so many Divines show a supream Ecclesiast Sanhedrim distinct from the Civill is held forth in this very place to which the People of God weere bound as to the supream Ecclesiasticall Court to bring all the difficult Ecclesiasticall causes which could not be determined in the lower Assemblies in which Court they were determined without any other appeale of which the Reader may find more in Walaeus Gerson Bucerus Apollonii jus Magistratus circa sacra first part page 374. and second part second chapter page 48. and aboue all others in Mr. Gillespie his Aarons Rod blossoming Book 1. chapt 3. who at large handles this point that the Iewes had an
Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin distinct from the Civill and among other grounds from this of Deut. 17. 8 9 10 11 12. But none of these learned men not any but Papists that ever I met with give the least hint of any judgement by Vrim to bee meant in this place neither do I find in all the Authors that I have read concerning the way of passing sentence in the highest Synedrion at Jerusalem and determining the difficulties about the Law brought to them whether the Ecclesiasticall of which the high Priest was president or the Civill that ever for the satisfaction of the parties and giving the true sense of the Law thus controverted and so putting an end to all controversies they were wont in that Court to enquire by Vrim nay there are severall things written in the Scriptures and by learned men who write of the customes of the Iewes and proceedings in that Court which show the contrary as those words imply as much Deut. 17. the Priest and the Iudge that shall be in those dayes from whence the Hebrews gather that if the high Synedrion had judged and determined of a matter as seemed right in their eyes and after them another Synedrion rose up which upon reasons seeming good unto them disannulled the former sentence then it was disanulled and judgement passed according as it seemed good unto these latter thou art not bound to walke save after the Synedrion that are in thy generation Now if it were a sentence by Vrim immediate and infallible from God no following Synedrion might have disannull'd it So those words according to the sentence which they shall teach thee showes the sentence was to be according to the Law the word written and not by a voice from heaven as also that instance of Ierem. being condemned to die by the supreme Court at Ierusal the Court of the Priests doing their part judging him a false Prophet and worthy to die the Court of the Princes acquitting him as a true Propheâ— of which see more in Aarons Rod blossom p. 18. 19. both of them going upon Scripture Grounds as I have shown p. 99. but in this great Controversie never appealing to the judgement of Vrim and so in their way of trying false Prophets they went not by the Priests putting on the Ephod to enquire of the Lord but therein all say the Iewes was this If he had threatned a judgement to come although it came not yet hee was not a false Prophet for that God say they is gracious as hee was to the Ninivites and to Hezekiah But if hee promised a good thing and it came not to passe then hee was a lyar For every good thing which God promiseth he performeth so Ieremiah tried Ananias to be a false Prophet because hee promised a good thing to Zedekiah and it came not to passe Fifthly the current of the Scripture both in the Law and Prophets still speaks of going to the Law and according to that making that the last resolution of Practise and Controversies in all morall things both of duties and sins and that for private and publick persons Esaiah 8. 20. To the Law and to the Testimony if they speake not according to this word it is because there is no light in them Deut. 30. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. the Iewes must hearken to the commandement written in the Book of the Law t is not hidden neither is it farre of t is not darke that it cannot be attained to It is not in heaven that it should be said who shall goe up for us to heaven and bring it unto us that wee may heare it and doe it But the worde is very nigh c Deut. 17. 18. v. the Law of God is to bee for the direction of the King and of the Priests and Levites The Book of the Law of the Lord given by Moses 2 Cron. 34. 15 19 30 31. compared with 2 Kings chapter 22. 8 11. v. chapter 23. 2 3. was that by which Josiah made his Reformation both in the removing of persons and things not once enquiring by Vrim whether he should slay Idolatrous Priests put downe others keep such a solemne passeover c and t is observable that the King commanded Hilkiah the high Priest and Shaphan the Scribe c to goe and enquire of the Lord for him and for the People concerning the words of this Book what judgement hanged over their heads and when it was like to fall and whether there were any means or whether it was not too late to appease his wrath and accordingly they went unto Huldah the Prophetesse yet he commanded not Hilkiah to enquire by Vrim neither did Hilkiah the high Priest put on the Ephod but went to the Prophetesse which is to me a great argument that the judgement of Vrim was only in some particular set cases as going in and out to war and such like but not for inquiry in cases of the Law what Reformation to be made or what transgressions of the Law to bee punished by death As for those other two places Deut. 19. 17 18. 21 and 5. I shall not spend many lines in clearing them as being not brought to prove the glorious Ordinance of the Oracle least I should be charged by Hagiomastix to show my valour in fighting with men of clouts of my owne setting up For the first t is understood of a single witnesse accusing one for seducing to Apostasie and revolt so Junius reads it ad testificandum in â—um Apostasiam and Ainsworth to testifie revolt against him not civill wrong as the English translation seems to carry it and the meaning is this although in all other causes two witnesses atleast are required by the Law yet in the businesse of religion one witnesse is sufficient to make a questioÌ„ of the partie by which God shows be would have the preservation of Doctrine commended to the Magistrate for this is an appendix of that Law which is spoken of Deut. 17. 2. So Iunius Diodate also on the place writes thus in case of a secret Seducement from Gods true service he that had been sollicited though hee were alone ought to detect the Seducer Deut. 13. 6. 8. and the Judges ought to proceed therein as upon an advice and denunciation not as upon a formall accusation which had required two witnesses And if the calumny was made to appeare unto them they were to observe this Law if it were truth that of Deut. 13. 9. So then this place holds forth no more then what Deut. 17. 8 9. does which hath nothing to doe with the judgement of Vâ—im as I have already showen at large and yet if this place had any thing in it more for enquiring by Vrim then the former it could doe Hagiomastix no good nor is to the point at all brought by him because this enquiring by Vrim is not to know from the Lord what kind of Idolatrie and Idolater this is whether that for which
Malefactors for offences against the second Table should not bee in force now and whatever is said by Hagiomastix in this reason against all bodily and civill punishment for transgressions of the first Table holds in all respects as strongly against the Magistrates punishing for killing stealing c and the Anabaptists Socinians and other Hereticks who wholly deny the Christian Magistrates sword or at least the use of it in point of death under the N. Testament against any transgression viz. Treason Murder adulterie c as well as Blasphemie Idolatrie may say the same for themselves and among all other Arguments brought by them against the Christian Magistrates killing or punishing Murder Theft Adulterie c they may adde this new one of Master Goodwins There is this cleere Reason why the old Testament Law for punishing of Murtherers Theeves Adulterers c should not now be in force upon any such terms as it was when and where it was given because in all difficult cases that happened about matters of the Second Table the Jewes to whom this Law was given had the opportunitie of immediate consultation with the mouth of God himselfe who could and did from time to time infallibly declare what his owne mind and pleasure was in them So that except those that were to give sentence in cases of bloud theft c had been desperately wicked and set upon bloud and had despised that glorious Ordinance of the Oracle amongst them they could not do injustice because God himselfe was alwayes at hand to declare unto them what was meet to be done and what kind of man-slayer was to be put to death and whether the person killed the man casually or wilfully c whereas now the best Oracles that Magistrates and Iudges have to direct them in doubtfull cases about matters of life estate c are men of very fallible judgements and the Lawes they are to proceede by of doubtfull Interpretation in many cases and therefore to goe about to prove that the Law for punishing Murtherers Theeves c is now or amongst us in force because it was once given unto the Jewes is as if men should prove that a man may safely and without danger walk among â—ogs Praecipices and ditches at midnight because he may well doe it at noon day I will undertake to make it good against Master Goodwin that whatsover he saith in this his cleere Reason for the Magistrates punishing in matters of Religion under the old Testament but against it now to show it was the same in matters of Iustice and Right among men then and is as strong against Magistrates coercive Power now in those things as in matters of Religion yea upon that head of difficult and doubtfull cases and danger of Magistrates erring and mistaking in judgement thereupon to give severall Reasons of the danger of Magistrates mistaking rather in difficult cases of the second then of the first Table Whoever hath but read and observed the Scriptures yea but the five Books of Moses must acknowledge there were many difficult and doubtfull cases under the old Law upon the commandements of the second Table as well as of the first and therefore superior and higher Courts divers one above another were appointed by God under the Law to which in hard matters concerning the second Table as of the first they might resort for advice and resolution Whoever doth but consider the many Questions and cases handled and written upon by the School-men Casuiâ—ls Canonists Civilians upon matters of the second Table as well as of the first together with the errrors and diversitie of Opinions that have been in the Church from the Apostles dayes down to this time upon every one of the commandements of the second Table as about Magistracie Polygamâ—e Communitie of Wives and Communitie of Goods about Christians being Magistrates the Lawfulnesse of Christians going to war about the Lawfulnesse of Lying dissimulation and aequivocation in divers cases c must confesse there are many Controversies and doubts about the Contents of the second Table That place in Deuteronomy 17. from the eigth verse to the twelfth brought by Master Goodwin for the judgement of Vrim in difficult cases about matters of Religion and so made the ground of Magistrates punishing for Religion then but not now speaks as well of hard matters in civill things betweene man and man as in the things of God There are some Divines who understand the Place wholly or Principally of hard matters and Controversies about the second Table so Luther upon the place laboring to free it from the corrupt Interpretation and sense put upon it by the Papists saith Moses doth here deale not concerningâ— the word or Doctrine or as they speake of the questions of faith which they would have referd to the Pope but of the sentence of Publick and Prophane Crimes So Aâ—â—sworth and our English Divines on the Place by blood and blood understand Murder of which the Iudges may be doubtfull and unable to find out whether it were wilfull which deserved death or unwilling for which exile into the Cities of Refuge was appointede by Plea and Plea pleading for and against in the same cause some accusing some denying as in 1 Kings 3. 16. 17. 18. by stroake and stroake may be also meant stroaks and Wounds that one man gave unto another whether of Malignitie or Casualtie and Hagiomastix in Section 107. in Answer to the Vindication of the Ordinance against Heresies which brought Deut. 17. 12. for a proofe of God making controverted points in Religion a matter of death or imprisonment carries his first and second Answers so as if that place were understood wholly or Principally of Controversies about the second Table between blood and blood between stroake and stroake Plea and Plea and if he meant not so those Answers are nothing to the Position of the Vindicator affirming that God in the old Testament gave Authority to make a controverted point in Religion for of Religion he speaks a matter of death or imprisonment But all Divines generally who write upon the place by way of exposition or who have written of the Judicatories among the Jewes and of Appeales from lower Courts to higher and of the distinction between Civill and Ecclesiasticall Courts do understand the hard matters in judgment and the matters of Controversie within the gates to bee meant of criminall matters in Civill things belonging to the second Table as sixth and eight Commandement as well as of Ecclesiasticall things the matter too hard between blood and blood between Plea and Plea is interpreted by learned Jâ—nius in his Analysis upon Deuterononie of shughter and killing and of contention in Civill causes about such things as belong to the accommodations of life as between stroak and stroak is of diseases as of the plague of Leprofie which was in an Ecclesiasticall and ceremoniall way according to the Law to be distinguished and therefore in this place the argument
of that knowne axiome A particulari ad universale non valet consequentia and therefore though that particular reason be ceased although I haue fully shown that never was any reason of those Laws under the old Testament for punishing of false Prophets but a meer device and a fancie t is no good consequence all the other reasons yea and the commands themselves should cease also Seventhly to that Hagiomastix saith that the punishments enjoyned by God then under the Law to be inflicted in his Church upon delinquents were more bodily and afflictive to the outward man then the punishments enjoyned under the Gospel and consequently were not only carnall or bodily but typicall also and prefignificative of those greater and more spirituall under the Gospel cutting off from his people then as of casting out from his people now cutting off under the Gospel being no where found to be used but in a metaphorical and allusive sense also to what Minus Celsus Senensis writes that that corporall punishment in Deut. 13. was a Type of eternall damnation and therefore that Law with all the rest given for the future signification of things by the comming of Christ ceased I answer as followes First I deny the punishments enjoyned by God under the Law to be inflicted in his Church upon delinquents to be bodily or afflictive at all to the outward man as by donfiscation of goods or by death but they were spirituall and inflicted upon the soules by suspension excommunication and such like spirituall censures as well as now under the Gospel T is true there were bodily outward punishments in the Civill Iudicatories inflicted then on the bodies of false Prophets Idolaters c but by the Magistrates the Civil Governors and not by the Priests the Ecclesiastical Governors in the Church of the Iewes For under the Law the Jewish Church and Common-wealth the Civil Government and Ecclesiastical the censures and punishments of Church and State were formally distinct as Master Gillespie hath fully and excellently proved in his Aarons rod blossoming in many places particularly 1. Book cap. 2. 3 4 5 and the Church of the Iewes proceeded then against false Prophets only with the sword of the Spirit and spirituall weapons and the State with the materiall Sword and bodily punishments Which truth is fully acknowledged also by Master Cotton however differing from Presbyterians about a National Church in his Answer to Master Williams Bloudy Tenet saying I should think mine eye not only obscured but the fight of it utterly put out if I should conceave as he doth that the National Church State of the Jewes did necessarily call for such weapons a speaking of a Sword of Iron or Steel to punish Hereticks more then the Congregetional State of particular Churches doth call for the same now in the dayes of the new Testament For was not the National Church of the Iewes as compleatly furnished with spirituall Armor to defend it selfe and to offend men and Divels as the particular Churches of the new Testament be Had they not power to convince false Prophets as Eliah did the Prophets of Baal Had they not power to seperate all evil doers from the fellowship of the Congregation what power have our particular Churches now which their National Church wanted or what efficacie is there found in the exercise of our power which was wanting to them It is therefore a Sophistical imagination of mans Braine to make a mans selfe or the world believe that the National Church State of the Iewes required a Civil Sword whereas the particular State of the Gospel needs no such helpe And was not the National Church of Israel as powerfully able by the same spirit to doe the same surely it was both spoken and meant of the National Church of the Jewes not by might nor by Power but my Spirit saith the Lord of Hosts Zach. 4. 6. So that by what I have already said Hagiomastix must either I suppose recall what he hath written of carnal bodily punishments enjoyned by God then to be inflicted in his Church upon delinquents or else must joyne with the Erastians in holding the Iewish Church and Common-wealth their Governement and Censures all one and the same Secondly The foundation upon which Hagiomastix rears this building of outward punishments under the old Testament being typical of spiritual under the new viz the Land of Canaan with the external happinesse and peace there being typical and therefore reasons a comparaâ—is and from the Analogie is sandie and unsound for the Land of Canaan with the external happinesse and long life in it whatsoever it was typical of was from what God had put into the Land being a Land healthful pleasant flowing with milke and honey abounding in excellent precious fruits the immediate blessings of God upon it and not from what came to it by the Magistrates Laws and their good Government for further satisfaction of which I wish Master Goodwin to resolve me this question whether the Land of Canaan were not typical as well in times of wars and troubles and under bad Princes as in dayes of peace and under good Princes and so to reason a comparatis to use his owne Phrase and adidem if temporall threatnings and bodily punishments inflicted upon delinquents under the old Testament were typicall and Praesignificative of greater under the Gospel they must be threatnings and bodily punishments inflicted from God upon false Prophets c not thoe executed by the Magistrates on them Thirdly Granting both Hagiomastixs foundation and the building reared upon it to be good yet they no whit prove bodily and outward punishments to be wholly taken away under the new Testament for suppose the temporal happinesse and the temporal punishments had typified more spiritual happinesse and lesse of the earth more spiritual judgements and lesse of outward or bodily sufferings under the Gospel yet it followes not they take away all outward happinesse and blessings and all outward bodily punishments there may be greater or lesser degrees of things under the old and new Testament suitable to some difference in the manner of Administration betweene the old and the new and yet not the substance of the things taken away These are knowne axioms Gradus non tollunt substantiam Magis Minus non variant speciem T is apparent by sense and experience that how much soever spirituall blessings and spiritual judgements in the dayes of the Gospel abound above the times under the Law yet they take not away all temporal outward blessings nor all temporal outward judgements but God for all that gives many outward blessings and sends many temporal judgements on the earth So supposing God should inflict more spiritual judgements on the soules of men under the new Testament and the Church greater spiritual censures then under the old it no way followes the Magistrates may inflict none at all especially when all spiritual judgements on the soule are slited and with a high hand
same reason the Decalogue the whole ten commandements are overthrown too for both in Moses his giving the moral Law and in the commands themselves with the preface from the second verse of the 20. of Exod. to verse 18. there are divers particulars typical and figurative of things under the Gospel temporall corporall things of spiritual and heavenly of which I having spoken before in this Book pag. 24. 25 83 85. and many learned Divines giving instances in this kind * as Zepperus Rivitus Master Burgesse I shall inlarge no further but referre the Reader to those Books Having laid downe divers reasons to prove the commands under the old Law for Magistrates punishing false Prophets Apostates Blasphemers to be of common reason and equity given to all Nations and for all Ages and having answered the most materiall grounds brought by the Patrons of Toleration to make void those commands as not binding under the new Testament I come in the third place to answer those evasions and shifts brought by Iacobus Acontius Minus Celsus Senensis and Hagiomastix `that if it should be granted that all and every the Lawes contested about as well that for putting to death the false Prophet as those for inflicting punishment upon the Idolater and Blasphemer were moral and still in force under the Gospel yet these could not reach unto Hereticks and false Teachers among us at not being those false Prophets Idolaters Blasphemers spoken of in the old Law If it can be proved that Hereticks are those Blasphemers false Prophets Apostates which Moses commands to be killed then it shall be acknowledged Hereticks are to be killed but there is a large difference between a Heretick and such a false Prophet or Apostate as the Presbyterians in their owne definition of Hereticks make A Heretick does not deny God the Creator of heaven and earth neither doth he teach that other gods are to be worshipped a Heretick does not deny the name of Christ a Heretick does not deny the word of God which an Apostate does So that the word of God may be used as a weapon against Hereticks which against an Apostate cannot A Heretick therefore is not mentioned nor touched in any one word of these Lawes But if any will go about to draw these Lawes unto an Heretick that cannot be done by the proper force of the words but as the Lawyers speake per extensionem latamque interpretationem by stretching of them and far fetched interpreation And it would first be well considered of whether every Law does admit of such extensions and if not every one which of them then does admit and wherfore and whether in this Law there are those things for which an extension is to be made By the false Prophet who was commanded to be put to death Deut. 13. 5. was not meant every Heretick or erroneous person nor yet those who taught or published any false Doctrine though of dangerous consequence but only those who endeavoured to perswade men to the worship of a false god that by affirming that they spake by the inspiration of some deitie and that their sayings were to be esteemed Oracles What Doctrine it was which made the Prophet or Teacher of it guilty of death is expresly determined in the Law it selfe and asserted to be this Let us goe after other gods which thou hast not known and let us serve them And that the Law of God made against false Prophets and worshippers of false Gods was not intended against those who otherwise held that the Law of God was to be kept but were infected with some other error is sufficiently evident from hence because in former times among the Iewes who were affected with a vehement love and zeale towards their law Hereticks notwithstanding were tolerated and particularly the Sadduces These although the greatest part of the people and the Rulers beleeved them to erre exceedingly neverthelesse they were not expelled the Citie neither exempted from being Magistrates or bearing any other Civill office yea they were not hindred from coming to the Temple or the Synagogues The Scribes and Pharisees also both held and taught many most dangerous and erroneous Doctrines yet were they also in great honor and esteeme in this Church and state And though our Saviour upon occasion reasoned against yea and reproved them all for holding and teaching these errors and gave warning to take heed of them yet did he never charge this Church or State or those that bare office in either with sin or unfaithfulnesse in their places for not proceeding against them in regard of their errors either by imprisonment or death And yet we know that the Zeale of his Fathers House did eat him up and that he attempted a reformation amongst them yea Christ did teach and presse upon men all and all manner of duties from judgement mercy and faith even to the paying tithe of Mint Annise and Cummin Now unto these and other such like besides some hints I have already given upon the 14. Thesis which may serve in part for satisfaction to some of these evasions I desire the Reader to mind these following Answers First there are other places of Scripture both of commands or else examples approved by God concerning the punishing with death or restraining by Civil power the last of which makes good the point in hand against Hagiomastix and other Libertines as well as that of death for other faults in matters of Religion besides Blasphemie Apostasie and false Prophecying in the sense now alledged by Hagiomastix and his Compeers which these following instances prove First in Deut. 13. 6 7 8 9 10 that very chapter verse 5. brought by Hagiomastix to prove only those were to be put to death who endeavoured to perswade men to the worship of a false God and that by affirming that they spake by the inspiration of some deitie and that their sayings were to be esteemed by Oracles the Holy Ghost layes downe the contrary giving a distinct Precept and command from that of the false Prophet or dreamer of dreams who publickly and openly sollicites to Apostasie concerning the killing of such who in a hidden and clancular way seduce T is observed by learned Junius in his Analytical explication on Deut. 13. that there are two sorts of Seducers to Apostasie commanded to be put to death the one of such who publickly and boldly sollicite who are spoken of in the 5 first verses the other of such who secretly intice in verse 6. and the five following Now however the false Prophet or dreamer of dreames might pretend to speak by the inspiration of some deitie for which the 5 verse of the 13. is quoted by Hagiomastix yet the private enticers to Apostasie as the daughter the wife of the bosome the Son besides that they are made a different sort from the Prophet and dreamer of dreams and those six verses from the sixt to the twelfth containe a distinct command from the five first
verses about false Prophets neither doe they give out signs or wonders to confirme their calling the parties instanced in the text being of daughters to Fathers Wifes to Husbands c were not likely so much as to pretend to them the name of Prophets speaking by inspiration of some deitie but rather drawing by their neernesse of relation intimatenesse of affection opportunities of private and constant converse which many phrases in those verses the wife of the bosome thy friend which is as thy owne soule entise thee secretly thou shalt not censent unto him neither shall thine eye pity and such like imply and yet these are commanded to be put to death as well as those Prophets who openly and bodily gave out signs and wonders to confirme their being Prophets of which the Reader may be further satisfied by reading Junius his Analytical explication on Deut. 13. And as Moses in that former part of the chapter showes plainly contrary to the affirmation of Hagiomastix and other Libertines that others who perswade men to the worship of a false god besides those who pretend themselves Prophets are to be killed so in the latter part of this chapter from v. 13. he layes downe how they are to be put to death also that are guilty of Apostasie that have suffered themselves to be drawn away from the true worship of God to other gods who are so far from comming under the notion of false Prophets endeavouring to perswade men to the worship of a false God and that by affirming they spake by the inspiration of some deitie as that they fal not under the Title of Seducers at all but the seduced and therefore Iunius writing upon this Deut. 13. analyzes the whole chap. concerning Apostasies into two First the Authors entising to Apostasie in the first 11. verses Secondly those who are guilty of Apostasie who suffer themselves to be withdrawn from the worship of God in the latter part of the chapter and he showes this is another part of the chap. in which Moses speaks not of those seducing false Prophets nor the clandestine Seducers but of those who yielded to their Seducements particularly of those who publickly to the view of all are Seduced and being in publick Order as a City rest in that Apostasie by the publick authoritie of men falling from God and openly defending that impietie So Deut. 17. from verse 2. to verse 8. sets downe a Law for putting to death those who are Idolaters and Apostates simply though they never went about to entice others Iunius upon this 17. c. observes that this Law differs from that in the 13 chapt the eleven first verses because there Moses speaks of Apostates who are Dogmatists and enticers to Apostasie but here of Idolaters simply In Deut. 17. from verse 8. to verse 13. there is a Law that in ecclesiastical cases in matters of Religion as well as Civil upon going from the lower Iudicatories to the supreme to the high Priest with the Colledge of Priests the man that would doe presumptuously and would not hearken unto the Priest even that man should die which was in other cases then Blasphemie Apostasie Prophecying falsly for it appears by the scope of that place and the stream of all interpreters that in too hard matters for inferior Courts they should goe to the High Ecclesiastical Synedrion and whoever presumptuously disobeyed their sentence according to the Law though in other things then the forenamed Blasphemie c as appears by this place verse 11. 12. speaking of the Law indefinitely with that 2 Chr. 19. 8 9 10 11. compared together mentioning what cause soever shal come to you of your brethren that dwell in their Cities between Law and commandement statutes and judgements should be put to death the ground of which putting to death here commanded was not only from the nature of these sins against the first Table of the highest forme as Apostasie Blasphemie and such like but for other sinnes in points of Religion though lesser when the sentence and resolution of the high Priest with his Colledges was presumptuously disobeyed so that the punishing of wilful scorneful contempt of supreme Ecclesiasticall Government determining doubts and Controversies according to the word of God though in other cases then Apostasie Blasphemie Prophecying falsly is here commanded But having spoken so much of this Deut. 17. already in p. 101. 102 103 104 105 135 159 160. I shal not enlarge further only I shal take my leave of this Scripture by adding a passage out of Master Cottons late Book against Mr. Williams in way of answer to an evasion of his that the capital punishment prescribed against the presumptuous rejection of the sentence of the highest Court in Israel was a figure of excommunication in the Church of Christ Unto which Master Cotton replyes That Law is of moral equity in all Nations and in all Ages Hee that shall presumptuously appeale from or rise up against the cheifest or highest Court in a free state is guilty laesae Majestatis publicae and therefore as a capital offender to be censured in any free common-wealth And certainly if that part of the Law in Deut. 17. of presumptuously appealing from or rising against the sentence of the cheifest and highest Court in a free State being punished with death be of universal and perpetual equitie then punishing so far at least as to restraine those who presumptuously rise up and contemn the sentence of the highest Ecclesiastical Iudicature in a Church going according to the word of God is of universall and perpetual equitie too and the command of God in that text for punishing is against the man that will not hearken unto the Priest as well as he that will not hearken unto the Judge Deut. 18. 20. sets downe a Law that the * Prophet which shal presume to speake a word in Gods name which he commanded him not to speak shal die as well as hee that shall speake in the name of other gods which place of Scripture proves expresly against Hagiomastix that other Prophets besides those that came in the name of false gods and with other false Doctrine then that let us goe after other gods which thou hast not known and let us serve them were to be put to death The command is indefinite concerning speaking any word in Gods name which he commanded not to speak which must needs extend further then a Prophet prophecying only of turning to another God for there were many false Doctrines and false worships against the Jewish Religion besides that of Apostasie to other gods Again the scope of the words and several phrases as if the thing follow not nor come to passe thou shalt not be afraid of him show t is meant of other Doctrine then saying let us goe after other gods namely of Doctrine foretelling of some things to come whereas enticing to goe and serve other gods is de praesenti Learned * Iunius writing
Prophets does not only signifie Prophets as Arias Montanus observes upon that place but foolish speakers and vaine talkers such namely who are the cunning devisers of vaine discourses and by the subtil illusious of words doe catch the people such as Peter speaks of 2 Pet. 2. false Teachers among the people who with fained words deceive among others such especially who when they are confuted by learned men by plain places of Scripture being destitute of all abilitie and means by which to defend them errors that they may delude weak people insolently hoast they have the Spirit all their discourses being full of the boasting of the Spirit their prayers disputations speeches to the People all full of that for which they thinke they should be more beleeved then for all reason testimonies imitating therein Mahomet that Prince of Hereticks who when be could not prove the things he taught then he fled to the authoritie of the Spirit saying the Spirit revealed those things to him Now all sorts of Hereticks and false Teachers besides those Prophets who say let us goe after other Gods are vain talkers and deceivers as they of the circumcision and others Tit. 1. 10. 3 In this place is understood Hereticks and false Teachers as well as false Prophets who teach the following after other Gods from the effects that follow upon the thrusting thorow in the 4. 5. 6. verses so Gualther upon the place saith that it ought to be understood of false Teachers out of what followes it shall be manifest as from saying I am no Prophet I am an but bandman for man taught me to keep cattell from my youth c. That is they shall ingenuously confessé their ignorance that they ought to be sent to the Plaw-taile and to keep cattel rather then to continue any longer in the Ministrie of the Church And this is fulfilled in our age in many Papists who have left many fat Livings and preferments to embrace the pure Doctrine of the Gospel and â—â—bet in the Church of Christ by the labor of their hands to get their living then in the tents of Anti-Christ to enjoy the greatest means Now Papists and such others however they are false Teachers venâ— corrupt unsound Doctrine yet they are not of those who deny the true God and Christ and perswade to serve strange Gods So that by all these places of Scripture opened wee may see fully proved against Hagiomastixs assertion by warrant of Scripture many corruptions in matters of Religion besides false Prophets publickly teaching Apostasie to false Gods outwardly and bodily punished as private Seducers though they pretend not to be Prophets as persons seduced not seducing as those who would not hearken to but contemne the sentence of the supreme Ecclesiasticall Assembly as Hereticks and false Teachers and whoever would see more of these instances of Magistrates punishing for corruptions of religion in points of wil-worship Sabboth breaking c let them look back to page 27. 28 29 of this present Tractate Secondly Supposing there had been no other commands nor examples for Magistrates under the old Testament putting to death for matters of Religion then those named by Hagiomast of false Prophets Apostates Blasphemers which is not true as I have now shown in this first Answer and page 28. of this present Book yet these were sufficient grounds to justifie the Magistrates punishing in like cases and that upon these Reasons 1. In all Laws and commands for the better knowing their nature what they require and would have t is good looking into the causes and reasons of them why such Lawes were given by God from the cause of making the Law the mind of the Law-giver is to be understood T is a knowne maxime Ratio legis est mens legis the reason of the Law is the mind of the Law Now the reasons and causes of both those commands both against false Prophets as also private Seducers in Deut. 13. from 1. to the 12 are 1. the seeking to turne men away from the Lord their God and thrusting them out of the way which the Lord commanded them to walke in 2. The putting away the evill from the midst of them that others may hear and fear and do no more any such wickednes among them these are the Spirit and substance of these commands that those are to bee punished who when they fal from God themselves tempt others to the like defection and therefore are to bee made examples that others may not doe the like And therefore whoever seeks to turne men away from the Lord God and thrust them out of the way which the Lord hath commanded them to walke in they come within the compasse of these commandements although they doe not tempt to goe after the false Gods of that time and those Countries which the false Prophets then enticed them to for the reason of the Law is expressed in a universall forme against those who seek to turne men away from the Lord their God and to thrust them out of the way which the Lord commanded them to walke in as Beza observes and therefore to be in force against those in generall who doe fal from the true Religion and enticers also which is done other wayes then by falling to the strange Gods in those times that Moses writ in yea the command it selfe verse 5. in the letter mentions as speaking to turne men away from the Lord their God so to thrust out of the way which the Lord their God commanded them to walke in which certainly in the Scripture sense and acception includes other Apostafie and Idolatrie then of other Gods and I aske whether Israels worshipping the golden calfe and the ten Tribes worshipping the golden calfe at Dan and Bethel though they worshipped Iehovah in and by them were not a going out of their way which the Lord their God commanded them to walke in Secondly It is common and usual that in the commands concerning the worship of God and in other places of Scripture where the worship of God is spoken of there are Synecdochicall speeches intending and containing many other things of like kind and nature although not formally and literally expressed Eliah whe he complained of the whole Covenant of God violated by the Israelites expresses it by a part thrown down thine Altars and slaine thy Prophets The Prophet Isaiah prophecying of Egypts embracing the true religion saith Egypt shall sweare to the Lord of hosts under that expressing the whole worship of God The commands of God are exceeding large and broad comprehending many things under one Rivet in his explication of the Decalogue among other Rules hee gives for understanding of the commandements hath this that in all the Precepts of the Decalogue we must acknowledge a Synecdecâ—e in which one kind being propounded all under the same genus are understood But that that Synecdoche may be rightly explained before all things the Scope of the Law-giver in
the nature of those commands and examples recorded in the old Testament and indeed considering how clearly largely and importunately the Magistrates power and dutie in punishing in matters of Religion is set down and pressed by the Holy-Ghost in the old Testament it had been no wonder if nothing had been said of the new the abundant urging in the old serving for a reason of silence in the new But because this rule is so fully and judiciously handled in a late Book cald Sabbatum Rediviâ—â—um viz. A Law instituted in the old Testament not abrogated in the new is of perpetuall obligation though it have not expresse â—atification in the Gospel I shall referre the Reader thither where he shall find many grounds brought to prove it extracting only one passge out of the Book Whatsoever Law in once delivered to the Church and accordingly recorded in the Law Booke the holy Scriptures even of the old Testament whosoever would claim exemption from it whether particular Person or Church must produce some what to prove that that Law is now under the Gospel repealed or at least expired more then bare saying that it is no longer in force It is so in the statute Law of our Kingdome and of all Kingdomes if a man can alledge for himselfe in point of Right or Priviledge or the Kings Councell for the Kings Rights and Pâ—erogatives any statute that was once made it stands good for all purposes unlesse they who would gainsay it can alledge and prove that such a Statute is out of date by expiration or repeale So that the proofe lies originally upon the refuser of the Law and they that would maintaine it and urge it need plead nothing more then the enacting of it once till the abrogation of it can be verified and if it be so in the Statutes of men and the positive Lawes of Kingdomes much more in those of God whose Authority in unquestionably more absolute and whose wisedome Holinesse Justice and Goodnesse is infinitely beyond that of all Princes and States in the world 3. T is granted Princes and Magistrates under the old Law before Christs comming had a coercive power in matters of Religion and did punish Blasphemers c Now 1. seeing they long had it can any proofe be brought how and upon what occasion it was taken from them can any man shew any text out of the new Testament where Christ and his Apostles took away this power from Princes or declared that however under the old Seducers and false Prophets were to be dealt with by the Civil powers yet not under the new but only with the word of God Bullinger in his fifth Book against the Anabaptists chapter 3. page 169. pleading for Magistrates power in matters of Religion speaks thus to them Are Princes and Magistrates of the new Testament endorred with lesse Spirit and power then those of the old Or in what place have Christ and his Apostles removed Christians Princes from this power of Magistrates Whatever reasons or grounds any way or in any kind there were under the old for this power of Magistrates the very same remaine now were errors and Heresies then deadly and damnable so they are now were they then spreading as a Gangrene and corrupting many so they do now were they then hateful to God so they are still were false Teachers in those times unreasonable perverse obstinate not to be convinced by words behold they are as froward and desparate in these were Princes and Magistrates then to be zealous of Gods honor and to serve the Lord not only as private persons but as Magistrates so they ought to be now and t is by the Spirit of God foretold they should Now where there is the selfe same reason there is ever the selfe same Law and Equity both under the Law and Gospel for the further proofe of which the Reader may consult Master Prynnâ— Sword of Christian Magistracy supported pag. 21. 22 23 2. It cannot seem reasonable that all other relations Parents Masters Husbands should have the same authority over their children servants wives under the Gospel as they had under the Law and that in spiritual things and the Christian Magistrate should not nay that the Power of Parents Masters Husbands should be confirmed strengthned and more largely set forth Ephes 5. 22 23 33. Ephes 6. from verse 1. to 10. Col. 3. from verse 18. to 23. 1 Pet. 2. 18 19. and the Power of Magistrates only taken away Musculus in his common places De Magistratibus speaking of the power that Fathers have over their children in matters of Religion reasons from thence that to the Magistrate the supreme Father of all his subjects whose Power is far greater then that of a Father the care of religion more belongs then to Fathers In Magistrates there is an Authoritie of supereminencie excelling all then which there cannot be a greater on earth Therefore shall not that be lawfull for such an Authority and Power which is lawfull for every Father in his owne House yea by that divine command is it not required that that should belong to the greater which belongs to the lesse that to the publick Father of the people which belongs to the private 3. God under the new Testament allowes and approves of the calling of Princes and Magistrates giving many expresse commands to Christians of subjection and obedience to them Rom. 13. from verse 1. to 6. Tit. 3. 1. 1 Pet. 2. 13 14 17. 1 Tim. 2. 1 2 3. the ends and uses also for which Magistrates were instituted are the same under the new Testament and old besides there is not any one text in the new Testament limiting or restraining the Power given them by God in the old and therefore their calling and Power must needs be the same Learned Bilson in his true Difference between Christian subjection and unchristian Rebellion proving the Princes power and charge by Gods Law of Deut. 17. 18 19. and by the example of the godly Kings of Israel and Judah reaching as well unto matters of Religion as other things that the sword is given them to provide that as well true Religion be maintained in their Realms as civill justice ministred that they forbid prevent and punish in all their subjects not only murders thefts and such like breaches of the second Table but also Schismes Hereâ—ies Idolatries and other offences against the first Table pertaining only to the service of God and matters of Religion answers thus the Jesuits objection the very same evasion the Sectaries have now This charge concerned none but the Kings of Israel and Iudah That refuge doth rather manifest your folly then satisfie my reason Did I pray you Sir the comming of Christ abolish the Vocation of Princes I trow not Then their office remaining as before per consequens both the same precept of God to them still dureth and also the like power to force their subjects to serve
God and Christ his Sonne standeth in as full strength under the Gospel as ever it did under the Law For Princes in the new Testament be Gods Ministers to revenge Malefactors as they were in the old and the greater the wickednesse the rather to be punished ergo the greatest as Heresies Idolatries Blasphemies are soonest of all other vices to be repressed by Christian Magistrates whose zeale for Christs glory must not decrease Christs care for their Scepters being increased and those monuments of former Kings left written for their instruction were not this sufficient as in truth t is to refute your evasion yet King David foreseeing in Spirit that Heathen Kings would â—and themselves and assemble together against the Lord and his Christ extendeth the same charge to the Gentiles which the Kings of Jurie received before and warned them all at once Be wise ye Kings understand yeâ— Judges of the world Serve the Lord. And so in another place of this Book the Jesuits saying these were Kings of the old Testament and they had the Law of God to guide them he answers Then since Christian Princes have the same Scriptures which they had and also the Gospel of Christ and Apostolick writings to guide them which they had not why should they not in their Kingdomes retaine the same power which yee see the Kings of Iudah â—ad and used to their immortall praise and joy Againe Christ came not to abolish or diminish the power of Kings and States but to save their souls they are no way loosers but gainers by Christs comming Christs Kingdome is not of this world it alters not the Power and Preeminence God once gave to them as Kings and Magistrates Lastly If Magistrates under the new Testament should have this power taken from them the Church of God should be in a farre worse condition and more uncomfortable then it was under the old Law the Church should lose a great helpe it sometimes enjoyned neither can that helpe the matter to say that we have now Excommunication and other spirituall weapons to supply that losse For the Church of the Jewes had excommunication and the word of God yea extraordinary Prophets many miracles answers by Vrim and Thummim in all difficult cases about religion as Hagiomastix faith which we have not and yet they had need of Magistrates coercive power in matters of religion for all that To conclude there can be no reason in the world showen or given why Magistrates under the new Testament should not have power to restraine and punish Apostaâ—ies Blasphemies c as well as under the old but many might be given why their power rather should be continued and enlarged under the new and in this wee have Master Burroughs himselfe a witnesse what a sad condition the Church of Christ would be in if we had no externall power to restraine from any kind of Blasphemie and Seducements which passage having quoted before and having spoken something on that occasion page 63. of this Treatise of Toleration I referre the Reader thither and to Master Burroughs Irenicum page 23. 24. Fourthly God is unchangeable the Covenant of life under the old and new Testament is one and the same for the essence and substance as our Divines show against the Socinians Antinomians Anabaptists and the rule of righteousnesse and holinesse is the same under the new that it was under the old and therefore God hating corruptions of Religion so as to command his Vice-gerents to punish them then and to prevent their spreading he being unchangeable and the punishing of violations of Religion and impieties being acts of holinesse and righteousnesse must needs stand firmâ— and bind Magistrates under the new Testament And if the Magistrates restraining and suppressing the dishonors of God ruine of souls by his sword be altered and changed by God in the times of the Gospel then that power of punishment was either truely Ceremonial or else judicial belonging properly to the Poliâ—ie and Paedagogie of the Jewes but it was neither First Not Ceremoniall it was no type of any thing which was to come as I have showen before page 168. 169. of this Treatise Secondly Not properly judiciall in the sense laid downe page 53. 54. of this Treatise but morall of common right used by other Nations and that both before the judicial Law was given and after of which having spoken so much in divers pages and places of this Booke I shall onely adde this viz. that Zeppâ—rus in his fourth Booke de Legibus mosaicis excellently showes these Lawes to be Appendixes of the Decalogue and in stead of a just Commentarie upon them particularly of the first commandement whereupon he handles that question of punishing false Prophets and Hereticks and showes how many Errors and Opinions be Blasphemies as Servetus Opinion against the Holy Trinitie and Opinions against the Attributes of God c which abominations whosoever denies ought to be punished capitally he overthrowes all pietie and showes himselfe to be a stranger to all Religion and faith where among other reasons brought by him why false Teachers and Hereticks should be punished by the Civil Magistrates as the expresse Lawes of God given by Moses and not antiquated he gives this No substantial sufficient reason can be brought why the Majesty of God and the Authoritie of the Church ought to be of lesse moment and waight among Christians then in times past it hath been amongst the Jewes Yea by how much God hath more clearely manifested himselfe by his Sonne then in times past by his Prophets by so much the lesse can that coldnesse and luke-warmenesse be excused if wee be carried with a lesse study of our Religion and do lesse defend it then they Fifthly It cannot upon any reasonable ground be presumed that Idolatries Heresies Blasphemies c commanded by God to be punished by the Civil Magistrate under the old Testament should by Christs comming be set at libertie and absolutely freed from punishment For 1. Besides that the old Testament prophecying of Christs comming speaks of those dayes as times of greater holinesse and strictnesse and that in reference to the commands of the first Table as these Scriptures show Isaiah 35. 8 9. there shall be a way and it shall be called the way of holinesse the uncleane shall not passe over it no Lion shall be there nor any ravenous beast shall go up thereon that is no enemie of God hurtfull to the Church among which false Teachers are chief cald by Christ and Paul ravening Wolves and greivous Wolfes not sparing the flock Matth. 7. 15. Acts 20. 29. Zach. 13. 2 3. prophecies that in the day in which the Messiah shall come into the world he shall overthrow Idolatrie false Doctrine and whatsoever is contrary to the word of God and true Religion The Prophet comprehends all under three Heads 1. I will out off the names of the Idols out of the Land and they shall no more
Deum Qui volebat de publico vel alioqui de gravi negotio percontari veniebat ad sacerdotem Is indutus Ephod stabat coram arca Domini In Ephoa sine in pectorali erant inclusi duo decim lapides pretiosi in quib us nomina duodecim tribuum erant inscripta Interrogantem oportuit faciem ob vertere ad sacerdotem interrogare non quidem tam aperte ut vox audiretur nec ita etiam obscure ut tantum in anima cogitaret quae petebat Deinde sacerdoti hoc pacto reddebatur oraculum Spiritus sanctivi literae quaedam in pectorali eminebant idque vel loco vel fulgore in quibus sacerdos oraculum voluntatem Dei legebat Haec Chimbâ— Cui quantum fidei fit tribuendum nescio Potuit enim fieri ut spiritus Dei absque literis oracula ediderit per vocem summi sacerdotis cujus animum vaticinio afflasseâ— Weems Christian Synagogue Prolegomena cap. 4. The Revelation by Vrim and Thummim is not expressely set down Iosephus thinks when they were to go to battell the Priest putting his Ephod upon him if they were to march then the stones did shine but if the stones did not shine then they were to stay but this seems not to have been a sufficient way to have directed them in other cases Wherefore t is most probable that the Priest having these stones upon his breast that the Lord inspired him by his Spirit what answer to make to every question asked him * Junius in Deut. 17 9 12. Conjunctionem disjuctivam esse apparet ex vers 12. ut reipsa munera esse disparata constat ad quae haec officiorum nomina respiciunt Mr. Gillespies Aarons rod blossoming c. 3. 11. Here are two Judicatories distinguished by the disjunctive Or v. 12. which we have both in the Hebrew Chaldee Greek and in our English translation * Vide Mr. Gil lesp Aaronsrod blossoming Book 3. c. 11 12. showing fully in this Scripture a transmitting difficult cases from inferior courts to those at Ierusalem and to the supreme court there Vid Luther Piscat in locuâ— In judiciis conveniens ordo observandus est ut sc judices inferiores quuÌ„ iis oblata est causa difficilâ—c ex qua expedire se non possunt causam illam deserant ad judices superiorestanquaÌ„ juris peritiores * Nicol. lyra in Deut. 17. 8 9 10. Surge ascende i. e. in his casibus consimilibus recurrendum est ad superiores judices sâ— ad summum sacerdetem Judicem populi * Cas Consc lib. 4. cap. 4. pag. 122. Si igitur haeretici sint maniesti publice noxii debent a Magistrrtu publica potestate coerceri Si vero â—tiam manifestè blasphemi sunt in illis blasphemiis pertinaces praefracti possint etiam affici supplicio capitali * De in obedientia in illis rebus quae ex lege Dei manifesto clare determinantur * Hagiomastix page 130. * Ad hoc tribunal referebantur quaecunque non poterant definiri ab aliis vel ambigua erant varia judicia inferiorum judicum experiebantur ex praescripto legis Deut. 17. 8 9. Ainsworth Annot. on the place Weems Christian Synagogue pag. 171. * Vide Diodate English Diviues Annotations on the place * Junius in locum Et si in omnibus aliis causis ad minimum duo testes ex lege requiruntur tamen in religionis negotio unus testis ad Questionem habendam sufficit adeo vult Deus Magistratibus conservationem doctrinae commendatam esse Est autem appendix legis quae habetur supr 17. * Theodoret Quaest in Levit Quaest 33. Deprthensus est quidam qui Deum omnium blasphemauerat nondum autem Lex erat scripta De Blaspemia propterea legislator hanc legem servari jussit * Vide Nicol. Lyram Babingt in locum Lev. 24. 15 16. * Vid. Lyram in Num. 15. Nesciebant tamen qua morte dehebat mori quoniam modus mortis non fuit determinatus Exod. 13. 14. Ergo recluserunt eum quo usque scirent hoc per revelationem Domini ☜ * Lutherus in Deu. 17. 8 9 10 11. Et hâ—nc locum miro conatu Papistae ad suum IdoluÌ„â—raxerunt ut Papatum statuâ—rent * One of the Members of the Assembly was the sole Author of the Vindication of the printed paper entituled An Ordinance for the preventing of the growth of Heresies and not 3. or 4. which worthy Member could hee get any time from his often preaching and constant attendance on the Assembly wold I doubt not make Hagiomastix not only a stripling but a very child * Bilsons true difference between Christian subjection and unchristian Rebellion part 2. p. 277. ☜ * Master Goodwins Modest humble Queres about the Ordinance Quere 2. ☞ * Anapologesiates Antapologias The Preface to the Reader But for those opinions wherein I dissent from Mr. Edwards and the generality of those whom he calls his godly Orthodox Presbyterian Ministers I have bestowed so much labour and travell of soul severall wayes to satisfie my selfe in the truth of them and withal have received such abundant satisfaction from God for what I hold in them in pregnant strong cleare and rationall demonstrations on the one hand in distinct cleare and home Answer to all objections to the contrary that ever I met withall on the other hand that if light be light reason reason sense sense Scriptures Scriptures I suppose I shall never be unsetled or shaken in them though the whole world should rise up as one man to oppose me And therefore being fully perswaded resolved and possest in my judgement soule and conscience that the way of the Congregation is the Truth A Quere concerning the Church Covenant pag. 1. First confident we are as confidence it selfe an make us that there is no commandement given to the Churches for exactâ—ng any such Covenant to those that are to be admitted into Church Fellowship with them A Letter of Master John Goodwins sent to Master Thomas Goodwin pag. 12 13. Confident I am that there is a light beyond your light in these matters and which you are very capable of if your eyes by your long slumber be not over heavy to open I professe in the sight of God and in as great singlenesse and simplicity of heart as ever nâ— an in this world spake word unto you that I doe as clearly apprehend Error and mistake throughout the greatest part of your way as I doe in this conclusion that twice two makes foure The necessity of your Covenant Prolix confession of faith putting men to deliver their judgements in points of doubtfull disputations upon and before their admission into your Churches the power of the Keyes and of Ordination of Pastors to be the right and inheritance of the whole body of the Congregation and of every member indifferently and promiscuously the divine institution or peremptory necessity