Gratian Theodosius and others who by publick Edicts did prohibit false Doctrines and did command all throughout the whole Empire to embrace the true Faith t is confessed by Master Burroughs himselfe The protection of their Civil peace is not sufficient to give them such a denomination of nursing Fathers and Mothers Upon which place Bâ—lson writes thus with this endeavour of Christian Princes God comforteth his Church by the mouth of Esay Kings shall be thy nursing Fathers c what Esay saith Princes shal do that I conclude Princes must doe because God would not promise they should usurpe another mans office but discharge their owne If you take the milke of Princes for temporall honours Lands and goods the â—ery Children will laugh you to scorne The Church of Christ is no wanton Church She lusteth for no worldly wealth which is rather harmful poison then wholesome food Gods provision for her is spiritual not carnall her delights are not outward in flesh but inward in grace The Prophet good man had no leasure to thinke on yoâ— farms demeans and Revenues no remedy you must needs yeeld us that Christian Princes in respect of their office not of their riches have received an expresse commandement from God to show themselves Nurses to his Church Now Nurses by nature must provide for their infants and defend them from danger ergo Kings and Queens in the new Testament are bound to tender the Church of Christ and by their princely power and publick Laws to defend the same from infection of Heresies invasions of Scismes and all other apparent corruptions of faith and good manners Zach. 13. 2 3. is a prophecie of the times and dayes of the Gospel as the context is cleare and is confessed by some Patrons of Toleration though put off and evaded that t is allegorical and figurative and meant of some one particular time only under the Gospel with other such like as the Posteript to Hagiomastix writes page 21. 22. all which evasions I had thought at this time to have fully taken of and to have cleared this text by many passages and Phrases in the context besides severall reasons that it must needs be understood literally and of all times under the Gospel but the troubles of the times call me of from my intended thoughts and preparations in this kind and shall reserve them if God will for a second part only I shall adde that divers learned Interpreters ancient and moderne as Theodoret Calvin and others hold the Prophet here alludes to Deut. 13. where God required such strictnesse in maintaining pure Doctrine that the Father should rise up against the Sonne whom he begat God would have all the godly to burne with such a zeal of defending the true worship of God and Pietie that no affinitie nor consanguinitie nor any other carnall respect should prevail to hinder the requiring of punishment upon their neerest friends in cases of violating the worship of God and corrupting sound Doctrine This was the Prescript of the Law But whereas for a time Religion had beene neglected yea troden under foot Zacharie saith that when the faithfull should repent they should bee endowed with such a desire of true Pietie as neither Father nor Mother should suffer wicked errors in their Sons And here t is to be observed that this zeale is approved of under the Kingdome of Christ for Zacharie does not here restraine this Doctrine to the time of the Law but showes what shall be when Christ is come namely that then again that zeale shall burne in the hearts of all the godly which was almost extinct It followes therefore this Law was not given only to the Jewes as many fanatical men imagine who would have a leave of disturbing the world but that this Law extends to us also Musculus speaking of things appertaining to the Classis of morall commands shows that many things in the Prophets writings belong thereunto and he gives this reason That in most things they were Interpreters of the Mosaicall Law And therefore Zacharie does here inter â—â—t that Law in Deut. 13. concerning false Prophets and Seducers to be in force under the Gospel The Prophets in their writings doe interpret and explaine Moses writings as the Books of Moses doe the Decalogue written by God in two Tables of stone and delivered unto Moses Deut. 5. 22. That in Deut. 13. is to be compared with this Zach. 13. 3. where we find the same things almost the same words used in a Prophecie of the times of the Gospel the meaning of which is not that his Father or Mother should presently run a Knife into him but that though they begat him yet they should be the means to bring him unto condigne punishment even the taking away of his life and so Master Cartwright speaking of this prophecie writes thus No power is given to one private man to kill another nor for the Private man to kill his children but this manner of speech is grounded on Deut 17. 7. where t is proved the Witnesse who accused should throw the first stone against the convicted persons ergo they ascribe the killing of the guilty person as belonging to the duty of the Accuser THESIS 20. In the Scriptures of the new Test there are clear grounds full proofes that Hereticks and false Teachers corrupters of Religion deserve to be punished corporally as well as spiritualy by excommunication and that Magistrates ought to punish in cases of Idolatry Heresie and such like as well as for transgressions against the second Table Now among many I shall lay down these following 1. That Christ and his Apostles being accused before Magistrates about matters of Religion as blasphemy being against the Law of Moses and such like they never pleaded for themselves that it was not lawfull to punish any man for matters of Religion but they defended their causes that they had not taught any thing against the word of God and the Law of Moses were not guilty of Blasphemy or Heresie so that they granted the major proposition namely that is was lawful for the Magistrate to punish Hereticks who taught against the Word of God but they denied the minor that they were Hereticks For out of the word of God they showed they were not Hereticks in that they taught nothing against the Word of God yea nothing but what had a proof in the Word of God But of this the Reader may see more in Zanchits Miscellanies De Magistratu page 173. 2. Christ in John 2. 14 15 16. made a scourge and drove out of the Temple those that made his Fathers house a house of merchandise which now false Teachers are said to doe 2 Pet. 2. 3. and t is the more observable that Christ who let the woman taken in adultery go away and did not punish her that would not divide an inheritance because his Kingdome was not of this world yet in the matter of his Fathers house did exercise
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
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
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
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
those things by the Law So that by all this and a great deal more that might be spoken to this effect as the Magistrates and Priests combining together c. the Iewes to whom the Law was given for putting false Prophets Blasphemers to death for all the opportunitie of immediate consultation with the mouth of God himselfe by Vrim and by Prophets might in many cases have been deceived mistaken and in as great uncertaintie every way as Hagiomastix supposes the Church to be in under the new Testament Thirdly supposing and granting there had been such a certaintie and infallibilitie in the matters of Religion under the old Law as is contended for by Hagiomastix and that free of all the exceptions now spoken of yet I affirme there is an infallibilitie and certaintie under the new also in the Doctrines of faith and worship and Christian Magistrates may infallibly and certainly know such and such Doctrines to be false and such true such Practises and speeches to be Idolatrous blasphemous as well as the Iewish Magistrates did and supposing that true which Hagiomastix saith that the Iewish Magistrates had a certaintie of knowledge in all difficult cases of Relgion by the judgement of Vrim which Christian Magistrates have not yet in another way and by other means they may have a certaintie and infallibilitie that these and these Doctrines are of God and other Doctrines are not of God when there are three or foure wayes to come to the certaine knowledge of a thing a man may be sure and certaine in one or two though he have not all the wayes A Iudge who hath three or foure honest witnesses and many circumstances with the parties own confession may be certaine though he might not see the fact committed nor have all wayes of knowledge that possible may be and so may Magistrates now in this case of Religion though they should want some one way the Magistrates under the new Testament had And for the certaintie and infallibilitie in matters of Religion under the new Testament it may apeeare thus 1. Hagiomastix must confesse upon his own Principles that during the Apostles times which was under the new Testament in all difficult cases that happened about matters of Religion Christian Magistrates might have had the same opportunities of immediate and infallible Answers as under the old Apostles Prophets then having as infallible immediate Revelations from God as the high Priests and therefore in case there had been Christian Magistrates in the Apostles days they might by this reason have exercised coercive power on Apostates Hereticks and Blasphemers as well as the Iewish Magistrates by which t is apparent those Lawes about false Prophets and Blasphemers were not only old Testament Lawes proper for Moses Paedagogie but new Testament Lawes and that for the prime flourishing state of the new Testament the Apostles times Secondly the Independents and Sectaries in many of their Books Sermonâ— and Discourses tell us of a time at hand wherein there will be a new and marveilous light when wee shall cleerly and certainly know the truth of these things now so much doubted of and controverted of the nature of a visible Church of the Government of the Church and such like Now then upon Master Goodwins cleare reason the old Testament Law for the putting of false Prophets c to death should be in force under the new Testament as well as under the old because then in all difficult cases in worship Doctrine c the Christians that live in those times may infallibly and certainly know the mind and pleasure of God in them Master Goodwin in his Postscript or Appendix to Hâ—giomastix the scope of which Discourse is to make inval'd that Zach. 13. 3. from being any ground for Civill coercive Power against false Prophets among other evasions interprets the place to relate to those times of refreshing to the Iewish Church and Nation the time when God intends to build up the Iewes again into a Church of far more inward grace and holines into a Nation of far more outward beauty strength and glory then ever was their portion since they first became a Church or Nation unto this day either in the one kind or in the other Now of that particular time and day of the new Testament t is especially Prophecied that outward coercive Power shall be exercised upon false Prophets And it shall come to passe that when any shall yet Prophesit then his Father and his Mother that begat him shall say unto him Thou shalt not live for thou speakest lyes in the name of the Lord and his Father and his Mother that begat him shall thrust him through when he Prophecieth As for Hagiomast figurative sense put upon these words against the literall and proper and other his glosses to corrupt the text I shall speak to them in the 19. Thesis where I shall prove that Zach. 13. 3. to be a good proofe of the Magistrates coercive Power under the Gospel Thirdly for that time and those dayes under the new Testament between the Primitive Apostolicall Churches and the calling of the Iewes into which we fall and among which our times are to be numbred there is an infallibilitie and certaintie to be had in Doctrines of faith and Christian Religion and the best Oracles Magistrates have to direct them in matters of Religion now are not fallible and every way obnoxious unto error and mistake The Scriptures are an infallible and certaine rule the voice and word of God himselfe God speaking by them as by Vrim and Thummim Learned Bishop Davenant in his Disputation De judice ac norma fidei Cultus Christiani in answering that objection of the Papists if generall Councels could erre their should be no firme Iudgement in the Church to compose Controversies answers If the Papists speak of a humane judgement we acknowledge nonâ— so firme and infallible to which all men may safely and securely commit their faith without triall But if they speak of a divine judgement we affirme there is a firme and perpetuall judgement in the Church of all the Doctrines of faith namely the judgement of God speaking in the Scriptures for he is not to be confuted with arguments but to be reckoned among Atheists who denies in the Scriptures in the things of faith that there is a sentence pronounced by God himselfe and that intelligible firme and infallible Were those Answers by Divine inspiration and immediate Revelation So are the Scriptures of divine inspiration and immediate revelation also 2 Tim. 3. 16. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God 2 Pet. 1. 20 21. No Prophesie of the Scripture is of any private Interpretation for the Prophecie came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost were those Answers sure and certaine the Oracles of God among them so are the Scriptures sure and certain Psal 19. 7. The Testimony of 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
and therefore in the present case the vindicating of and promoting of the glory of God the punishing of evill doers which Blasphemers Hereticks and Scismaticks are the commanding good being Morall-practicall things of perpetuall reason and equity bind all those in authority and government according to their places though they be no Types nor extraordinary persons Fifthly if this evasion of the kings of Israel and Iudah about Typicalnesse be good by the same reason it may hold against Magistrates punishing under the Gospel for matters of the second Table murther adultery c. for may not the Socinians and Anabaptists who deny Christian Magistrates may punish capitally for murther treason c. say the same thing against all the examples of Magistrates and kings under the old Law punishing with death for such offences that they were Types and that people and Land typicall which no Magistrate nor people are now and what ever can be said upon this ground against Princes meddling in matters of Religion may as well be said against their punishing in Civill matters and Anabaptists and Socinians may as well say those Kings were Types of Christ in respect of their power over the State as over the Church and if they should affirm it how would it be disproved And the Bloudy â—Teneâ— pag. 209. grants that in the Land of Israel all things their civils morals and naturals were carried on in Types as well as their Spirituals and Ecclesiasticals yea by this ground what ever shall be brought out of the Old Testament to show the duty of Magistrates or the qualifications of them as that they that rule over men must be just fearing God hating covetousnesse courageous c. it may be answered that was required of those who were typicall and their people typicall but it concerns not Magistrates now and yet higher by this evasion men may reason against all instances out of the Old Testament brought from Fathers Masters to bring up their children in the feare of God c. because the first-borne such Fathers and Masters of families were typicall and their children typicall which Fathers are not under the Gospel Sixthly if this answer of typicalnesse may hold all those Kings and Princes actions and practises in other things of Morall particular duties as prayer mourning for sinne giving God thanks for deliverances c. are taken away from binding now as well as their acts of power and authority and when Ministers bring these examples of David Iosiah Hezekiah c. in such things it may be said they were Types of Christ and did them as Types of something to come the Antinomian may upon this ground answer the example of Davids praying so often and constantly and of mourning for his sinnes by saying David was a Type of Christ Seventhly by this Answer all the Scriptures of the Old Testament Moses Psalms Prophets with whatever of any duty coÌ„manded or sin spoken against in any of these are at once made void for it may be said the Pen-men were Types and given to a typicall people written in a typicall Land It may be said of the whole Morall Law that as Moses in his person was a Type of Christ in many particulars so in delivering the Law he shadowed Christ the Mediatour Moses being a mediator betweene God and his people in giving the Law Galat. 3. 19. the Law was delivered in the hand of a Mediator that is Moses Acts 7. 38. and therefore not binding to Christians And so it may be pretended of all things written in the Psalms Prophets and the other Books that they were viz. the Oracles of God committed to the Jewes and the Circumcision Rom. 3. 2. Rom. 9. 4. which people and Nation of Israel were typicall of the true Israel the Israel of God Galat. 6. 16. So the Land of Canaan was typicall of rest from 〈◊〉 and of true rest and the heavenly inheritance Hebr. 4. 1 2 3 8 9 10 11. vers And indeed what was not typicall some way or other in the Jewish Church and State as the first-borne the Priests Kings Prophets the Land the people their worships with many more particulars so that if this Answer stand good all the Scriptures of the Old Testament are overthrown and all Hereticks whatsoever Socinians Antinomians Familists c. may evade any Scripture brought from thence as well as the pleaders for Toleration the examples of the Kings of Israel and Judah 8ly All the actions and practises done by persons and things typicall are so farre from nothing concerning them who live under the Gospel that the Scriptures of the New Testament tell us that many things under the Old Testament were made Figures and Typeâ— for the admonitions and example of those in like cases under the New and did teach to the uttermost as the 1 Cor. 10. from the sixth verse to the twelfth and that clause of promise in the fifth Commandement That thy dayes may be long upon the Land which the Lord thy God giveth thee is meant of the Land of Canaan a typicall Land which yet did teach Christians under the New Testament that obedience to their Parents would bring a being well with them and living long upon the earth though they had not the Land of Canaan as Ephes 6. 1 2. 3. fully showes Saint Paul also tells us Rom. 15. 4. that whatsoever things were written 〈◊〉 were written for our learning and so those Magistrates and Princes of Israel and Judah how ever they might typifie Christs Kingdome they were such Types spoken of in 1 Cor. 10. viz. examples to Christian Magistrates to teach them to do so likewise as Fathers then were to teach Fathers now to instruct their children and therefore though such an order of men as Kings in Israel might be intended to typifie Christs Kingdom yet that no way hinders but what they did as Kings in ruling and ordering of their subjects they performed as the proper works of their places common to them with other Princes without any reference to their being Types or doing them as Types God in Scripture recording all along what they did as going upon common morall grounds and speaking nothing of them in their Reformations as in a figurative typicall notion And in the close of my Answer to this evasion of the instances of the Kings of Judah I shall hint to the Reader to consider some notes of distinction between actions meerly typicall and fulfilled in the Antitype done only to represent and shadow forth what Christ was to do and mixt actions morall and typicall too or at least the actions of one who by person or order is a Type and upon search it will be found that all the notes of actions morall not meerly typicall will be found in the practises of those Ks of Judah and Israel before named As first when their practises and wayes are not barely related but commended and praised by God wheras actions meerly typical are only related and set down as
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
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
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
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
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
grâ—sse then the Papists I referre the Reader to the Theses of learned Voetius De necessitate utilitate Dogmatis de saâ—stâ— Trinitate who fully and excellently proves all these particulars In the ancient Constitutions of Gratian Valentinian Theodosius Martian Iustinian Antitrinitarians are said Iewishly and Apostatically to contradict the Trinitie and the name of Christians is denied them Are not Anti-trinitatians as Paul Best that hath belched out so many reproachfull speeches against Christ and the Holy-Ghost Blasphemers in a high measure Are not they who doe not only speak evill of the Trinitie but teach others so to doe greater Blasphemers then those spoken of in Levit. 24. 16 Are not divers Anabaptists who have broached false Doctrines and foretold divers things to come as the day of judgement to be on such a day such a City or Country to be destroyed on such a day such a Citie or Kingdome to be given them of God and that by affirming they spake by Revelation and immediate inspiration of God false Prophets as well as those in Deut. 13. 2. Deut. 18. 20 22 In a word I shall conclude this with a passage out of * Beza De Haereticis a Magistratu puniendis brought by way of Answer to a like objection against Deut. 13. c Those Lawes are not now in force because there is no man now a false Prophet according to Moses definition that is who foretels any thing to come and teaches to worship other gods I answer that the mind of the Law-giver is to be understood from the cause of making the Law Because he hath spoken to turne away from the Lord your God Now there are divers publick Declarations of this defection of which although the Principall only and those which most commonly fall out be named in the Laws yet the very reason of the Law is expressed in a universall forme and therefore in the general oúght to be in force against those who doe fall from the true religion and sollicite others to defection whom in a generall word we call now Hereticks not false Prophets or dreamers of dreams or Sacrificers to other gods because that those out ward ceremonies and those gifts of Prophecie are ceased But though they be ceased notwithstanding neither defection nor the punishment of it is ceased Moreover I say those who interpret the holy Scripture wrongfully withdraw men from the true worship of God and so perswade them to the worship of other gods For t is necessary that all Doctrine which speaks of the worship of God if it be not of God it proceeds from the Devil Therefore he that receives it intertains the Devil and he that perswades the receiving it drawes away from God For Paul cals the Doctrines of forbidding meats and marriage the Doctrines of Devils Fourthly In the commands given by God either against such and such sins or for punishing in such and such sins without any stretching of the commands at all or interpretations at large many things not named must necessarily be contained as under generals the particulars as under one kind other kinds of a higher nature or of the like nature as under the male the female also and other such or else many common received Rules given by Divines for interpretation of the Decalogue and Scripture are to be rejected Yea many things that are evill and abominable are not forbidden in the Law of God There are many things may be instanâ—ed in out of the new Testament of which God showes his dislike which yet in the letter and particularly by name are not forbidden in any of the commands of the old Testament as Rom. 1. 26. with divers others that might be named and there are many abominations that have been are and may be committed even of things against the light of nature that are neither in the old Testament nor new forbidden particularly and yet certainly these things are forbidden directly and properly in the commandements and the commandements are not stretcht nor wyre-drawn by those who alledge such commands against such Practises If the Scriptures must set down particularly by name all the kinds and degrees of evils with the particular manner and way of doing them which the corrupt nature of man is capable of committing and al particulars of all kinds and manner of duties with all particular cases about punishments and all kinds and degrees of punishment belonging to all kind of offences that may fall out and that both in Civil and Ecclesiastical censures with the particular way and manner of proceeding in them all I suppose some hundreds of great volumes would not containe them all but that it might be said in this case as t is Iohn 21. the last verse of the things which Iesus did that if they should be written every one the world it selfe could not containe the Books that should be written And if there must not be an extension and interpretation of commands so as to hold such commands and places of Scripture forbid or enjoyne some things not particularly named how will Hagiom prove many things practised by Papists and Prelaticall men to be against the second command or against any command as the making Crosses for Religion Holy-Water Saints Reliques bowing at the name of Jesus Holy-Dayes Surplices Altar-Clothes with a hundred other Ceremouies and Inventions of men in the worship of God are these literally and by name forbidden in the second command or any other and may not the Papists and Prelates in all the texts of Scripture brought against their Wil-worship and Inventions of men say the very same to Hagiomastix and his fellowes that Crosses Holy-Dayes bowing at the name of Iesus c are not mentioned nor touched in any one word of those Laws under the old Testament given against Idolatrie But if any one will goe about to draw these words unto their Crosses c that cannot bee done by the proper force of the words but as Lawâ—ers speake per extensionem latamque interpretationem And it would be first well considered of whether every Law does admit of such extensions and if not every one which of them then does admit and wherefore and whether in the second commandement there are those things for which an extension is to be made Again I desire Hagiomastix and his compeers to resolve me these questions seeing there must be no extension of that command in Deut. 13. 1 5. nothing else commanded but what is in the letter of the Law Whether a false Prophetesse that should arise and endeavour to perswade to the worship of a false God and that by affirming she spake by the inspiration of some deitie and that her saying's were to be esteemed Oracles were not to be put to death by virtue of this command as well as the false Prophet and yet a Propheâ—esse is not in the text Whether that command Exod. 21. 33 34. of the owner of the pit into which his neighbours Oxe or Asse fell making good the
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