by the Word of God and by the Confessions of Faith of the Reformed Churches doth belong to the Christian Magistrate in matters of Religion Which I do but now touch by the way so far as is necessary to wipe off the aspersion cast upon Presbyterial Government The particulars I refer to Chapter 8. Our sixth Concession is That in extraordinary cases when Church-government doth degenerate into tyranny ambition and avarice and they who have the managing of the Ecclesiastical power make defection and fall into manifest Heresy Impiety or Injustice as under Popery and Prelacy it was for the most part then and in such cases which we pray and hope we shall never see again the Christian Magistrate may and ought to do diverse things in and for Religion and interpose his Authority diverse wayes so as doth not properly belong to his cognizance decision and administration ordinarily and in a Reformed and well constituted Church For extraordinary diseases must have extraordinary remedies More of this before A seventh Concession is this The Civil Sanction added to Church-government and Discipline is a free and voluntary Act of the Magistrate That is Church-government doth not ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 necessitate the Magistrate to aid assist or corroborate the same by adding the strength of a Law But the Magistrate is free in this to do or not to do to do more or to do lesse as he will answer to God and his conscience it is a cumulative Act of favour done by the Magistrate My meaning is not that it is free to the Magistrate in genere moris but in genere entis The Magistrate ought to adde the Civil Sanction hic nunc or he ought not to do it It is either a duty or a sin it is not indifferent But my meaning is The Magistrate is free herein from all coaction yea from all necessity and obligation other then ariseth from the Word of God binding his conscience There is no power on Earth Civil or Spiritual to constrain him The Magistrate himself is his own Judge on Earth how far he is to do any cumulative Act of favour to the Church Which takes off that calumny that Presbyterial Government doth force or compel the conscience of the Magistrate I pray God we may never have cause to state the Question otherwise I mean concerning the Magistrate his forbidding what Christ hath commanded or commanding what Christ hath forbidden in which case we must serve Christ and our consciences rather then obey Laws contrary to the Word of God and our Covenant whereas in the other case of the Magistrate his not adding of the Civil Sanction we may both serve Christ and do it without the least appearance of disobedience to the Magistrate Eighthly We grant that Pastors and Elders whether they be considered distributively or collectively in Presbyteries and Synods being Subjects and Members of the Common-wealth ought to be subject and obedient in the Lord to the Magistrate and to the Law of the Land and as in all other duties so in Civil subjection and obedience they ought to be ensamples to the Flock and their trespasses against Law are punishable as much yea more then the trespasses of other Subjects Of this also before Ninthly If the Magistrate be offended at the sentence given or censure inflicted by a Presbytery or a Synod they ought to be ready in all humility and respect to give him an account and reason of such their proceedings and by all means to endeavour the satisfaction of the Magistrate his conscience or otherwise to be warned and rectified if themselves have erred CHAP. IV. Of the agreements and differences between the nature of the Civil and of the Ecclesiastical Powers or Governments HAving now observed what our opposites yeeld to us or we to them I shall for further unfolding of what I plead for or against adde here the chief agreements and differences between the Civil and Ecclesiastical powers so far as I apprehend them They both agree in these things 1. They are both from God both the Magistrate and the Minister is authorized from God both are the Ministers of God and shall give account of their administrations to God 2. Both are tyed to observe the Law and Commandments of God and both have certain directions from the Word of God to guide them in their administration 3. Both Civil Magistrates and Church Officers are Fathers and ought to be honoured and obeyed according to the fifth Commandment Utrumque scilicet dominium saith Luther Tom. 1. fol. 139. both Governments the Civil and the Ecclesiastical do pertain to that Commandment 4 Both Magistracy and Ministery are appointed for the glory of God as Supreme and for the good of men as the subordinate end 5. They are both of them mutually aiding and auxiliary each to other Magistracy strengthens the Ministery and the Ministery strengthens Magistracy 6. They agree in their general kinde they are both Powers and Governments 7. Both of them require singular qualifications eminent gifts and endowments and of both it holds true Quis ad haec idoneus 8. Both of them have degrees of censures and correction according to the degrees of offences 9. Neither the one nor the other may give out sentence against one who is not convict or whose offence is not proved 10. Both of them have a certain kind of Jurisdiction in foro exteriori For though the Ecclesiastical power be spiritual and exercised about such things as belong to the inward man onely yet as Dr. Rivet upon the Decalogue pag. 260. 261. saith truly there is a two-fold power of external jurisdiction which is exercised in foro exteriori one by Church-Censures Excommunication lesser and greater which is not committed to the Magistrate but to Church-Officers Another which is Civil and coercive and that is the Magistrates But Mr. Coleman told us he was perswaded it will trouble the whole World to bound Ecclesiastical and Civil Jurisdiction the one from the other Maledicis pag. 7. Well I have given ten agreements I will now give ten differences The difference between them is great they differ in their causes effects objects adjuncts correlations executions and ultimate terminations 1. In the efficient cause The King of Nations hath instituted the Civil power The King of Saints hath instituted the Ecclesiastical power I mean the most high God possessor of Heaven and Earth who exerciseth Soverainty over the workmanship of his own hands and so over all mankind hath instituted Magistrates to be in his stead as gods upon Earth But Iesus Christ as Mediator and King of the Church whom his Father hath set upon his holy Hill of Zion Psal. 2. 6. to reigne over the House of Jacob for ever Luke 1. 33. who hath the key of the House of David laid upon his shoulder Isa. 22. 22. hath instituted an Ecclesiastical power and goverment in the hands of Church-Officers whom in his name he sendeth forth 2. In the matter Magistracy or Civil
delegare plus juris quam ipse habet No man can give from him by delegation or deputation to another that right or power which he himself hath not 3. If the power of excommunication come by delegation from the Magistrate either the Magistrate must in conscience give this power to Church-officers onely or he is free and may without sin give this power to others If the former what can bind up the Magistrates conscience or astrict the thing to Church-Officers except it be Gods ordinance that they only do it If the latter then though this Parliament hath hath taken away the old High Commission Court which had Potestatem utriusque gladii yet they may lawfully and without sin erect a new High Commission Court made up of those who shall be no Church-officers yea having none of the Clergy in it as the other had with commission and power granted to them to execute spiritual Jurisdiction and Excommunication and that not onely in this or that Church yea or Province but in any part of the whole Kingdom So much of the first point Now to the second concerning appeals to the Magistrate as to the head of the Church It is asked what remedy shall there be against the abuse of Church-discipline by Church-officers except there be appeals from the Ecclesiastical Courts to the civil Magistrate which if it be Church-officers will be the more wary and cautious to do no man wrong knowing that they may be made to answer for it And if it be not there is a wide dore opened that ministers may do as they please Answ. 1 Look what remedy thene is for abuses in the preaching of the Word and administration of the Sacraments the like remedy there is for abuses in Church-discipline Mal-administration of the Word and Sacraments is no lesse sinfull to the ministers and hurtful to others then mal-administration of discipline and in some respects the former is more to the dishonour of God and destruction of men than the latter Ministers have not an arbitrary power to preach what they will Now when the word is not truly preached nor the Sacraments duely administred by any minister or ministers the Magistrate seeketh the redresse of these things in a constituted Church by the convocating of Synods for examining discovering and judging of such errors and abuses as are found in particular Churches But if the Synod should connive at or comply with that same error yet the Magistrate taketh not upon him the supreme and authoritative decision of a controversie of faith but still endeavoureth to help all this by other Ecclesiastical remedies as another Synod and yet another till the evil be removed The like we say concerning abuses in Church-discipline The Magistrate may command a resuming and re-examination of the case in another Synod but still the Synod ratisieth or reverseth the censure In which case it is betwixt the Magistrate and the Synod as betwixt the will and understanding for Voluntas imperat Intellectui quo ad exercitium yet notwithstanding determinatur per intectellum quoad specificationem actus Take for instance this also If it be a case deserving deposition or degradation In such a case saith learned Salmasius appar ad lib. de primatu pag. 298. the Prince or Magistrate cannot take from a minister that power which was given him in ordination with imposition of hands for he cannot take away that which he cannot give But if a Prince would have a minister for his offenceâ— to be deprived of his ministeriall power he must take care that it be done by the ministers themselves qui Judices veri ipsius sunt auferre soli possunt quod per ordinationem dederunt Who are his true Judges and they onely can take away what by ordination they have given Thus Salmasius 2. And further if Presbyteries or Synods exceed the bounds of Ecclesiasticall power and go without the Sphaere of their own activity interposing and judging in a civil cause which concerneth any mans life or estate The Magistrate may reverse and make null whatsoever they do in that kind and punish themselves for such abuse of their power As Solomon punished Abiathar and banished him to Anathoth he being guilty of high treason 1 Kings 2. 26. It was not a case of scandall onely or of Delinquency or mal-administration in his Sacerdotall office otherwise it had fallen within the cognizance and jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Sanhedrin 3. Though the case be meerly spirituall and ecclesiastical the Christian Magistrate by himself and immediatly may not onely examine by the judgement of discretion the sentence of the Ecclesiastical Court but also when he seeth cause either upon the complaint of the party or scandall given to himself interpose by letters messages exhortations and sharp admonitions to the Presbyterie or Synod who in that case are bound in conscience with all respect and honour to the Magistrate to give him a reason of what they have done and to declare the grounds of their proceedings till by the blessing of God upon this free and fair dealing they either give a rationall and satisfactory accompt to the Magistrate or be themselves convinced of their mal-administration of Discipline 4 And in extraordinary cases when the Clergy hath made defection and all Church discipline is degenerated into Tyrannie as under Popery and Prelacy it was it belongeth to the Magistrate to take the protection of those who are cast out or censured unjustly for extraordinary evils must have extraordinary helps And in this sence we are to understand divers of our Reformers and others groaning under the pressures of the Roman Clergy and calling in the help of the civil Magistrate for their relief But we deny that in a well constituted Church it is agreeable to the will of Christ for the Magistrate either to receive appeals properly so called from the sentence of an Ecclesiastical Court or to receive complaints exhibited against that sentence by the party censured so as by his authority upon such complaint to nullifiâ— or make void the Ecclesiastical censure The latter of these two Vâ—…delius pleadeth for not the former But Apollonius oppugneth the latter as being upon the matter all one with the former Now to ascribe such power to the Magistrate is 1. To change the Pope but not the Poâ—…edome the Head but not the Headship for is not this the Popes chief supremacy to judge all men and to be judged of no man to ratifie or rescind at his pleasure the decâ—ees of the Church Councels â—nd all and shall this power now be transferred upon the Magistrate Good Lord where are we if this shall be the up-shot of our Reformation Oâ— for it Shall we condemn the Papists and Anabaptists who give too little to the Magistrate and then joyn hands with the Arminians who give as much to the Magistrate as the Pope hath formerly usurpâ—d 2. Appeals lie in the same line of subordination and do not go de gâ—…nere
not so hatefull to God as legall uncleannesse The Law of confessing sin Levit. 5. Num. 5. is meant of every known sin which was to be expiated by Sacrifice especially the more notorious and scandalous sins CHAP. XIII M. Prynnes argument from 1 Cor. 10. which he takes to be unanswerable discussed and confuted Mr Prynne in expounding that Text of the Passeover differeth both from the Apostles and from Erastus himselfe His argument if good wil necessarily conclude against his owne Concessions If scandalous sinners had been suspended from the Manna and Water of the Rocke they had been suspended from their ordinary orporal meat and drinke That the scandalous sins mentioned by the Apostle were committed not before but after their eating of that Spirituall meate and drinking of that Spirituall drinke The Argument strongly retorted The scandalous sins mentioned by the Apostle were Nationall sins and so come not home to the present Question which is of persons not of Nations An Appendix to the first Booke THe Erastians misrepresent the Jewish Government Their complyance with the Anabaptists in this particular Their confounding of that which was extraordinary in the Jewish Church with that which was the ordinary rule Fourteen Objections answered M. Prynne his great mistakes of Deut. 17. and 2 Chron. 19. The power and practice of the godly Kings of Iudah in the reformation of Religion cleared The Argument from Solomon his deposing of Abiathar and putting Zadock in his place answered foure waies The Priests were appointed to be as Judges in other cases beside those of leprosie and jealousie 2 Chro. 23. 19. further scanned A scandalous person was an unclean person both in the Scripture phrase and in the Jewish language The sequestration of the uncleane from the Sanctuary no civill punishment Of Lawes and causes Civill and Ecclesiasticall among the Jewes Of their Scribes and Lawyers Some other observable passages of Maimonides concerning Excommunication What meant by not entring into the Congregation of the Lord Deut. 23. 1 2 3. and by separating the mixed multitude Nehem. 13. 3. Five reasons to prove that the meaning of these places is not in reference to civil dignities and places of government nor yet in reference to unlawful mariages onely but in reference to Church-membership and communion Two Objections to the contrary answered One from Exod. 12. 48. Another from the example of Ruth An useful observation out of Onkelos Exod. 12. The second Booke Of the Christian Church Government CHAP. I. Of the rise growth decay and reviving of Erastianisme THe Erastian error not honest is parentibus natus Erastus the Mid-wife how engaged in the busines The breasts that gave it sucke prophannesse and self-interest It s strong food arbitrary Government It s Tutor Arminianisme It s deadly decay and consumption whence it was How ill it hath been harboured in all the reformed Churches How stiffled by Erastus himselfe Erastianisme confuted out of Erastus The Divines who have appeared against this error How the Controversie was lately revived CHAP. II. Some Postulata or common principles to be presupposed THat there ought to be an exclusion of vile and prophane persons knowne to be such from the holy things is a principle received among the Heathens themselves That the dishonour of God by scandalous sinnes ought to be punished as well yea much rather than private injuries That publique sinnes ought to be publiquely confessed and the offenders put to publique shame That there ought to be an avoyding of and withdrawing from scandalous persons in the Church and that by a publique order rather then at every mans discretion That there is a distinction of the Office and power of Magistracy aâ—d Ministery That the directive judgement in any businesse doth chiefly belong to those who by their prosession and vocation are set apart to the attendance and oversight of such a thing CHAP. III. What the Erastians yeeld unto us and what we yeeld unto them THey yeeld that the Magistrate his power in Ecclesiasticis is not arbitrary but tied to the word That there may be a distinct Church government under Heathen Magistrates That the abuse takes not away the just power They allow of Presbyteries and that they have some jurisdiction That the Ministery is Iure divino and Magistracy distinct from it We yeeld unto them That none ought to be Rulers in the Church but such against whom there is no just exception That Presbyteriall government is not a Dominion but a Service That it hath for its object onely the inward man That Presbyteriall government is not an Arbitrary government cleared by sive considerations That it is the most limited and least Arbitrary government of any other cleared by comparing it with Popery Prelacy Independency and with lawfull Magistracy That the civil Magistrate may and ought to doe much in and for Religion ordinarily and yet more in extraordinary cases That the civil Sanction is a free and voluntary act of the Magistrates favour That Ministers owe as much subjection and honour to the Magistrate as other Subjects CHAP. IV. Of the agreement and the differences between the nature of the Civill and of the Ecclesiasticall powers or Governments TEn agreements between the Civil power and the Ecclesiasticall power The differences between them opened in their causes efficient matter where a fourfold power of the keys is touched for me and ends both supreme and subordinate where it is opened how and in what respect the Christian Magistrate intendeth the glory of Jesus Christ and the purging of his Church Also effects objects adjuncts correlations ultimate terminations and divided executions CHAP. V. Of a twofold Kingdome of Iesus Christ a generall Kingdome as he is the eternall Sonne of God the Head of all Principalities and Powers raigning over all creatures and a particular Kingdome as he is Mediator raigning over the Church onely HOw this controversie fals in and how deepe it drawes That our Opposites herein joyne issue with the Socinians Nine Arguments to prove this distinction of a twofold Kingdom of Christ. In which of the eternity universality donation and subordination of the Kingdome of Christ. The Arguments brought to prove that Christ as Mediator raigneth over all things and hath all government even civil put in his hands examined and confuted In what sence Christ is said to be over all the heire of all things to have all things put under his feet to be the head of every man A distinction between Christs Kingdome Power and Glory cleared CHAP. VI. Whether Iesus Christ as Mediator and Head of the Church hath placed the Christian Magistrate to hold and execute his office under and for him as his Vicegerent The Arguments for the affirmative discussed THe decision of this Question will doe much yet not all in the decision of the Erastian controversie The question rightly stated Ten Arguments for the affirmative discussed and answered Where divers Scriptures are debated and cleared How we are to understand that Christ is King
of Kings and Lord of Lords How all power in Heaven and in Earth is said to be given to him That the Governments set in the Church 1 Cor. 12. 28. are not civill Magistrates fully proved Ephes. 1. 21 22 23. and Colos. 2. 10. vindicated CHAP. VII Arguments for the negative of that Question formerly propounded THe lawfull authority of the Heathen Magistrates vindicated It can not be shewed from Scripture that Christ as Mediator hath given any Commission of Vice-gerentship to the Christian Magistrate That the worke of the Ministery is done in the name and authority of Jesus Christ the worke of Magistracy not so The power of Magistracy or civill Government was not given to Christ as Mediator shewed from Luke 12. 14. Iohn â—8 36. Luke 17. 20 21. Magistracy founded in the Law of nature and Nations The Scripture holds forth the same origination of Heathen Magistracy and of Christian Magistracy CHAP. VIII Of the power and priviledge of the Magistrate in things and causes Ecclesiasticall what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not and what it is THat no administration formally and properly Ecclesiasticall and namely the dispencing of Church censures doth belong unto the Magistrate nor may according to the Word of God be assumed and exercised by him proved by six Arguments That Christ hath not made the Magistrate head of the Church to receive appeales from all Ecclesiasticall Assembles There are other sufficient remedies against abuses or Mal-administration in Church-Government Reasons against such appeales to the Magistrate The Arguments to the contrary from the Examples of Ierenâ—…y and of Paul discussed Of the collaterality and coordination of the Civill and Ecclesiasticall powers What is the power and right of the Magistrate in things and causes Ecclesiasticall cleared first generally next more particularly by five distinctions 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 belong to the civill power but non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. The Magistrate may imperare that which he may not elicere 3. Distinguish the directive power from the coercive power 4. The Magistrates power is cumulative not privative 5. He may doe in extraordinary cases that which he ought not to doe ordinarily A caution concerning the Arbitrary power of Magistrates in things Ecclesiasticall CHAP. IX That by the Word of God there ought to be another Government besides Magistracy or civill Government namely an Ecclesiasticall Government properly so called in the hands of Church-officers THe Question stated and the Affirmative proved by one and twenty Scripturall Arguments Who meant by the Elders that rule well 1 Tim. 5. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 names of government The words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb 13. 7 17. examined Of receiving an accusation against an Elder Of rejecting an Hereticke Of the excommunication of the Incestuous Corinthian and the sence of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of the subjection of the spirits of the Prophets to the Prophets The Angels of the Churches why reproved for having false Teachers in the Church Note that man 2 Thess. 3. 14. proved to be Church-censure Of the Ruler Rom. 12. 8. and Governments 1 Cor. 12. 28. A patterne in the Jewish Church for a distinct Ecclesiasticall government What meant by cutting off Gal. 5. 12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly what Of the Ministeriall power to revenge all disobedience 2 Cor. 10. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 2. 8. what Of the visible administration of the Kingdome of Christ by his Laws Courts Censures The Arguments for Excommunication from Matth. 18. and 1 Cor. 5. briefly vindicated That Elders are rulers of the flock 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a name of Government Ministers why called Sâ—…ewards of the Mysteries of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a name of government Church-Government exercised by the Synod of the Apostles and Elders Acts 15. CHAP. X. Some objections made against Ecclesiasticall Government and Discipline answered Mr Husseys objection doth stricke as much against Paul as against us The fallacy of comparing Government with the word preached in point of efficacy Foure ends or uses of Church-government That two coordinate Governments are not inconsistent The objection that Ministers have other worke to doe answered The feare of an ambitious ensnarement in the Ministery so much objected is no good Argument against Church-government M. Husseys motion concerning Schooles of Divinity examined Church Government is no immunity to Church-officers from Censure Though the Erastian principles are sufficiently overthrown by asserting from Scripture the may be of Church-government yet our Arguments prove a must be or an Institution Six Arguments added which conclude this point CHAP. XI The necessity of a distinct Church-government under Christian as well as under Heathen Magistrates THis acknowledged by Christian Emperours of old Grotius for us in this particular Christian Magistracy hath never yet punished all such offences as are Ecclesiastically censurable Presbyteries in the primitive times did not exercise any power which did belong of right to the Magistrate No warrant from the word that the Ordinance of a distinct Church government was onely for Churches under persecution but contrariwise the Churches are charged to keep till the comming of Christ the commandement then delivered No just ground for the feare of the interfeering of the civill and of the Ecclesiasticall power The Churches liberties enlarged not diminished under Christian Magistrats The Covenant against this exception of the Erastians The Christian Magistrate if he should take upon him the whole burthen of the corrective part of Church-government could not give an account to God of it The Erastian principles doe involve the Magistrate into the Prelaticall guiltinesse The reasons and grounds mentioned in Scripture upon which Church-censures were dispenced in the Primiâ—ive Churches are no other then concerne the Churches under Christian Magistrâ—tes The end of Church-censures neither intended nor attained by the administration of Christian Magistracy The power of binding and loosing not temporary They who restrict a distinct Church-government to Churches under Heathen or persecuting Magistrats give a mighty advantage to Socinians and Anabaptists Gualther and Master Prynne for us in this Question APPENDIX A Collection of some testimonies out of a Declaration of King Iames the Helvetian Bohemian Augustane French and Dutch confessions the Ecclesiasticall Discipline of the reformed Churches in France Harmonia Synodorum Belgicarum the Irish Articles a Book of Melanchton and another of L. Humfredus The third Booke Of Excommunication from the Church AND Of Suspension from the Lords Table CHAP. I. An opening of the true state of the question and of Master Prynnes many mistakes and mis-representations of our Principles A Transition from Church-government in generall to Excommunication and Suspension in particular The present controversie ten waies mis-stated by M. Prynne That which was publiquely depending between the Parliament and Assembly did rather concerne the practicall conclusion it selfe then the Mediums to prove it The strength of the Assemblies proofes
Law but Gods owne Law which the Priests and Levites were to expound So that it was proper for that time and there is not the like reason that the Ministers of Jesus Christ in the New Testament should judge or rule in civill affairs nay it were contrary to the rule of Christ and his Apostles for us to do so yet the Levites their judging and governing in all the bufines of the Lord is a patterne left for the entrusting of Church officers in the New Testament with a power of Church government there being no such reason for it as to make it peculiar to the old Testament and not common to the New The fourth Scripture which proves an Ecclesiasticall government and Sanhedrin is 2 Chro. 19. 8 10 11. where Iehoshaphat restoreth the same Church government which was first instituted by the hand of Moses and afterward ordered and setled by David Moreover saith the Text in Jerusalem did Jehoshaphat set of the Levites and of the Priests and of the chiefe of the Fathers of Israel for the judgement of the Lord and for controversies c. It is not controverted whether there was a civill Sanhedrin at Ierusalem but that which is to be proved from the place is an Ecclesiasticall Court which I prove thus Where there is a Court made up of Ecclesiasticall members judging Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall causes for a Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall end moderated by an Ecclesiasticall president having power ultimately and authoritatively to determine causes and controversies brought before them by appeale or reference from inferiour Courts and whose sentence is put in execution by Ecclesiasticall officers There it must needs be granted that there was a supream Ecclesiasticall court with power of Government But such a Court we finde at Ierusalem in Iehoshaphats time Ergo. The Proposition I suppose no man wil deny For a Court so constituted so qualified and so authorised is the very thing now in debate And he that will grant us the thing which is in the assumption shall have leave to call it by another name if he please The assumption I prove by the parts 1. Here are Levites and Priests in this Court as members thereof with power of decisive suffrage and with them such of the chiefe of the Fathers of Israel as were joyned in the government of that Church Whence the Reverend and learned Assembly of Divines and many Protestant Writers before them have drawn an argument for Ruling Elders And this is one of the Scriptures alledged by our Divines against Bellarmin to prove that others beside those who are commonly but corruptly called the Clergy ought to have a decisive voyce in Synods 2. Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall causes were here judged which are called by the name of the judgement of the Lord V. 8. and the matters of the Lord distinguished from the Kings matters V. 11. so V. 10. beside controversies between blood and blood that is concerning consanguinity and the interpreting of the Laws concerning forbidden degrees in marriage it being observed by interpreters that all the lawfull or unlawfull degrees are not particularly expressed but some onely and the rest were to be judged of by parity of reason and so it might fall within the cognizance of the Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin Though it may be also expounded otherwise between blood and blood that is Whether the murther was wilfull or casuall which was matter of fact the cognisance whereof belonged to the civill Judge It is further added between Law and Commandement Statutes and Judgements noting seeming contradictions between one Law and another such as Manasseb Ben Israel hath spoken of in his Conciliator or when the sence and meaning of the Law is controverted which is not matter of fact but of right wherein speciall use was of the Priests whose lips should preserve knowledge and the Law was to be sought at his mouth Aâ—…al 2. 7. and that not onely ministerially and doctrinally but judicially and in the Sanhedrin at Ierusalem such controversies concerning the Law of God were brought before them as in 2 Chro. 19. the place now in hand Yea shall even warn them c. Which being spoken to the Court must be meant of a synedricall Decree determining those questions and controversies concerning the Law which should come before them As for that distinction in the Text of the Lords matters and the Kings matters Erastus page 274. saith that by the Lords matters is meant any cause expressed in the Law which was to be judged Whereby he takes away the distinction which the Text makes for in his sence the Kings matters were the Lords matters Which himselfe it seems perceiving he immediately yeeldeth our interpretation that by the Lords matters are meant things pertaining to the worship of God and by the Kings matters civill things Si per illas libet res ad cultum Dei spectantes per haec res civiles accipere non pugnabo If you please saith he by those to understand things pertaining to the worship of God by these civill things I will not be against it 3. It was for a Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall end ye shall even warne them that they trespasse not against the Lord. It s not said against one another but against the Lord for two reasons 1. Because mention had been made of the Commandements Statutes and Iudgements after the generall word Law V. 10. by which names Interpreters use to understand both in this and many other places of Scripture the Lawes morall Ceremoniall and Judiciall Now the case to be judged might be part of the Ceremoniall Law having reference to God and his Ordinances and not part of the Judiciall law or any injury done by a man to his neighbour And in referâ—nce to the morall Law it might â—e a trespasse against the first Table not against the second 2. Even in the case of a personall or civill injury or whatsoâ—ver the controversie was that was brought before them they were to warn the Judges in the Cities not to trespasse against the Lord by mistaking or mis-understanding the Law or by righting mens wrongs so as to wrong Divine right And for that end they were to determine the Ius and the intendment of the law when it was controverted 4. Whatsoever cause of their brethren that dwelt in the Cities should come unto them V. 10. whether it should come by appeale or by reference and arbitration this Court at Ierusalem was to give out an ultimate and authoritative determination of it So that what was brought from inferiour courts to them is brought no higher to any other Court 5. This Court had an Ecclesiasticall Prolocutor or moderator V. 11. Amariah the chiefe Priest is over you in all matters of the Lord Whereas Zebadiah the Ruler of the house of Iudah was Speaker in the civill Sanhedrin for all the Kings matters Amariah and Zebadiah were not onely with the Sanhedrin as members or as Councellors but over them as Presidents Eis summos Magistratus
shall not finde councell nor the understanding of the law saith Sanctius Polanus upon the place draweth an Argument against the infallibility of counsels because the law and counsell did perish not onely saith he from the Priests here and there in the Cities but also from the high Priest and the other Priests and Elders who were together at Ierusalem If this Text be rightly applied by him and so it is by other Protestant Writers to prove against Papists that Councels may erre then here was an Ecclesiasticall councell Eightly even without Ierusalem and Iâ—…da there was a Senate or assembly of Elders which did assist the Prophets in overseeing the manners of the people censuring sin and deliberating of the common affairs of the Church This C. Bertramus de polit Jud. c. 16. collecteth from 2 Kings 6. 32. But Elisha sate in his house and the Elders sate with him I know some think that those Elders were the Magistrates of Samaria but this I cannot admit for two reasons 1. Because Iosephus Antiq. lib. 9. cap. 2. cals them Elishaes disciples and from him Hugo Cardinalis Carthusianus and others doe so expound the Text. They are called Elishas Disciples as the Apostles were Christs Disciples by way of Excellency and eminency all the disciples or sonnes of the Prophets were not properly Elders but those onely who were assumed into the Assembly of Elders or called to have a share in the mannaging of the common affaires of the Church 2. Cajetan upon the place gives this reason from the Text it selfe to prove that these Elders were spirituall men as he speaketh because Elisha asketh them See ye how this sonne of a murderer hath sent to take away my head What expectation could there be that they did see a thing then secret and unheard of unlesse they had been men familiar with God Now these Elders were sitting close with Elisha in his house It was not a publike or Church assembly for worship but for counsell deliberation and resolution in some case of difficulty and publike concernment So Tostatus and Sanctius on the place A paralell place there is Ezech. 8. 1. I sate in mine house and the Elders of Iudah sate before me Whether those Elders came to know what God had revealed to the Prophet concerning the state of Iudah and Ierusalem as Lavater upon the place supposeth or for deliberation about some other thing it is nothing like a civill Court but very like an Ecclesiasticall senate Now if such there was out of Ierusalem how much more in Ierusalem where as there came greater store of Ecclesiasticall causes and controversies concerning the sence of the Law to be judged so there was greater store of Ecclesiastical persons â—it for government whatsoever of this kind we finde elsewhere was but a Transsumpt the Archetype was in Ierusalem Ninthly that place Zeâ—…h 7. 1 2 3. helpeth me much The Jews sent Commissioners unto the Temple there to speake unto the Priests which were in the house of the Lord of Hosts and to the Prophets the Chaldee hath and to the Scribes saying Should I weepe in the first moneth c. Here is an Ecclesiasticall assembly which had authority to determine controversies concerning the worship of God Grotius upon the place distinguisheth these Priests and Prophets from the civill Sanhedrin yet he saith they were to be consulted with in controverted cases according to the Law Deut. 17. 9. If so then their sentence was authoritative and binding so far that the man who did presumptuously disobey them was to die the death Deut. 17. 12. Tenthly let it be considered what is that Moshav Zekenim consessus or Cathedra seniorum Psal. 107. 32. for though every argument be not an infâ—llible demonstration yet cuncta juvant let them exalt him also in the Congregation or Church of the people and praise him in the Assembly of the Elders Compare this Text with Psalm 115. 9 10 11. as likewise with Psalm 118. 2 3 4. In all the three Texts there are three sorts of persons distinguished and more especially called upon to glorifie God Oh that men would praise the Lord for his goodnesse saith the Text in hand Psalm 107. 31. for that you have in the other two places Ye that feare the Lord c. for the congregation of the peple you have in the other two places Israel and the house of Israel For the Assembly of the Elders you have in the other Texts the house of Aaron I will not here build any thing upon the observation of Hugo Cardinalis on Psalm 107. 32. that the congregation of the Princes is not mentioned in this businesse because not many mighty not many noble c. One thing I am sure of there were Elders in Israel clearly distinct both from the Princes Judges and civill Magistrates Ios. 23. 2. 2 Kings 10. 1. Ezra 10. 14. Acts 4. 5. and elsewhere And the parallel Texts afore cited doe couple together these Elders and the house of Aaron as Pastors and ruling Elders now are and as the Priests and Elders are found conjoyned elsewhere in the old Testament Exod. 24. 1. Deut. 27. 1. with vers 9. Ezech. 7. 26. Ier. 19. 1. So Matth. 26. 59. The work also of giving thanks for mercies and deliverances obtained by the afflicted and such as have been in distresse the purpose which the Psalmist hath in hand extended also to the deliverances of particular persons is more especially commended to those who are assembled in an Ecclesiasticall capacity Even as now among our selves the civill Courts of Justice or Magistrates and Rulers or Judges assembled by themselves in a politick capacity use not to be desired to give thanks for the delivery of certain persons from a danger at Sea or the like But it were very proper and fit to desire thanks to be returned 1. by those that feare God for as we should desire the prayers so likewise the praises of the Saints 2. By the Church or Congregation of which they that have received the mercy are members 3. By the Eldership yea if therebe occasion by a Synod of Elders who as they ought to watch over the City of God and to stand upon their watch-tower for observing approaching dangers so they ought to take speciall notice of exemplary mercies bestowed upon the afflicted members of the Church and be an ensample to the flocke in giving thanks as well as in other holy duties The eleventh place which seemeth to hold forth unto us an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin is Ezech. 13. 9. where its said of the Prophets that did see vanity and Divine lies they shall not be in the assembly of my people neither shall they be written in the writing of the house of Israel neither shall they inter into the Land of Israel Where as Diodati and Grotius observe the speech riseth by degrees 1. they shall not any more be admitted into the assembly or councell to have any voice there as Prophets in those daies had saith
Diodati citing Ier. 26. 7. Secondly they shall not so much as come into the computation or numbring of the people as members of the Church of Israel 3. Nay they shall not be permitted to dwell in the holy Land or to returne thither from their captivity they shall not have so much favour as strangers had who might come into the holy Land and sojourne there In the first branch the word translated assembly is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sod which properly signifieth a secret and is used for counsell because counsell ought to be secret or for the place of counsell or assembly of Counsellers Pagnin in his Thesaurus p. 1761. readeth this place with Hierome in consilio or otherwise saith he in concilio Vatablus in concilio populi mei non erunt The Septuagints read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is those Prophets shall have no hand in the Discipline of my people The same word they render in other places by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yea by both these put together Prov. 20. 19. where for the Hebrew sod the Septuagints have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He that revealeth the secret counsels in the Sanhedrin and it cohereth well with the preceding Verse where they mention 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Governments Sometime they expound the word by an Episcopall I mean not Prelaticall inspection Iob 29. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God was an overseer of my house So that so far as the Septuagints authority can weigh that place Ezek. 13. 9. must be understood of the secluding of those Prophets from the Sanhedrin not from the Civill in which the Prophets were not members but from the Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin In the twelfth and last place the new Testament holds out to us an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin Whether the civill Sanhedrin was wholy taken away by Herod and another civill Sanhedrin not substitute in the place of that which he took away but the Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin onely remaining as some hold or whether both did then continue though not so clearely distinct as others hold This we finde that there was an Ecclesiasticall government in the hands of Church-officers for 1. there was a councell of the Priests and Elders and Scribes Matth. 2. 4. 16. 21. 21. 23. 26. 57 59. 27. 1. 12. Marke 14. 43. Luke 22. 66. Acts 4. 5. The Centurists say that those Elders were joyned with the Priests in the government of the Church with Ecclesiasticall persons in Ecclesiasticall affaires Which hath been rightly taken for a president of our ruling Elders 2. That Councell is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luke 22. 66. Acts 22. 5. the Presbytery or Eldership the very name which Paul gives to that assembly of Church-officers who ordained Timothy 1 Tim. 4. 14. is it credible that the Apostle would transfer the name of a civill Court to signifie an Assembly which was meerely Ecclesiasticall and not Civill The very use of the word in this sence by the Apostle tels us that in his age the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was taken in an Ecclesiasticall notion onely 3. This Councell did examine Iesus concerning his Disciples and his doctrine and received witnesses against him and pronounced him guilty of blasphemy Matth. 27. 57. Marke 14. 53 55. Ioh. 18. 19. Hence Protestant writers draw an argument against Papists to overthrow their infallibility of Councels unto which argument Bellarmine deviseth foure answers But it came not once into his thoughts to reply that this councell was civill not Ecclesiasticall which had been his best answer if any probability for it It hath been supposed both by Protestant and Popish Writers that it was an Ecclesiasticall Councell such as the controversie is about otherwise our Argument had been as impertinent as their answer was insufficient 4. Our opposites have no evasion here but that which Bilson Saravia and others of the Prelaticall party did answer in opposition to ruling Elders namely that the Jewish Elders were Judges or Magistrates But the reply which served then will serve now the Elders are plainly distinguished from Judges Rulers and Princes Ios. 8. 33. 23. 2. Deut. 5. 23. Iud. 8. 14. 2 Kings 10. 1 5. Ezra 10. 14. Acts 4. 5. Tâ—…status on Deut. 21. 2. 22. 15 16. observeth the same distinction of Judges and Elders Pelargus on Deuâ—… 21. 2 3 4. observeth the like That which I say concerning the distinction of Judges and Elders may be confirmed by Halichoth Olam Tract 1. cap 3. The Judges of Soura M. Houna and D. Isaac The Iudges of Phoumbeditha M. Papa the sonne of Samuel c. The Elders of Soura M. Houna and M. Hisda The Elders of Phoumbeditha Ena and Abimi the sonne of Rahba And thus we are taught how to under and thâ—se Gemarick phrases of the Judges of such a place and the Eldâ—rs of such a place that we may not mistake them as if they were one 5. Some have also drawne a patterne for the constitution of Synods from that Councell Acts 4. 5 6. where we finde assembled together Rulers 〈◊〉 Elders Scriâ—es according to which patterne we have in our Synods 1. the civill 〈◊〉 to preside in the order of proceedings for preventing tumults injuries disorders and to assist and protect the Synod 2. Pastors of Churches 3. Doctors from universities answering to the Scribes or Doctors of the Law 4. Ruling Elders who assist in the Government of the Church 6. After that Iudaea was redacted into a Province and the Romans having keptin their owne hands not only the power of life and death Iohn 18. 31. but all judgement in whatsovever civill or criminall offences falling out among the Jews meant by matters of wrong or wicked leudness Acts 18. 14. And having left to the Jewes no government nor any power of judgement except in things pertaining to their religion onely Ib. verse 15. These six things considered it is very unprobable if not unpossible that the Councell of the Priests Elders and Scribes mentioned so often in the New Testament should be no Ecclesiasticall Court but a temporall and civill Magistracy The Centurists Cent. 1. lib. 1. cap. 10. reckon that Councell for an Ecclesiasticall Court distinct from civill Magistracy and they propose these two to be distinctly treated of Acta coram Pontificibus seu Magistratu Ecclesiastico and here they bring in the councell of the Priests Elders and Scribes And Actio coram Pilato seu magistratu politico I know Erastus lib. 3. cap. 2. aud lib. 4. cap. 4. though he confesse plainly that the Jewish Sanhedrin mentioned in the Gosspell and in the Acts of the Apostles had onely power of judging causes belonging to Religion and that the Romans did leave them no power to judge of civill injuries yet he holdeth that in these causes of Religion the Sanhedrin had power not onely of imprisoning and scourging but even of death it selfe And so endeavours to make it a temporall or civil Magistracy which
civill Court of Justice had then removed from Hierusalem and had lost its authority in executing Justice I. Coch annot in Exc. Gem. Sanhedrin cap. 1. sâ—…ct 13. beareth witnesse to the same story above mentioned that forty yeeres before the destruction of the Temple the Sanhedrin did remove from its proper seat where he also mentions the ten stations or degrees of their removing and Iam tum cessarunt judicia capitalia saith he Now at that time the capitall judgements did cease Thus we have three witnesses singularly learned in the Jewish Antiquities Unto these adde Casauâ—…on exerc 16. anno 34. num 76. He holds that though the Councell of the Jewes had cognizance of the offence for otherwise how could they give a reason or cause when they demanded justice in which respect the Councell did judge Christ to be guilty of death Marke 14. 64. yet their Councell had then no more power of capitall punishments which saith he the more learned moderne writers doe demonstrate è Iuchasin and from other Talmudicall writings he addeth that this power of putting any man to death was taken from the Jewes some space before this time when they said to Pilate It is not lawfull for us to put any man to death for this power was taken from them saith he forty yeeres before the destruction of the second Temple as the Rabbinicall writers doe record I have thus largely prosecuted my last argument drawn from the New Testament mentioning the Councell of the Priests Elders and Scribes And I trust the twelve arguments which have been brought may give good satisfaction toward the proofe of an Ecclesiasticall Jewish Sanhedrin The chiefe objection which ever I heard or read against this distinction of a Civill Sanhedrin and an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jewes is this That neither the Talmud nor the Talmudicall writers mention any such distinction but speake onely of one supreme Sanhedrin of 71 and of other two Courts which sate the one at the doore of the Court before the Temple the other at the gate which entereth to the mountaine of the Temple There were also Courts in the Cities where capitall cases were judged by three and twenty pecuniall mults by three Answ. It must be remembred that not onely the Talmudicall Commentators but the Talmud it selfe is much later than the time of the Sanhedrin and the integrity of the Jewish government Yea later by some Centuries than the destruction of the Temple and City of Ierusalem So that the Objection which is made is no stronger than as if one should argue thus There is no mention of Elderships constituted of Pastors and Ruling Elders without any Bishop having preeminence over the rest neither in the Canon Law nor decretals of Popes nor in the Booke of the Canons of the Roman Church Therefore when Paul wrote his Epistle to the Church of Rome there was no such Eldership in that Church constituted as hath been said But if the Ecclesiasticall Government either of the Church of Rome or of the Church of the Jewes can be proved from Scripture as both may it ought to be no prejudice against those truths that they are not fouâ—d in the Writers of afâ—ertimes and declining ages Howbeit there may be seen some footsteps of a Civill and Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin even in the Talmudicall writers in the opinion of Constantinus L'Empereur and in that other passage cited by D. Buxtorf out of Elias Of which before And so much concerning an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jewes If after all this any man shall be unsatisfied in this particular yet in the issue such as are not convinced that there was an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jewes distinct from their civill Sanhedrin may neverthelesse be convinced not by the former arguments but by other Mediums that there was an Ecclesiasticall government among the Jewes distinct from their civill government For it belonged to the Priests not to the Magistrates or Judges to put difference between holy and unholy and between unclean and cleane And the Priests not the Magistrates are challenged for not putting difference between the holy and prophane Ezech. 22. 26. And this power of the Priests was not meerly doctrinall or declarative but decisive binding and juridicall so farre as that according to their sentence men were to be admitted as cleane or excluded as uncleane Yea in other cases as namely in trying and judging the scandall of a secret and unknown murther observe what is said of the Priests Deut. 21. 5. by their word shall every controversie and every stroke be tried Yea themselves were Judges of controversies Ezech. 44. 24. And in controversie they shall stand in judgement and they shall judge it according to my judgements Where the Ministers of the Gospell are principally intended but not without an allusion unto and parallel with the Priests of the old Testament in this point of jurisdiction Suppose now it were appointed by Law that Ministers shall separate or put difference between the holy and prophane that by their word every controversie concerning the causes of suspension or sequestration of men from the Sacrament shall be tried that in controversie they shall stand in judgement and judge according to the word of God Would not every one looke upon this as a power of government put into the hands of Ministers And none readier to aggravate such government then the Erastians Yet all this amounts to no more then by the plaine and undeniable Scriptures above cited was committed to the Priests Suppose also that men were kept backe from the Temple and from the Passeover not for any morall uncleannesse but for ceremoniall uncleannesse onely which is to be afterwards discussed yet the Priests their judging and deciding of controversies concerning mens legall uncleannesse according to which judgement and decision men were to be admitted to or kept backe from the Temple and Passover yea sometime their owne houses as in the case of leprosie could not choose but entitle them to a power of government which power was peculiar to them and is not in all the old Testament ascribed to Magistrates or Judges And as the exercise of this power did not agree to the Magistrate so the commission charge and power given to those who did keepe backe the uncleane was not derived from the Magistrate for it did belong to the intrinsecall sacerdotall authority 2 Kings 11. 18. The Priest Iehojada appointed Officers over the house of the Lord. The 70 thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These Officers or overseers over the Temple were appointed by Iehojada for keeping backe the uncleane as Grotius upon the place following Iosephus hath observed Compare 2 Chro. 23. 19. And he Iehojada set the Porters at the gates of the house of the Lord that none which was uncleane in any thing should enter in For the same end did he appoint these overseers over the Temple 2 Kings 11. It was also appointed by the Law that the man who should doe any thing
punishment except what was civill He granteth also that Niddui was included in the other two so that in all three there was a shutting out from the holy things I must not forget the Testimony of my Countreyman Master Weemse in his Christian Synagogue lib. 1. cap. 6. sect 3. paragr 7. They had three sorts of Excommunication first the lesser then the middle sort then the greatest The lesser was called Niddui and in the New Testament they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 put out of the Synagogue and they hold that Cain was excommunicated this way The second was called Cherem or Anathema with this sort of Excommunication was the Incestuous person censured 2 Cor. 2. The third Shammatha they hold that Enoch instituted it Jude v. 14. And after these who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 put out of the Synagogue were not simply secluded from the Temple but suffered to stand in the Gate c. These who were Excommunicated by the second sort of Excommunication were not permitted to come neer the Temple These who were Excommunicated after the third sort were secluded out of the society of the people of God altogether And thus I have produced fifteen witnesses for the Ecclesiasticall Excommunication of the Jewes I might produce many more but I have made choice of these because all of them have taken more than ordinary paines in searching the Jewish antiquities and divers of them are of greatest note for their skill therein In the next place let us observe the causes degrees manner and rites how the authority by which the ends and effects of excommunication among the Jewes and see whether all these doe not helpe to make their Excommunication a patterne for ours For the causes there were 24 causes for which a man was Excommunicated among the Jewes You may read them in Buxtorfs Lexicon Chald Talmud Rabbin p. 1304 1305. M. Selden de jure nat Gentium lib. 4. cap. 8. Jo. Coch Annot. in Excerp Gem. Sanhedrin cap. 2. pag. 147. divers of these causes did not at all concerne personall or civill injuries for such injuries were not accounted causes of Excommunication but were to be punished otherwise as shall be proved afterward but matters of scandall by which God was dishonoured and the stumbling-blocke of an evill example laid before others One cause was the despising of any of the preceps of the Law of Moses or Statutes of the Scribes Another was the selling of Land to a Gentile Another was a Priest not separating the gifts of the oblation Another he that in captivity doth not iterate or observe the second time a holy day Another he that doth any servile worke upon Easter eve Another he that mentioneth the name of God rashly or by a vaine oath Another he that enduceth or giveth occasion to others to prophane the name of God Another he that makes others to â—ate holy things without the holy Temple Another he that maketh computation of yeeres and moneths without the Land of Israel that is as D r Buxtorf writeth Calendars or as M. Selden computeth yeeres and moneths otherwise than their fathers had done Another he that retardeth or hindreth others from doing the Law and Commandement Another he that maketh the offering prophane as D r Buxtorf or offereth a sickly beast as I. Coch. Another a Sacrificer that doth not shew his Sacrificing Knife before a Wise man or a Rabbi that it may be knowne to be a lawfull Knife and not faulty Another he that cannot be made to know or to learne Another he that having put away his wife doth thereafter converse familiarly with her Another a Wise man that is a Rabbi or Doctor infamous for an evill life The other causes had also matter of scandall in them namely the despising of a Wise man or Rabbi though it were after his death The despising of an Officer or messenger of the house of judgement He that casteth up to his neighbour a servile condition or cals his neighbour servant He that contumaciously refuseth to appeare at the day appointed by the Judge He that doth not submit himselfe to the Judiciall sentence He that hath in his house any hurtfull thing as a mad dogge or a weake leather He that before Heathen Judges beareth witnesse against an Israelite He that maketh the blind to fall He that hath Excommunicate another without cause when he ought not to have been Excommunicate Thus you have the 24 causes of the Jewish Excommunication of which some were meere scandals others of a mixed nature that is partly injuries partly scandals but they were reckoned among the causes of Excommunication qua scandals not qua 〈◊〉 Io. Coch. Annot. in Exc. Gem. Sanhedrin pag. 146 explaining how the wronging of a Doctor of the Law by contumelies was a cause of Excommunication sheweth that the Excommunication was because of the scandall Licet tamen condonare nisi res in praputulo gesta sit Publicum Doctoris ludibrium in legis contemptum redundat 〈◊〉 ob causam Doctor legis honorem 〈◊〉 remittere non potest Ubi res clam sine scandalo gesta est magni animi sapientis est injuriam contemptu vindicare If there was no scandall the injury might be remitted by the party injured so as the offendor was not to be Excommunicate But if the contumely was known abrond and was scandalous though the party wronged were willing and desirous to bury it yet because of the scandall the Law provided that the offender should be excommunicate For they taught the people that he who did contend against a Rabbi did contend against the holy Ghost for which see Gul. Vorstius annot in Maimon de fundam legis pag. 77 78. and hence did they aggravate an Ecclesiasticall or Divine not a Civill injury Whence it appeareth that the causes of Excommunication were formally lookt upon as scandals Adde that if qua injuries then a quatenus ad omne all personall or civill injuries had been causes of Excommunication But all civill injuries doe not fall within these 24. causes If it be objected that neither doe all scandalls fall within these 24. causes I answer they doe for some of the causes are generall and comprehensive namely these two the 5 th He that despiseth the Statutes of the Law of Moses or of the Scribes and the 18 th He that retardeth or hindereth others from doing the Law When I make mention of any particular heads either of the Jewish Discipline or of the ancient Christian discipline let no man understand me as if I intended the like Strictnesse of Discipline in these dayes My meaning is onely to prove Ecclesiasticall censures and an Ecclesiasticall Government And let this be remembred upon all like occasions though it be not everywhere expressed And so much for the causes The degrees of the Jewish excommunication were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Niddui 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cherem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Schammata Elias in Tisbite saith plainly
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Erastus pag. 315. confesseth it is very hard to tell what it was He gives three conjectures First that it was some ignominy put upon a man which I thinke no body denies and it may well stand with our interpretation Secondly he saith not that it was a separating of the party from all company or society with any man for which Master Prynne citeth Erastus with others but a pulling away or casting out of a man from some particular Towne onely for instance from Nazareth Thirdly He saith it seemes also to have been a refusall of the priviledges of Jewish Citizens or the esteeming of one no longer for a true Jew but for a Proselyte But that a Proselyte who was free to come both to Temple and Synagogue for of such a Proselyte he speaketh expressely should be said to be made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it may well weaken it cannot strengthen his cause 8. In Tzemach David edit Hen. Vorst pag 89. We read that when the Sanhedrin did remove from Hierusalem 40. yeeres before the destruction of the Temple there was a Prayer composed against the Hereticks Hen. Vorstius in his observ pag. 285 sheweth out of Maimon that it was a maledictory Prayer appointed to be used against the Hereticks of that time who encreased mightily and that R. Sol. Jarchi addeth this explanation of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Minim the Disciples of Jesus of Nazareth D. Buxtorf Lexic Chald. Talm. rab pag. 1201. collecteth that this maledictory Prayer was composed in Christs time and against his Disciples Surely it suteth no story so well as that of the decree of casting out of the Synagogue Io. 12. 42. After all these eight considerations this I must adde that I doe not a little admire how Master Prynne could cite Godwyns Jewish Antiquities lib. 5. cap. 2. for that opinion that the casting out of the Synagogue was not an Ecclesiasticall but onely a civill censure If he had but looked upon the page immediately preceding he had found this distinction between the Ecclesiasticall and civill courts of the Jewes The office of the Ecclesiasticall Court was to put a difference between things holy and unholy c. It was a representative Church Hence is that diâ—… Ecclesiae Matt. 18. 17. Tell the Church because unto them belonged the power of excommunication the severall sorts of which censure follow and so he beginneth with the casting out of the Synagogue as the first or lesser Excommunication oâ— Niddui and tells us among other effects of it that the male Children of one thus cast out were not circumcised To Master Prynnes fourth exception the Answer may be collected from what is already said We never find the temporall Magistrate called the Ruler of the Synagogue nor yet that he sate in Judgement in the Synagogue The beating or scourging in the Synagogues was a tumultuous disorderly act we read of no sentence given but onely to be put out of the Synagogue which sentence was given by the Synagogicall consistory made up of the Priest or Priests and Jewish Elders For the power of judging in things and causes Ecclesiasticall did belong to the Priests and Levites together with the Elders of Israel 1 Chro. 23. 4. 26. 30. 32. 2. Chro. 19. 8. And therefore what reason Master Prynne had to exclude the Priests from this corrective power and from being Rulers of the Synagogue I know not Sure I am the Scriptures cited make Priests and Levites to be Judges and Rulers Ecclesiasticall of which before As for the chief Ruler of the Synagogue Archysynagogus erat primarius in Synagoga Doctor say the Centurists Cent. 1. lib. 1. cap 7. and if so then not a civill Magistrate To the fifth I Answer 1. If there was an exclusion from Reading Expounding Preaching and Prayer then much more from Sacraments in which there is more of the communion of Saints 2. He that was cast out of the Synagogue might not enter in the Synagogue saith Menochius in Io. 9. 22. therefore he did not communicate in Prayer with the Congregation nor in other acts of Divine Worship which how farre it is applicable to excommunication in the Christian Church I do not now dispute nor are all of one opinion concerning excommunicate persons their admission unto some or exclusion from all publike Ordinances hearing of the word and all I know Erastus answereth the word Synagogue may signifie either the materiall house the place of Assembling or the people the congregation which did Assemble and some who differ in Judgement from us in this particular hold that when we read of putting out of the Synagogue the word Synagogue doth not signifie the house or place of publike worship which yet it doth signifie in other places as Luk. 7. 5. Act. 18. 7. but the Church or Assembly it selfe But I take it to signifie both joyntly and that it was a casting out even from the place it selfe such as that Io. 9. 34. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and they cast him out or excommunicated him as the English Translators adde in the Margine Besides I take what it is granted It was a casting out from the Assembly or Congregation it selfe But how could a man be cast out from the Congregation and yet be free to come where the Congregation was Assembled together O but he must keepe off foure cubites distance from all other men And was there so much roome to reele to and fro in the Synagogue I doe not understand how a man shall satisfie himselfe in that notion But I rather thinke Bertramus speakes rationally that he that was excommunicate by Niddui was shut out ab hominum contubernio atque adeâ—… ab ipsius Tabernaculi aditu de Rep. Jud. cap. 7. which Niddui he takes to be the same with casting out of the Synagogue He that was cast out from mens society must needs be excluded from the publike holy Assemblies and from the place where these Assemblies are Whereunto agreeth that which we read in Exc. Gem. Sanhedrin cap. 3. Sect. 9. a certaine Disciple having after two and twenty yeeres divulged that which had been said in the Schoole of R. Ammi he was brought out of the Synagogue and the said Rabbi caused it to be proclaimed this is a revealer of secrets 3 It is more then Mr. Prynne can prove that the Sacrament of Circumcision was not then administred in the Synagogues The Jewes do administer it in their Synagogues and that Iohn was Circumcised in the Synagogue some gather from Luk. 1. 59. Venerunt they came to wit to the Synagogue to Circumcise the Child for my part I lay no weight upon that argument But I see lâ—sse ground for Mr. Prynnes Assertion As for that which M. Prynne addeth in the close that those who were cast out of the Synagogue might yet resort to the Temple he hath said nothing to prove it I find the same thing affirmed by Sutlivius de Presbyt pag. 25. though I
these two things 1. It is the opinion of divers who hold two Sanhedrins among the Jewes one Civill and another Ecclesiasticall that in causes and occasions of a mixed nature which did concerne both Church and State both did consult conclude and decree in a joynt way and by agreement together Now Ezra 10. the Princes Elders Priests and Levites were assembled together upon an extraordinary cause which conjuncture and concurrence of the Civill and the Ecclesiasticall power might occasion the denouncing of a double punishment upon the contumacious forfeiture and excommunication But 2. The objection made doth rather confirme me that Excommunication is intended in that place For this forfeiture was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a making sacred or dedicating to an holy use as I have shewed out of Iosephus The originall word translated forfeited is more properly translated devoted which is the word put in the margin of our bookes The Greek saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 anathemstizabitur which is the best rendring of the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was not therefore that which we call forfeiture of a mans substance Intellige saith Grotius ita ut Deo sacra fiat And so the excommunication of a man and the devoting of his substance as holy to the Lord were joyned together and the substance had not been anathematized if the man had not been anathematized I doe not say that Excommunication ex natura rei doth inferre and draw after it the devoting of a mans estate as holy to the Lord. No Excommunication can not hurt a man in his worldly estate further than the Civill Magistrate and the Law of the Land appointeth And there was Excommunication in the Apostolical Churches where there was no Christian Magistrate to adde a Civill mulct But the devoting of the substance of Excommunicated persons Ezra 10. as it had the authority of the Princes and Rulers for it so what extraordinary warrants or instinct there was upon that extraordinary exigence we can not tell Finally M. Selden de Jure nat Gentium lib. 4. cap. 9. p. 523. agreeth with Lud. Capellus that the separation from the Congregation Ezra 10. 8. plane ipsum est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fieri it is the very same with casting out of the Synagogue which confuteth further that which M. Prynne holds that the casting out of the Synagogue was not warranted by Gods word but was onely a humane invention I know some have drawne another argument for the Jewish Excommunication from Nehem. 13. 25. I contended with them and cursed them id est anathematizavi excommunicavi saith C. a lapide upon the place So Tirinus upon the same place Mariana expounds it anathema dixi Aben Ezra understands it of two kinds of Excommunication Niddui and Cherem For my part I lay no weight upon this unlesse you understand the cursing or malediction to be an act of the Ecclesiasticall power onely authorised or countenanced by the Magistrate Which the words may well beare for neither is it easily credible that Nehemiah did with his owne hand smite those men and plucke off their hayre but that by his authority he tooke care to have it done by civill Officers as the cursing by Ecclesiasticall Officers The Dutch annotations leane this way telling us that Nehemiah did expresse his zeale against them as persons that deserved to be banned or cut off from the people of God Another Text proving the Jewish Excommunication is Luke 6. 22. When they shall separate you and shall reproach you and â—…ast out your name as evill It was the most misapplied censure in the world in respect of the persons thus cast out but yet it proves the Jewish custome of casting out such as they thought wicked and obstinate persons This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beda upon the place understandeth of casting out of the Synagogue Separent Synagoga depellant c. yet it is a more generall and comprehensive word then the casting out of the Synagogue It comprehendeth all the three degrees of the Jewish Excommunication as Grotius expounds the place Which agreeth with Munsterus Dictionar Trilingue where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the onely Greeke word given both for the three Hebrew words Niddui Cherem and Shammata and for the Latine Excommunicatio Wherefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place is extermino excommunico repudio which is one of the usuall significations of the word given by Stephanus and by Scapula It is a word frequently used in the Canons of the most ancient Councels to expresse such a separation as was a Church-censure and namely suspension from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper For by the ancient Canons of the Councels such offences as were punished in a Minister by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is deposition were punished in one of the people by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is segregation or sequestration Zonaras upon the 13 th Canon of the eighth generall Councell observeth a double 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used in the ancient Church â—ne was a totall separation or casting out of the Church which is usually called Excommunication another was a suspension or sequestration from the Sacrament onely Of which I am to speak more afterward in the third Booke I hold now at the Text in hand which may be thus read according to the sence and letter both when they shall excommunicate you c. Howbeit the other reading when they shall separate you holds forth the same thing which I speake of separate from what our Translators supply from their company but from what company of theirs not from their civill company onely but from their sacred or Church assemblies and from religious fellowship it being a Church-censure and a part of Ecclesiasticall discipline in which sence as this word frequently occurreth in the Greeke fathers and ancient Canons when they speake of Church discipline so doubtlesse it must be taken in this place 1. Because as Grotius tels us that which made the Jewes the rather to separate men in this manner from their society was the want of the Civill coercive power of Magistracy which sometime they had And I have proved before that the civill Sanhedrin which had power of criminall and capitall judgements did remove from Ierusalem and cease to execute such judgement forty yeeres before the destruction of the Temple 2. Because in all other places of the new Testament where the same word is used it never signifieth a bare separation from civill company but either a conscientious and religious separation by which Church members did intend to keep themselves pure from such as did walke or were conceived to walke disorderly and scandalously Acts 19. 9. 2 Cor. 6. 17. Gal. 2. 13. or Gods separating between the godly and the wicked Matth 13. 49. 25. 32. or the setting apart of men to the ministery of the Gospell Acts 13. 2. Rom. 1. 1. Gal. 1. 15. Thirdly a Civill separation is for a Civill injury but this separation
signification and was a Type of Christ and Communion with him It is worthy of observation that by the Chaldee paraphrase Exod. 12. 43. Any Israelite who was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an apostate might not eate of the Passeover Againe verse 48. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 omnis prophanus So the Latine Interpreter of Onkelos And no prophane person shall eate of it The word is used not onely of a Heathen but of any prophane person as Prov. 2. 16. where the Chaldee expresseth the whorish woman though a Jewesse by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It commeth from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be prophaned è sancto prophanum fieri Surely Onkelos had not thus paraphrased upon Exod. 12. if it had not been the Law of the Jewes that notorious prophane persons should be kept backe from the Passeover The second Book OF THE CHRISTIAN Church-Goverment CHAP. I. Of the Rise Growth Decay and Reviving of Erastianisme DIverse Learned men have to very good purpose discovered the origination occasion first authors fomenters rise and growth of Errors both Popish and others I shall after their example make known briefly what I find concerning the rise and growth the planting and watering of the Erastian Error I cannot say of it that it is honest is parentibus natus it is not borne and descended of honest parents The Father of it is the old Serpent who finding his Kingdom very much impaired weakned and resisted by the vigor of the true Ecclesiastical discipline which separateth between the precious and the vile the holy prophane and so contributeth much to the shaming away of the unfruitful works of darknesse thereupon he hath cunningly gone about to draw men first into a jealousie and then into a dislike of the Ecclesiastical discipline by Gods mercy restored in the Reformed Churches The Mother of it is the enmity of nature against the Kingdom of Iesus Christ which he as Mediator doth exercise in the goverment of the Church Which enmity is naturally in all mens hearts but is unmortified and strongly prevalent in some who have said in their hearts We will not have this man to raigne over us Luke 19. Let us break their bonds asunder and cast away their cords from us Psal. 2. 3. The Midwife which brought this unhappy brood into the light of the world was Thomas Erastus Doctor of Medicine at Heidelberg of whom I shall say no more then what is apparant by his owne Preface to the Reader namely that as he was once of opinion that excommunication is commanded in the Word of God so he came off to the contrary opinion not without a male-contented humour and a resentment of some things which he lookt upon as provocations and personal reflections though its like enough they were not really such but in his apprehensions they were One of these was a publick dispute at Heydelberg in the year 1568. upon certain Theses concerning the necessity of Church Government and the power of Presbyteries to excommunicate Which Theses were exhibited by M. George Withers an Englishman who left England because of the Ceremonies and was at that time made Doctor of Divinity at Heydelberg And the learned dispute had thereupon you may find epitomized as it was taken the day following from the mouth of Dr. Vrsinus in the close of the second part of Dr. Pareus his explication of the Heidelberg Catechisme The Erastian error being borne the breasts which gave it suck were prophanesse and self-interest The sons of Belial were very much for it expecting that the eye of the civil Magistrate shall not be so vigilant over them nor his hand so much against them for a scandalous and dissolute conversation as Church-discipline would be Germanorum bibere est vivere in practice as well as in pronunciation What great marvel if many among them for I do not speak of all did comply with the Erastian Tenent And it is as little to be marvelled at if those whether Magistrates Lawyers or others who conceived themselves to be so far losers as Ecclesiastical Courts were interested in Government and to be greater gainers by the abolition of the Ecclesiastical interest in government were by assed that way Both these you may find among the causes mentioned by Aretius 〈◊〉 probl loc 133. for which there was so much un willingnes to admit the discipline of Excomunication Magistratus jugum non admittuxt timent honoribus licentiam amant c. The Magistrates do not admit a yoke are jealous of their honours love licentiousnesse Vulgus quoque plebs dissolutior major pars corruptissima est c. The Communaltic also and people are more dissolute the greater part is most vicious After that this unlucky child had been nursed upon so bad milk it came at last to eat strong food and that was Arbitrary Government under the name of Royall Prerogative Mr. Iohn Wemys sometime Senator of the Colledge of Justice in Scotland as great a Royalist as any of his time in his book de Regis primatu lib. 1. cap. 7. doth utterly dissent from and argue against the distinction of Civil and Ecclesiasticall lawes and against the Synodical power of censures holding that both the power of making Ecclesiastical lawes and the corrective power to censure Transgressors is proper to the Magistrate The Tutor which bred up the Erastian error was Arminianisme for the Arminians finding their plants pluckt up and their poison antidoted by Classes and Synods thereupon they began to cry down Synodical authority and to appeal to the Magistrates power in things Ecclesiastical hoping for more favour and lesse opposition that way They will have Synods onely to examine dispute discusse to impose nothing under pain of Ecclesiastical censure but to leave all men free to do as they list See their exam cens cap. 25. and Vindic. lib. 2. cap. 6. pag. 131. 133. And for the Magistrate they have endeavoured to make him head of the Church as the Pope was yea so far that they are not ashamed to ascribe unto the Magistrate that Jurisdiction over the Churches Synods and Ecclesiastical proceedings ' which the Pope did formerly usurpe For which see Apollonius in his Ius Majâ—…statis circa sacra But the Erastian Error being thus borne nursed fed and educated did fall into a most deadly decay and consumption the procuring causes whereof were these three First the best and most and in some respect all of the Reformed Churches refused to receive harbour or entertain it and so left it exposed to hunger and cold shame and nakednesse Some harbour it had in Switzerland but that was lookt upon as comming onely through injury of time which could not be helped the Theological and Scriptural principles of the Divines of those Churches being Anti-Erastian and Presbyteriall as I have else-where shewed against Mr. Coleman So that Erastianisme could not get warmth and strength enough no not in Zurick it self Yea Dr. Ursiâ—…us in his Iudicium de
whole Diocesse consisting it may be of some hundreds of Congregations holding that the Ministers of particular Congregations did preach the Word and minister the Sacraments in his name by vertue of authority and order from him and because he could not act by himself in every Congregation The Presbyteriall Government acknowledgeth no Pastorall charge of preaching the Word and ministring the Sacraments to more Congregations then one and doth acknowledge the Pastors of particular Churches being lawfully called to have power and authority for preaching the Word and ministring the Sacraments in the name of Christ and not in the name of the Presbyterie 5. The Prelates as they denyed the power and authority of Pastors so they utterly denyed the very offices of ruling Elders and Deacons for taking more especiall care of the poor in particular Congregations 6. They did not acknowledge Congregationall Elderships nor any power of discipline in particular Congregations which the Presbyteriall Government doth 7. They intruded Pastors oft times against the consent of the Congregation and reclamante Ecclesiâ which the Presbyteriall Government doth not 8. They ordained Ministers without any particular charge which the Presbyterial Government doth not 9 In Synods they did not allow any but the Clergie alone as they kept up the name to have decisive suffrage The Presbyterial Government gives decisive voices to ruling Elders as well as to Pastors 10. The Prelates declined to be accountable to and censurable by either Chapters Diocesan or Nationall Synods In Presbyteriall Government all in whatsoever Ecclesiasticall administration are called to an account in Presbyteries Provinciall and Nationall Assemblies respectively and none are exempted from Synodicall censures in case of scandall and obstinacy 11. The Prelates power was not meerly Ecclesiasticall they were Lords of Parliament they held Civil places in the State which the Presbyterial Government condemneth 12. The Prelats were not chosen by the Church Presbyters are 13. The Prelates did presume to make Lawes binding the Conscience even in things indifferent and did persecute imprison fine depose excommunicate men for certain Rites and Ceremonies acknowledged by themselves to be indifferent setting aside the will and authority of the Law makers This the Presbyteriall Government abhorreth 14. They did excommunicate for money matters for trifles Which the Presbyteriall Government condemneth 15. The Prelates did not allow men to examine by the Judgement of Christian and private discretion their Decrees and Canons so as to search the Scriptures and look at the Warrants but would needs have men think it enough to know the things to be commanded by them that are in place and power Presbyteriall Government doth not lord it over mens consciences but admitteth yea commendeth the searching of the Scriptures whether these things which it holds forth be not so and doth not presse mens Consciences with Sic volo sic jubeo but desireth they may doe in faith what they do 16. The Prelates held up pluralities non-residencies c. Which the Presbyteriall Government doth not 17. As many of the Prelates did themselves neglect to preach the Gospel so they kept up in diverse places a reading non-preaching Ministery Which the Presbyteriall Goverment suffereth not 18. They opened the door of the Ministery to diverse scandalous Arminianized and popishly affected men and locked the door upon many worthy to be admitted The Presbyteriall Government herein is as contrary to theirs as theirs was to the right 19. Their Official Courts Commissaries c. did serve themselves Hâ—ires to the sons of Eli Nay but thou shalt give it me now and if not I will take it by force The Presbyterial Government 〈◊〉 such proceedings 20. The Prelates and their High-Commission Court did assume potâ—…statem utriusque gladij the power both of the Temporall and Civil Sword The Presbyteriall Government medleth with no Civil nor Temporall punishments I do not intend to enumerate all the differences between the Papal and Prelatical Government on the one side and the Presbyterial Government on the other side in this point of unlimitednesse or arbitrarynesse These differences which I have given may serve for a consciencious caution to intelligent and moderate men to beware of such odiouâ— and unjust comparisons as have been used by some and among others by Mr. Salâ—…marsh in his Parallel between the Prelacy and Presbyterie Which as it cannot strike against us nor any of the Reformed Churches who acknowledge no such Presbyterie as he describeth and in some particulars striketh at the Ordinance of Parliament as namely in point of the Directory so he that hath a mind to a Recrimination might with more truth lay diverse of those imputations upon those whom I beleeve he is most unwilling they should be laid upon In the third place The Presbyterian Government is more limited and lesse arbitrary than the Independent Government of single Congregations which exempting themselves from the Presbyterial subordination and from being accountable to and censurable by Classes or Synods must needs be supposed to exercise a much more unlimited or arbitrary power than the Presbyterial Churches do especially when this shall be compared and laid together with one of their three grand Principles which disclaimeth the binding of themselves for the future unto their present judgement and practice and avoucheth the keeping of this reserve to alter and retract See their Apologetical narration pag. 10 11. By which it appeareth that their way will not suffer them to be so far moulded into an Uniformity or bounded within certain particular rules I say not with others but even among themselves as the Presbyterian way will adâ—it of Finally The Presbyterial Government hath no such liberty nor arbitrarinesse as Civil or Military Government hath there being in all civil or temporal affairs a great deal of latitude 〈◊〉 to those who manage the same so that they command nor act nothing against the Word of God But Presbyterial Government is tyed up to the rules of Scripture in all such particulars as are properly spiritual and proper to the Church Though in other particular occasional circumstances of times places accommodations and the like the same light of nature and reason guideth both Church and State yet in things properly Spiritual and Ecclesiastical there is not near somuch latitude left to the Presbytery as there is in civil affairs to the Magistrate And thus I have made good what I said That Presbyterial Government is the most limited and least arbitrary Government of any other All which Vindication and clearing of the Presbyterial Government doth overthrow as to this Point Master Hussey's Observation pag. 9. of the irregularity and arbitrarinesse of Church-government And so much of my fourth Concâ—ssion The fifth shall be this 'T is far from our meaning that the Christian Magistrate should not meddle with matters of Religion or things and causes Ecclesiastical and that he is to take care of the Common-wealth but not of the Church Certainly there is much power and Authority which
commonly say of the Magistrate that he is Custos utriusque Tabulae He is to take speciall care that all his Subjects be made to observe the Law of God and live not onely in moral honesty but in Godlinesse and that so living they may also enjoy peace and quietnesse More particularly the end of Church censures is that men may be ashamed humbled reduced to repentance that their spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. The end of civil punishments inflicted by the Magistrate is That justice may be done according to Law and that peace and good order may be maintained in the Common-wealth as hath been said The end of delivering Hymeneus and Alexander to Satan was that they may learn not to blaspheme 1 Tim. 1. 20. Erastus yeelds to Beza pag. 239. that the Apostle doth not say Ut non possint blasphemare that henceforth they may not be able to sin as they did before which yet he acknowledgeth to be the end of civil punishments but that they may learn not to blaspheme Wherefore when he expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to no other sence but this That the Apostle had delivered those two to be killed by Satan Ut non possint that they may not be able to blaspheme so any more just as a Mastgirate delivers a theef from the gallows that he may not be able to steal any more and as he tels us some speak that he may learn to steal no more He is herein confuted not onely out of the Text but out of himself So then the end of Church-censures is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the offenders may learn or be instructed to do so no more which belongeth to the inward man or soul. The end of civil punishments is Ut non possint as Erastus tels us that the offenders may not be able or at least being alive and some way free may not dare to do the like the sword being appointed for a terrour to them who do evil to restrain them from publike and punishable offences not to work upon the spirit of their mindes nor to effect the destroying of the flesh by mortification that the spirit may be safe in the day of the Lord. The fifth difference between the Civil and Ecclesiastical powers is in respect of the effects The effects of the Civil power are Civil Laws Civil punishments Civil rewards The effects of the Ecclesiastical power are Determinations of Controversies of Faith Canons concerning Order and Decency in the Church Ordination or Deposition of Church-Officers Suspension from the Sacrament and Excommunication The powers being distinct in their nature and causes the effects must needs be distinct which flow from the actuating and putting in execution of the powers I do not here speak of the effects of the Ecclesiastical power of Order the dispensing of the Word and Sacraments but of the effects of the power of Jurisdiction or Government of which onely the Controversic is Sixthly The Civil power hath for the object of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the things of this life matters of Peace War Justice the Kings matters and the Countrey-matters those things that belong to the external man But the Ecclesiastical power hath for the object of it things pertaining to God the Lords matters as they are distinct from Civil matters and things belonging to the inward man distinct from the things belonging to the outward man This difference Protestant Writers do put between the Civil and Ecclesiastical powers Fr. Junius Ecclesiast lib. 3. cap. 4. saith thus We have put into our definition humane things to be the subject of Civil administration but the subject of Ecclesiastical administration we have taught to be things Divine and Sacred Things Divine and Sacred we call both those which God commandeth for the sanctification of our minde and conscience as things necessary and also those which the decency and order of the Church requireth to be ordained and observed for the profitable and convenient use of the things which are necessary For example Prayers the administration of the Word and Sacraments Ecclsiastical censure are things necessary and essentially belonging to the Communion of Saints but set dayes set hours set places fasts and the like belong to the decency and order of the Church c. But humane things we call such as touch the life the body goods and good name as they are expounded in the second Table of the Decalogue for these are the things in which the whole Civil administration standeth Tilen Synt. part 2. disp 32. tels us to the same purpose That Civil Government or Magistracy versatur circa res terrenas hominem externum Magistratus saith Danaui Pol. Christ. lib. 6. cap. 1. instituti sunt à Deo rerum humanarum quae hominum societati necessariae sunt respectu ad earum curam If it be objected How can these things agree with that which hath been before by us acknowledged that the Civil Magistrate ought to take special care of Religion of the conservation and purgation thereof of the abolishing idolatry and superstition and ought to be Custos utriusque Tabulae of the first as well as second Table I answer That Magistrates are appointed not onely for Civil Policy but for the conservation and purgation of Religion as is expressed in the Confession of Faith of the Church of Scotland before cited we firmly beleeve as a most undoubted truth But when Divines make the object of Magistracy to be onely such things as belong to this life and to humane society they do not mean the object of the Magistrates Care as if he were not to take care of Religion but the object of his Operation The Magistrate himself may not assume the administration of the keys nor the dispensing of Church-censures he can but punish the external man with external punishments Of which more afterwards The seventh difference stands in the Adjuncts For 1. the Ecclesiastical power in Presbyterial or Synodical Assemblies ought not to be exercised without prayer and calling upon the Name of the Lord Matth. 18. 19. There is no such obligation upon the Civil power as that there may be no Civil Court of Justice without prayer 2. In divers cases Civil Jurisdiction hath been and is in the person of one man But no Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction is committed to one man but to an Assembly in which two at least must agree in the thing as is gathered from the Text last cited 3. No private or secret offence ought to be brought before an Ecclesiastical Court except in the case of contumacy and impenitency after previous admonitions This is the ordinary rule not to dispute now extraordinary exceptions from that rule But the Civil power is not bound up by any such ordinary rule For I suppose our opposites will hardly say at least hardly make it good that no Civil injury or breach of Law and Justice being privately committed may be brought before a Civil Court except first there
of baptizing thus I baptize thee in the name of Iesus Christ. But I spake of the action not of the expression even as in the other instance I gave our assembling together is in the name of Christ though we do not say in terminis We are now assembled in the name of Christ. In baptisme Christ doth not command us to say either these words I baptize thee in the Name of Christ or these words I baptize thee in the Name of the Father Son and holy Ghost but we are commanded to do the thing both in the name of Christ as Mediator and in the name of the Father Son and holy Ghost But in different respects A minister of Christ doth both preach and baptize in the name of Christ as Mediator that is vice Christi in Christs stead and having authority for that effect from Christ as Mediator for Christ as Mediator gave us our commission to preach and baptize by Mr. Husseys confession So that to preach and baptize 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we find both of preaching Luk. 24 47. and of baptizing Act. 2. 38. comprehendeth a formall commission power and authority given and derived from Christ I say not that it comprehendeth no more but this it doth comprehend But when Christ biddeth us baptise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto or into or in the name of the Father Son and holy Ghost Mat. 28. 19. this doth relate to the end and effect of baptisme or the good of the baptized if we understand the words properly not the authority of the baptizer as if a formall commission were there given him from the Father Son and holy Ghost So that to baptize one in or unto the name of the Father Son and holy Ghost is properly meant both of sealing the parties right and title to the enjoyment of God himself as their God by covenant and their interest in the love of God the grace of Christ and the communion of the holy Ghost and of dedicating the party to the knowledge profession saith love and obedience of God the Father Son and holy Ghost I return The next branch of my Argument was that we excommunicate in the name of Christ 1 Cor. 5 5. Mr. Hussey pag. 22. saith I make great hast here deliver to Sathan saith he is not to excommunicate c. But grant that it were excommunication c. the decree was Pauls and not the Corinthians What is meant by delivering to Sathan belongs to another debate Call it an Apostolicall act or call it an Ecclesiasticall act or both yet it was done in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ the like whereof we find not in Scripture of any act of the civil Magistrate Why doth he not attend to the drift of the Argument And as to his exceptions they are no other then Prelats Papists and Socinians have made before him and which are answered long agoe That the Apostle commandeth to excommunicate the incestuous man is acknowledged by Mr. Prynne That he who is excommunicated may be truly said to be delivered to Sathan is undeniable for he that is cast out of the Church whose sins are retained on whom the Kingdom of heaven is shut and locked whom neither Christ nor his Church doth owne is delivered to Sathan who reignes without the Church That this censure or punishment of excommunication was a Church act and not an Apostolicall act onely may thus appear 1. The Apostle blameth the Corinthians that it was not sooner done he would not have blamed them that a miracle was not wrought 2. He writeth to them to do it when they were gathered together not to declare or witnesse what the Apostle had done but to joyne with him in the authoritative doing of it vers 4. 5. again he saith to them vers 7. Purge out therfore the old leaven vers 12. Doe not ye judge them that are within vers 13. Put away from among your selves that wicked person 3. It was a censure inflicted by many 2. Cor. 2. 6 not by the Apostle alone but by many 4. The Apostle doth not absolve the man but writeth to them to forgive him 2 Cor. 2. 7. Lastly the Syriack maketh for us which runneth thus vers 4. That in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ you all may be gathered together and I with you in the Spirit with the power of our Lord Iesus Christ vers 5. That you may deliver him to Sathan c. But now at last Mr. Hussey comes home and gives this answer to my third Argument A thing may be said to be done in the name of Christ or of God when men do any thing in confidence that God will assist us so Psal. 20 5. In the name of our God will we set up our banners in confidence God will assist us Thus I hope the Parliament and other Christians may undertake the businesse in the name of Christ c. Secondly In the name of Christ a thing is said to be done that is done in the authority room and place of Christ c. So he pag. 24. seeking a knot in the rush In the first part of his distinction he saith nothing to my Argument neither saith he any more of the Parliament then agreeth to all Christians the poorest and meanest for every Christian servant every Christian Artificer is bound to do whatsoever he doth in the name of Christ Colos. 3. 17. But what is that to the Argument Come to the other member of his distinction The Ministers of Christ do act in the name of Christ that is in the authority room and place of Christ We are Ambassadors for Christ and we preach in Christs stead 2 Cor. 5. 20. This he doth not nor cannot denie which makes good my Argument Why did he not shew us the like concerning Magistracy I suppose he would if he could this is the very point which he had to speak to but hath not done it My fourth Argument against the Magistrates holding of his office of and under and for Christ that is in Christs room and stead as Mediator shall be that which was drawn from Luk. 12. 14. The Jewes were of the same opinion which Mr. Coleman and Mr. Hussey have followed namely that civil government should be put in the hands of Christ which they collected from Ier. 23. 5. He shall execute justice and judgement in the earth and such other Prophecies by them mis-understood And hence it was that one said to Christ Master Speak to my brother that he divide the inheritance with me Our Lords answer was Man who made me a Judge or a divider over you Whatsoever act of authority is done by a Deputy or Vicegerent as representing his Master and Soveraigne may be done by the King himself when personally present If therefore the Magistrate judge civil causes and divide inheritances as the Vicegerent of Christ and of Christ as Mediator then Christ himself when present in the dayes of his flesh had power as Mediator to
in genus but the civil and Ecclesiasticall Courts stand not in one line neither are they of one kind and nature they are disparata non subordinata 3. They who receive appeals have also power to 〈◊〉 the sentence else the appeal is in vain But the Magistrate hath no power to execute the Church ceâ—sure nor to shut out of the Church our opposites themselves being Judges It was not therefore without just cause that Augustine did vâ—ry â—uch â—lame the Donatists for their appealing from the Ecclesiâ—stical Assemblies to the Emperors and civil Câ—urts Epist. 48. and Epist. 162. There are two examples alledged from Scripture for appeals from Ecclesiastical to Civil Courts One is the example of Ieremiah Iâ—…r 26. The other is the example of Paul Act. 25. But neither of the two prove the point For 1. Ieremiah was not censured by the Priests with any Spirituall or Ecclesiastical censure of which alone our controversie is but the Priests took him and said to him Thou shalt surely die Jer. 26. 8. 2. Would God that every Christian Magistrate may protect the servants of God from such unjust sentences and persecuting decrees When Ecclesiasticall Courts are made up of bloody persecuters that is an extraordinary evil which must have an extraordinary remedy 3. Neither yet is there any syllable of Ieremiahs appealing from the Priests to the Princes but the Text saith When the Princes of Judah heard these things then they came up c. verse 10. that is The Princes so soon as they understood that the Priests had taken Ieremiah and had said to him Thou shalt surely die verse 8. And being also informed that all the people were gathered together tumultuously and disorderly against the Prophet verse 9. They thought it their duty to rescue the Prophet from the Priests and people that he might be examined and judged by the civil Court he being challenged and accused as one worthy to die As for Pauls Appellation to Caesar. First It is supposed by our opposites that he appealed from the Ecclesiastical Sanhedrin of the Jews which is a great mistake For he appealed from the Judgement-seat of Festus to Caesar that is from an inâ—eriour civil Court to a superiour civil Court which he had just cause to do for though Festus had not yet given forth any sentence against Paul yet he appeals à gravamine and it was a great grievance indeed while as Festus shew'd himself to be a most corrupt Judge who though the Jews could prove none of those things whereof they accused Paul Act. 25. 7. which should have made Festus to acquit and dismisse him yet being willing to do the Jews a pleasure he would have Paul to go to Ierusalem there to be judged before himself verse 9. Now this was all the favour that the Jews had desired of Festus that he would send Paul to Ierusalem they laying wait in the way to kill him vers 3. No appellation here from the Sanhedrin at Ierusalem where he had not as yet compeered to be examined far lesse could he appeal from any sentence of the Sanhedrin The most which can be with any colour alleadged from the Text is that Paul declined to be judged by the Sanhedrin at Ierusalem they not being his competent and proper Judges in that cause I stand at Caesars Iudgement-seat saith he where I ought to be judged meaning that he was accused as worthy of death for sedition and offending against Caesar whereof he ought to be judged onely at Caesars Tribunall not by the Jews who were no Judges of such matters A declinator of a Judge is one thing and Appellation from his Judgement or sentence is another thing But put the case that Paul had indeed appealâ—d from the Sanhedrin at Ierusalem either it was the civil Sanhedrin or the Ecclesiasticall If the civil it is no President for appeals from Ecclesiastical Courts If the Ecclesiastical yet that serveth not for appeals from Ecclesiasticall Courts in Ecclesiasticall causes for it was a capital crime whereof Paul was accused Nay put the case that Paul had at that time appealed from the Ecclesiastical Sanhedrin in an Ecclesiastical cause yet neither could that help our opposites for the government of the Christian Church and the government of the Jewish Church were at that time separate and distinct so that the Ecclesiastical Court which should have judged of any scandall given by Paul if at all he ought to have been censured had been a Christian Synod not a Jewish Sanhedrin And so much of Appeals Of which Question Triglandius Revius and Cabeljavius have peculiarly and fully written Three famous Academies also of Leyden Groening and Utrecht did give their publike testimonies against appeals from Ecclesiastical to civil Courts And the three Professors of Utrecht in their testimony do obtest all Christians that love truth and peace to be cautious and wary of the Arminian poyson lurking in the contrary Tenent See Cabeljav defensio potestatis Ecclesiasticae pag. 60. It is further objected That thus fixing a spirituall jurisdiction in Church-officers we erect two collateral Powers in the Kingdom the Civil and the Ecclesiastical unlesse all Ecclesiastical Courts be subordinate to Magistracy as to a certain head-ship Answ. There is a subordination of Persons here but a co-ordination of powers A subordination of Persons because as the Ministers of the Church are subject to the civil Magistrate they being members of the Common-wealth or Kingdom So the Magistrate is subject to the Ministers of the Church he being a Church-member The former we assert against Papists who say that the Clergy is not subject to the Magistrate The latter we hold against those who make the Magistrate to be the head of the Church Again a co-ordination of powers because as the subjection of the person of the Christian Magistrate to the Pastors and Elders of the Church in things pertaining to God doth not inferre the subordination of the power and office of the Magistrate to the Church-officers So the subjection of Pastors and Elders to the Magistrate in all civil things as other members of the Common-wealth are subject may well consist with the co-ordination of the Ecclesiastical power with the civil And as it is an error in Papists to make the secular power dependant upon and derived from the Ecclesiasticall power So it is an error in others to make the Ecclesiastical power derived from and dependant upon the civil power for the Ecclesiastical power is derived from Christ Ephes. 4. 11. And now while I am expressing my thoughts I am the more confirmed in the same by falling upon the concession of one who is of a different Judgement For he who wrote Ius Regum in opposition to all spiritual authority exercised under any forme of Ecclesiastical Government doth not withstanding acknowledge pag. 16. Both of them the Magistrate and the Minister have their Commission immediatly from God and each of them are subject to the other without any subordination of offices
for my Argument that he acknowledgeth this Scripture to warrant Synods of Ministers and Elders and the power of these Synods to be not onely consultive but conclusive decisive and obligatory for this I suppose he means by the power to determine controversies and to make Canons for the Churches peace and government else he had concluded nothing against the Independents who yeeld a consultive Synodicall power If any shall yet desire to be more partiâ—ularly satisfied concerning the strength of my present Argument from Act. 15. I will make it out from these particulars following First Here is a power and authority to assemble Synodically and it is an intrinsecall power within the Church it self not adventitioâ—s or extrinsecall from the Magistrate Whence the soundest Protestant writers prove that though the civil Magistrate hath a power of convocating Synods and he ought to do it when the Churches necessity or danger doth call for such a remedy yet this power of his is positive not privative cumulative not destructive And that if the Magistrate be an enemy and persecuter of the Church and of true Religion or cease to do his duty that is to wit in a manifest danger of the Church the Church notwithstanding ought not to be wanting to her self but ought to use the right and authority of convocation which first and forâ—…most remaineth with the Rulers of the Church as may be seen Act. 15. So say the Professors of Leyden in Synops. purior Theol. Disp. 49. Thes. 24. beside diverse others whom I might here cite but that is not now my businesse Secondly Beside the publike debate and deliberation the Synod did also choose and send certain delegates or commissioners to Antioch and wrote by them a Synodical Epistle to the Churches in Antioch Syria and Cilicia I beleeve such Synodical acts of sending Commissioners and letters to the Churches in other Nations or Provinces should now be lookt upon as acts of government if done without the leave of the Magistrate as then Iudas and Silas were sent Thirdly That Synod did exercise and make use of a threefold Ecclesiastical power for remedy of a three-fold Ecclesiastical disease 1. They purge out the leven of false doctrine and heresie by deciding and determining that great controversie whether Circumcision and the keeping of the Ceremoniall Law of Moses were neeessary to salvation They hold forth and declare to the Churches the negative And this they do by the dogmatik power 2. There was a great scandal taken by the beleeving Jewes then not fully instructed and perswaded concerning the abrogation of the Ceremoniall Law by the death of Christ who were so far stumbled and offended at the beleeving Gentiles for their eating of things sacrificed to Idâ—ls and of blood and things strangled that they could not freely nor contentedly converse company and eate together with the Gentiles For remedy whereof the Synod doth require in regard of the law of love edification peace and avoyding of scandall that the Gentiles should abstain from those things as also from fornication which for what cause it is added I do not now dispute And this they do by the Diataktik power 3. There was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a schisme dissention and rent made in the Church by the Judaizing Teachers vers 2. Who clothed themselves with a pretended authority and warrant from the Apostles and Elders at Hierusalem and thereupon got the more following and drew away the more disciples after them For remedy hereof the Synod stigmatizeth and brandeth those men by declaring them to be lyars troublers of the Church and subverters of souls vers 24. And this they do by the Critick power or authority of censures Fourthly The decree and Canon of the Synod which is made imposed emitted and promulgat is authoritative decisive and binding Act. 15. 28. For it seemed good to the holy Ghost and here the Arabick repeateth it seemed good to us to lay upon you no greater burthen then these necessary things That ye abstain c. If it be said that this was but a doctrinal advice It seemed good c. I answer Iosephus Antiq. Iud. lib. 4. cap. 8. speaking of the decree of the supreme Sanhedrin which he that disobeyed was to be put to death calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which seemeth good So likewise in this place the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not meant of an Opinion onely for an Opinion as Schoolmen define it is properly such a 〈◊〉 of or assent to a thing as is evident and firme but not certain So that Opinion cannot be ascribed to the holy Ghost It is therefore here a word of authority and decree as Mr. Leigh in his Critica sacra at the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 noteth out of Châ—…mnitius In which sence the Grecians frequently use it So Stephanus out of Demosthenes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is de reed by the Senate And Budaeus out of Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is certainly appointed to die Observe also the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imposing and burthen They do impose some burthen onely they are carefull to impose no burthen except in necessary things Acts 16. 4. And as they went through the Cities they delivered them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the decrees that were ordained of the Apostles and Elders which were at Hierusalem And here I cannot passe the observation of that gentleman who hath taken so good pains in the Original Tongues Mr. Leigh in his Critica sacra of the New Testament in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wheresoever 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is found in the New-Testament it is put for Decrees or Lawes as Luke 2. 1. Acts 17. 7. it is put for the Decrees of Caesar and Ephes. 2. 15. Colos. 2. 14. for the Ceremonial Lawes of Moses and so frequently by the LXX in the Old Testament for Decrees as Dan. 2. 13. and 3. 10. 29. and 4. 6. for Lawes Dan. 6. 8. Caeterum saith Erasmus upon Act. 16. 4. Dogmata Graeca vox est significans ipsa decreta five placita non doctrinam ut vulgus existimat And whereas some have objected that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are used onely in reference to a doctrinal power as Col. 2. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I answer Budaeus expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be decerno and Col. 2. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Syriack makes it judicamini Erasmus and Bullinger Decretis tenemini Stephanus Beza and Gualther ritibus oneramini the English Translators are ye subject to Ordinances This subjection was not onely to Doctrines but to Commandements vers 22. after the Commandements and Doctrines of men and these commandements though in deed and truth the commandements of men onely at that time were imposed as the Commandements of God and as Ceremoniall Lawes given by Moses The vulgar Latine hath decernitis and Tertullian readeth Sententiam fertis
Classical and Synodical Assemblies and to give a kind of Papal power to the Magistrate yet in this particular he argueth strongly for us and not against us Secondly Where is that Christian Magistracy which hath suppressed or punished all such offences as did fâ—ll under Ecclesiastical cognizance and censure in the Primitive and Apostolick Churches Or where is that Christian Magistrate that will yet undertake to punish all those offences and scandals which were censured in the Apostolick Churches Till some such instance be given this exception against Church-discipline and censures under a Christian Magistrate hath not so much as colour enough Aliae sunt leges Caesarum aliâ—…e Christi aliud Papinianus aliud Paulus noster praecipit saith Hierome in Epitaph Fabiâ—…lae Caesars Lawes and Christs Lawes are not the same but different Papinianus commands one thing Paul another thing Chrysostome Homil. 12. in 1. Epist. ad Cor. tells us that the best and wisest Law-givers had appointed no punishment for fornication for consuming and trifling away of time with playing at dice for gluttony and drunkennesse for Stage-plaies and lascivious whorish gestures therein Is there not some cause to apply all this and much more of this kind even to Christian Law givers and Magistrates Put the case that he who is called a brother as the Apostle speaks that is a member of the visible Church be found grossely ignorant of the Principles of Religion and so far from growing in knowledge that he loseth the knowledge of the Scriptures and of the truth of God which he had for this hath been diverse times observed through neglect of the means or if he be known to neglect ordinaâ—lly prayer in and with his Family and to continue in that offence after admonition or if he live in known or scandalous malice and envie and refuse to be reconciled with his neighbour or if he be a known lyar and dissembler or if by his words and actions he do scandalously and manifestly shew himself covetous drowned in sensuality ambitious proud or if he give a foul scandal by filthy and obscene speeches by lascivious obscene whorish-like gestures or actions where the act it self of adultery or fornication cannot be proved I suppose that for these and such like scandals which are causes deserving not onely the Elderships enquiry and admonition but suspension from the Lords Table the Christian Magistrate neither doth nor by the civil or municipal Laws is bound to arraign and punish all such as are guilty thereof Thirdly whereas Arch-bishop Whitgift Answ. to the Admon pag. 114. did alledge that the Church may not be governed under a Christian Magistrate as it may under a Tyrant which he brings as an exception against ruling Elders and Elderships while he could not denie but such there were in the Primitive Church Mr. Cartwrigh in his Reply pag. 140. answereth that if these Elders under a Tyrant had medled with any office of a Magistrate then there had been some cause why a godly Magistrate being in the Church that office should cease but since they did onely assist the Pastor in matters Ecclesiastical there is no distinction between times of persecution and times of peace as touching the office of Elders The like say I of Church-censures and discipline If the Government of the Church by Presbyteries and Synods if suspension and excommunication in the Apostles times had been an usurping of any thing belonging to the Magistrate then there had been some reason to lay aside all Church-censures and Ecclesiastical Government when the Magistrate turned Christian and willing to do his duty But if not then the civil and Church-government may still remain distinct even where the State is Christian. Fourthly Every Institution or Ordinance of Christ must continue as a perpetual obligation unlesse we can find in the Word that Christ hath given us a dispensation or taken off the obligation and set a period to the Ordinance that it shall continue so long and no longer I mean every Ordinance of Christ must be perpetual which we cannot prove from the Word to be but temporal or extraordinary Now in the Word Christ hath not appointed the governing the Church and correcting scandals to be onely under a Tyrant and to cease under a Christian Magistrate neither is there any such thing held forth in Scripture which yet our opposites must shew if they will make good what they say But contrariwise what Christ delivered to the Apostles and they to the Churches is to be kept and continued till our Lord come again 1 Cor. 11. 23. 26. 1 Tim. 6. 14. and he himself saith Rev. 2. 24. 25. That which ye have already hold fast till I come These things were not spoken to the Apostles to Timothy to the Churches of that time personally for they were not to live till Christs comming again but the charge was given to them in name of and with respect unto all the Ministery and Churches of Christ. Fifthly This exception made against Church-censures under a Christian Magistrate supposeth that such censures will make an interfering and clashing between the civil and Ecclesiastical power But there is no cause for that fear these powers being so hugely differenced in their efficient causes matters formes ends effects objects adjuncts correlations and ultimate terminations as I have made it to appear in the particulars Chap. 4. Sixthly The Churches liberty and power is not to be infringed diminished nor taken away but preserved maintained enlarged and augmented under a Christian Magistrate Were it not a sad case if there should be cause to say that the Churches of Christ have not so much liberty under a Christian Magistrate to keep themselves and the Ordinances from pollution as they had under Pagan and Infidel Magistrates Seventhly Why may not Christian Church-government consist with Christian Magistracy as well as the Jewish Church government did consist with the Jewish Magistracy being of the same Religion Or if we please to look to later Presidents who can be ignorant that civil government and Church-discipline have rather strengthened then destroyed each other not onely in France where the Magistracy is not Protestant but in Scotland in the Low-Countries in Geneva and else-where Eightly We have covenanted to endeavour a Reformation of Church-Government and discipline according to the word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches Now both the Word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches leadeth us to a Church-government distinct from civil Government and the example of the best Reformed Churches doth undeniably lead us to a Church-discipline even where he Magistrate is Christian neither doth the word make any exception of Christian States but contrariwise chargeth us to keep the commandement and Ordinances till Christ come again Ninthly The Magistrate hath other work to do and such as will take up the whole man and if he should take upon him the whole burthen of Church-Government the enquiring into examining and correcting of all
his place against the holy Ghost the said holy Spirit bearing the contrary record to his Conscience Testimonies taken out of the Harmony of the Confessions of the Faith of the 〈◊〉 Churches Râ—printed at London 1643. Pag. 238. Out of the confession of Helvetia FUrthermore there is another power of duty or ministerial power limited out by him who hath full and absolute power and authority And this is more like a Ministry then Dominion For we see that some master doth give unto the steward of his house authority and power over his House and for that cause delivereth him his keyes that he may admit or exclude such as his master will have admitted or excluded According to this power doth the Minister by his office that which the Lord hath commanded him to do and the Lord doth ratifie and confirm that which he doth and will have the deeds of his ministers to be acknowledged and esteemed as his own deeds unto which end are those speeches in the Gospel I will give unto thee the keyes of the Kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou bindest or loosest in earth shall be bound and loosed in heaven Again whose sins soever ye remit they shall be remitted and whose sins soever ye retain they shall be retained But if the minister deal not in all things as his Lord hath commanded him but passe the limits and bounds of Faith then the Lord doth make void that which he doth Wherefore the Ecclesiastical power of the Ministers of the Church is that function whereby they do indeed govern the Church of God but yet so as they do all things in the Church as he hath prescribed in his Word which thing being so done the faithful do esteem them as done of the Lord himself Pag. 250. Out of the confession of Bohemia THe 14th Chapter of Ecclesiastical doctrine is of the Lords keyes of which he saith to Peter I will give thee the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and these keyes are the peculiar function or Ministery and administration of Christ his power and his holy Spirit which power is committed to the Church of Christ and to the Ministers thereof unto the end of the world that they should not onely by preaching publish the holy Gospel although they should do this especially that is should shew forth that Word of true comfort and the joyful message of peace and new tydings of that favour which God offereth but also that to the beleeving and unbeleeving they should publikely or privately denounce and make known to wit to them his favour to these his wrath and that to all in general or to every one in particular that they may wisely receive some into the house of God to the communion of Saints and drive some out from thence and may so through the performance of their Ministery hold in their hand the Scepter of Christ his Kingdom and use the same to the government of Christ his Sheep And after Moreover a manifest example of using the power of the keyes is laid out in that sinner of Corinth and others whom St. Paul together with the Church in that place by the power and authority of our Lord Jesus Christ and of his Spirit threw out from thence and delivered to Sathan and contrariwise after that God had given him grace to repent he absolved him from his sins he took him again into the Church to the communion of Saints and Sacraments and so opened to him the Kingdom of Heaven again By this we may understand that these keyes or this divine function of the Lords is committed and granted to those that have charge of souls and to each several Ecclesiastical Societies whether they be smal or great Of which thing the Lord sayeth to the Churches Verily I say unto you whatsoever ye bind on earth shall be bound in heaven And straight after For where two or three are gathered together in my Name there am I in the middest of them Pag. 253. Out of the French Confession VVE beleeve that this true Church ought to be governed by that regiment or discâ—pline which our Lord Jesus Christ hath established to wit so that there be Pastors Elders and Deacons that the purity of doctrine may be retained vices repressed c. Pag. 257. Out of the Confession of Belgia VVE beleeve that this Church ought to be ruled and governed by that spiritual Regiment which God himself hath delivered in his word so that there be placed in it Pastors and Ministers purely to preach and rightly to administer the holy Sacraments that there be also in it Seniors and Deacons of whom the Senate of the Church might consist that by these means true Religion might be preserved and sincere doctrine in every place retained and spread abroad that vicious and wicked men might after a spiritual manner be rebuked amended and as it were by the bridle of discipline kept within their compasse Pag. 260. Out of the Confession of Auspurge AGain by the Gospel or as they term it by Gods Law Bishops as they be Bishops that is such as have the administration of the Word and Sacraments committed to them have no jurisdiction at all but onely to forgive sin Also to know what is true doctrine and to reject such Doctrine as will not stand with the Gospel and to debarre from the communion of the Church such as are notoriously wicked not by humane force and violence but by the word of God And herein of necessity the Churches ought by the law of God to perform obedience unto them according to the saying of Christ He that heareth you heareth me Upon which place the Observation saith thus To debar the wicked c. To wit by the judgement and verdict of the Presbyterie lawfully gathered together c. A Testimony out of the Ecclesiastical Discipline of the Reformed Churches in France Cap. 5. Art 9. THe knowledge of scandals and the censure or judgement thereof belongeth to the Company of Pastors and Elders Art 15. If it befalleth that besides the admonitions usually made by the Consistories to such as have done amisse there be some other punishment or more rigorous censure to be used It shall then be done either by suspension or privation of the holy communion for a time or by excommunication or cutting off from the Church In which cases the Consistories are to be advised to use all prudence and to make distinction betwixt the one and the other As likewise to ponder and carefully to examine the faults and scandals that are brought before them with all their circumstances to judge warily of the censure which may be required Harmonia Synodorum Belgicarum Cap. 14. Art 7. 8. 9. PEccata sua natura publica aut per admonitionis privatae contemtum publicata ex Consistorii totius arbitrio modo formâ ad aedificationem maximè accomodatis sunt Corrigenda Qui pertinaciter Consistorii admonitiones rejecerit à S. Coenae communione
In the old Testament the originall giveth the name Kahal Church which is the word used in the Hebrew Evangel of Matthew published by Munsterus chap. 18. vers 17. and the Septuagints the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Elders and Rulers of Israel as 1 Chro. 13. 2. 4. 29. 1. 2 Chro. 1. 3. and in other places And that which is said of the Elders Deut. 19. 12. Iâ—…sh 20. â— is said of the Congregation or Church Num. 35. 24. Ios. 20. 6. So Exod. 12. 3. compared with vers 21. The Septuagints also render Kahal by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prov. 26. 26. It was not therefore to any assembly but to an assembly of rulers that causes were brought in the old Testament If we turne to the Heathen Grecians among them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had a power of jurisdiction to judge and determine causes as is manifest from Acts 19. 38. 39. There 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was of two sorts as Suidas Budaeus Stephanus and others have observed 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a lawfull set fixed assembly which met at ordinary diets which is meant in that place of the Acts last cited It was also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because of the jurisdiction and ruling power which was seated in it Wherein I am confirmed by this passage of Aristotle polit lib. 3. cap. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the assembly saith he hath the government or arbitrement of all such things He is speaking of the choosing of Magistrates and of craving an account of their administration 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was indicted and called pro re nata upon some urgent extraordinary cause and it was concio magnatum sâ—…ve optimatum in which the people were not present as in the other It was therefore rightly noted by Passor that Demosthenes useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pro concione magnatum Afterward the Roman Senate was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without an adjection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore among the Heathen Grecians from whom the word came was not any assembly but an assembly which had a jurisdiction or ruling power It shall not be in vaine to adde that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to appeale to a superiour Ruler commeth from the same originall verbe from which commeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. The Church mentioned Matth. 18. 17. hath a forensicall or juridicall power as appeareth by that of the two or three witnesses vers 16. which relateth to a Juridicall proceeding in the trying and punishing of offences as M. Prynne hath observed Peradventure some man will say that the two or three witnesses here are brought in onely to be witnesses to the admonition or to make the admonition the more effectuall and the more to be regarded but not as if any use were to be made of these witnesses to prove the fact or offence it selfe before the Church if there be occasion I answer either it must be supposed here that the trespasse was seen or knowne onely by him that gives the first rebuke privately or that it was also seen or known by those two or three witnesses If the former it is much disputed among Schoolmen whether he that rebukes his offending brother be to proceed any further than a private rebuke for a private offence or whether he is to stop at private rebukes and not to take witnesses with him which divers thinke to be unfit and disallowed as being an officious and unnecessary irritation of the offending brother by the spreading of his shame a making of a private sinne to become scandalous to others as likewise an engaging of witnesses to assist in the admonition and rebuke by a blinde and implicite faith for my part I shall not need here to dispute this point for what ever ought to be done or ought not to be done in this case when the trespasse is known to one onely yet in the other case when besides him that rebukes there are two or three more which can be witnesses of the fact or trespasse committed the trespasse being yet not publiquely divulged it can not be denied that these witnesses of the fact are to be brought unto and confronted with the offender when he cannot be gained by private rebuke and if need be prove it afterward before the Church Which I have before noted out of Durand And Aegidius de Coninck tels us in whatsoever other case witnesses are to be taken or are not to be taken in this case all doe consent that witnesses are to be taken Concerning the taking of witnesses when the trespasse is known to me alone there are three different opinions 1. That when I have rebuked the offender privately and cannot gaine him I am to proceed no further but have done my duty and must leave the event to God 2. That when a secret admonition is not effectuall witnesses are to be taken in case the offender so admonished continue in his sinne or in case his relapse be feared and expected that the witnesses may observe such continuing or relapse in sinne and then assist and joyne in rebuking him and if need be that is in case of his contumacy to prove the fact before the Church 3. That even when his continuance or relapse in sinne can not be observed and so can not be afterward proved by witnesses yet the second admonition is to be given before witnâ—sses when the first admonition given privately hath not gained the offender Of these let the Reader judge T is enough for the point now in hand that when witnesses can be had to prove the trespasse committed they ought to be brought first before the offender and then if he continue obstinate before the Church to prove the fact and they must be three or two at the least which I doe not see how it can be thought necessary if we suppose that the sinne is not known to any but to me alone who give tho first rebuke for if there must be a witnesse of my second admonition why may not one witnesse joyn with me as well as two when I can not have two but one onely willing and ready to â—oyn with me But now a necessity of precept lies on me that I must have two witnesses at least which cannot be otherwise understood but in reference to a forensicall proceeding afterwards if need be 5. That interpretation which now I speak against while it goeth about to avoyd a power of Jurisdiction and Censure in this Text it doth subject him that is reproved by another to a heavier yoke and brings him into a greater servitude For though a man be not disobedient nor contumacious unto any Court Civill or Ecclesiasticall yet if he doth not hearken to such a number as the party offended shall declare the case unto being a greater number then two or three he must be by and by esteemed and avoyded as
a one terrified and chased away 4. It shall not be in vaine to observe here that Gamachaeus in tertiam partem Thomae Quaest. 64. c. 4. though he hold that Christ gave the Sacrament to Iudas whence he argueth that the Sacraments doe infallibly worke ex opere operato where no barre is put though there be no faith nor devotion exercised in the receiver yet he doth immediately move this objection It is unlawfull to give the Sacraments to the unworthy and to such as live in mortall sinne Whereunto he answereth that it is indeed unlawfull to Ministers to give the Sacrament to the unworthy when they can refuse them without scandall a restriction which I suppose M r Prynne dare not owne for if the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of the thing must be determined by the scandall they goe upon a very slippery ground He addeth that it is unlawfull to us to follow Gods example in giving holy things to the unworthy as it is unlawfull to follow his example in the permitting of sinne when we can hinder it The like I finde in Alexander Alensis Summa Theol. part 4. Quaest. 11. membr 2. art 1. sect 4. where he moves this objection in the question whether Christ gave the Sacrament to Iudas Christ himselfe hath commanded Give not that which is holy to dogs c. and it seems he would not doe the contrary of that which himselfe commandeth Unto this objection his answer is that this prohibition lieth indeed upon the Ministers Dispencers of the Sacraments but bindeth not Christ himselfe the Law-maker As long therefore as we are able to prove from Scripture that scandalous persons ought to be keep back from the Sacrament and that it is unlawfull for Church officers to admit such the Erastians doe but weakly helpe themselves by arguing from Christs giving the Sacrament to Iudas Which I have said by way of concession for my opinion is that Christ did upon the matter excommunicate Iudas and that his practice in this very particular is a patterne to us which I hope I have made evident Finally it is observed by Io. Baptista de Rubeis in his Novum rationale divinorum officiorum lib. 1. cap. 24. that this cause of Iudas doth not concerne publique and known scandalous persons but secret and lurking wicked persons when they publikely desire to receive the Sacrament who yet saith he ought to be admonished and dehorted by the Minister that they come not to the Sacrament and if such a one make his desire to receive the Sacrament secretly known to the Minister the Minister ought to refuse him though his sinne be yet secret and not publiquely known But if the sinne be open or manifest then whether the sinner do secretly or openly desire to receive the Sacrament the Minister ought to refuse him CHAP. XI Whether it he a full discharge of duty to admonish a scandalous person of the danger of unworthy communicating And whether a Minister in giving him the Sacrament after such admonition be no way guilty Mr. Prynne pag. 28. stateth the seventh point in difference thus Whether the Minister hath not fully discharged his duty and conscience if he give warning to unworthy communicants of the danger they incurre by their unworthy approaches to the Lords Table and seriously dehort them from comming to it unlesse they repent reforme and come preparedly But here he much mistakes his marke or hitteth it not as may appeare thus First what if we should affirme it as he doth What hath he gained thereby That the Minister hath not the power of keeping backe scandalous persons which cannot adde one dram weight to his cause The power is seated in the Eldership of which the Minister is a principall member even as Aristotle polit lib. 3. cap. 11. tels us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is not the Senator but the Senat that doth rule But if M r Prynne meant to conclude against the suspension of scandalous persons not excommunicated the thing which all along he opposeth he ought to have stated the point thus Whether the Eldership hath not fully discharged their duty c. For every branch of this controversie concerning Suspension which is an act of jurisdiction and censure must be fixed upon the Eldership not upon the Minister There is a huge difference between the Ministers personall duty and the censure of suspension in so much that if the affirmative of this present question as he stateth it were yeelded to him it derogateth nothing from the power of the Eldership to suspend from the Sacrament a person not excommunicate Secondly in the debating of this point he sometimes argueth against the refusing or withholding of the Sacrament by any Minister or Presbytery as pag. 29 30 31. sometimes he argueth that no Ministers private judgement or conscience ought to be the rule of his admitting any to or suspending them from the Sacrament as pag. 32. Which is a confounding together of two most different points Thirdly and if the question should be stated of the Minister his duty that which M r Prynne affirmeth viz. that the Minister hath fully discharged his duty and conscience if he give warning to unworthy communicants of the danger they incurre by their unworthy approaches to the Lords Table and seriously dehort them from comming to it unlesse they repent reforme and come preparedly is erroneous and false for there are other necessary duties incumbent to the Minister in this businesse as 1. he must be earnest in his prayers to God for the conversion and reformation of such unworthy persons else that God would give his Spirit and assistance to the Eldership and others to whom the case shall be brought that they may faithfully doe their duty in restraining such persons or if not so that God would by his owne providence keepe backe such persons or hedge up their way with thornes and make a wall that they shall not finde their pathes to come and prophane the Lords Table 2. The Minister must deale seriously with the Eldership by informations exhortations and admonitions to move them to doe their duty 3. The Minister must give his owne vote and sentence in the Eldership against the admission of such persons 4. If which God forbid the Eldership be not willing to doe their duty but sinfully neglect it the Minister ought to addresse himselfe with his complaints to the superiour Ecclesiasticall assemblies as they lie in their order that they may interpose by their authority to rectifie the mal-administration of the Congregationall Eldership 5. And if it should fall out that a scandalous unworthy person should finde so much favour in the higher assemblies also as that they shall judge him fit to be admitted to the Sacrament yet if the Minister know him certainly to be a scandalous abominable person and be also cleere in his conscience that the matter of scandall is sufficiently
from the Sacrament now in publike agitation is a matter of great moment much difficulty and very circumspectly to be handled established to prevent proâ—anation and scandal on the one hand and arbitrary tyrannical papal domineering power over the Consciences the spiritual priviledges of Christians on the other These are his own words in the preface of his Quaeries whether hath he gone in an even path to avoid both these evills Or whether hath he not declined to the left hand while he shunned the error of the right hand Whether hath he not so gone about to cure the heat of the liver as to leave a cold and phlegmatick stomack uncured And whether doth he not trespasse against that rule of his owne last cited when he adviseth this as the best and onely way to suppresse all kind of sins and to reform and purge the Churches of this Kingdom that the sword of excommunication and suspension be not drawn but onely the sword of the spirit and the sword of the Magistrate Vindic. pag. 57. Finally Whether in this Kingdom there be more cause to fear and apprehend an arbitrary tyrannical papal domineering power over the Consciences of Christians where Church discipline is to be so bounded by authority of Parliament that it be not promiscuously put in the hands of all but of such against whom there shall be no just exception found yea are or shall be chosen by the Congregations themselves who have also lately abjured by a solemn Covenant the Popish and Preâ—atical Government Or whether we ought not to be more afraid and apprehensive that the Ordinances of Christ shall hardly be kept from pollution and the Churches hardly purged from scandals there being many thousands both grossely ignorant and grossely scandalous 4. I desire it may be upon a review seriously considered how little truth wisdom or charity there is in that suggestion of Mr Prynn pag. 57. that the lives of the generality of the people are more strict pious lesse scandalous and licentious in our English Congregations where there hath been powerful preaching without the practice of Excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament then in the Reformed Churches of France Germany Denmark or Scotland for which I appeal to all Travellers c. I confesse it is a matter of great humiliation to the servants of Christ that there is occasion to exercise Church discipline and censures in the Reformed Churches yet this is no other then what was the condition of the Apostolique Churches 2 Cor. 12. 21. I fear saith the Apostle lâ—…st when I come again my God will humble me among you and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already and have not repented of the uncleannesse and fornication and lasciviousnesse which they have committed And this is not the onely Testimony concerning scandals and disorderly walking in those primitive Churches But as for those who are so rigid in their censures against the government of the Reformed Churches I answer to them as Hierome did of the Montanists They are rigid not to the end that themselves also might not commit worse sins but this difference there is between them and us that they are ashamed to confesse their sins as if they were righteous We while we repent do the more easily obtain mercy Mr. Prynn and others of his profession are not very willing that such an Ecclesiastical discipline be established in England as is received and setled in Scotland and other Reformed Churches But if once the like sin-searching sin-discovering and sin-censuring discipline were received and duely executed in England then and not till then such comparisons may if at all they must be made between the lives of the generality of the people in England with those in other Reformed Churches which of them is more or lesse licentious and scandalous A Testimony of Mr. Foxe the Author of the Book of Martyrs taken out of a treatise of his printed at London 1551. entituled De Censura Ecclesiastica Interpellatio J. Foxi the eighth Chapter of which Treatise is here translated out of Latin into English What the are chief obstacles hindering Excommunication THat the thought and care of excommunication hath now so far waxed cold almost in all the Churches is to be ascribed as appeareth unto three sorts of men The first is of those whose minds the wealth of this world and high advancement of dignity do so lift up that they are ashamed to submit the neck to the obedience of Christ. What say these shall that poor fellow lay a yoke on me What should I be subject to this naughty and rude Pastor But let go good Sir your vain swelling empty words how rude soever he be yet if he be your Pastor you must needs be a sheep of the flock whom if he doth rightly instruct so much the more dutifully you must submit But if otherwise it is the fault of the man not of the Ministry To those at least yeeld thy self to be ruled whom thou knowest to be more learned But go to thou which canst not suffer a man to be thy Pastor to whom then wilt thou submit thy self unto Christ himself thou sayest very well forsooth This then is of such importance that Christ for thy cause must again leave the heavens or by his Angels or Arch-Angels feed and govern thee whom these mean men the Pastors do not satisfie But what if it so pleased the Lord by these mean Pastors as thou callest them to cast down and confâ—und all the highest statelynesse and pride of this World even as of old by a few and comtemptible Fishers he subdued not onely the high and conceited opinion of Philosophers but even the Scepters of Kings also Now what will thy boasting magnificence say But hear what Christ himself saith of them whom thou from thy high loftinesse lookâ—st down upon as unworthy He that despiseth you despiseth me saith he And moreover who so despiseth Christ despiseth him from whom he is sent and who said unto him Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee Ask of me and I will give thee the Heathen for thine inheritance and the utmost ends of the earth for thy possission Thou shalt rule them with a rod of yron and break them in peâ—…ces like a pâ—…tters vessel Wherefore seeing thou dost acknowledge so great a Lord so many wayes above all Maiesty whatsoever can be named let it not be grievous to thee my brother whosoever thou art or with how great power soever thou art highly advanced laying aside thy high looks and pride to be humbled under his mighty hand And do not think it a light matter whereas thou entertainest with so great applause and honourable respect an earthly Kings Ambassadors that thou shouldest disdain the Ambassadors of him who alone hath power over all Kings and Lords If thou yeeldest unto a mortal Physitian thy wounds to be handled yea to be cut also and to be burned and seared if need be how commeth
of his Passion this was the onely point of his accusation which was confessed and avouched by himselfe was most aggravated prosecuted and driven home by the Iewes was prevalent with Pilate as the cause of condemning him to die and was mentioned also in the superscription upon his crosse And although in reference to God and in respect of satisfaction to the Divine justice for our sinnes his death was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a price of redemption yet in reference to men who did persecute accuse and condemne him his death was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Martyrs Testimony to seale such a truth This Kingly Office of Iesus Christ as well as his Propheticall is administred and exercised not onely inwardly and invisibly by the working of his Spirit in the soules of particular persons but outwardly also and visibly in the Church as a visible politicall ministeriall body in which he hath appointed his own proper Officers Ambassadours Courts Laws Ordinances Censures and all these administrations to be in his own name as the onely King and Head of the Church This was the thing which Herod and Pilate did and many Princes Potentates and States doe looke upon with so much feare and jealousie as another Government co-ordinate with the civill But what was darke upon the one side to them hath been light upon the other side to those servants of Iesus Christ who have stood contended and sometime suffered much for the Ordinance of Church-Government and Discipline which they looked upon as a part of Christs Kingdome So Bucer So Parker So M. Welseh my countreyman of precious memory who suffered much for the same truth and was ready to seale it with his blood Beside divers others who might be named especially learned Didoclavius in his Altare Damascenum Cap. 1. and throughout I am not ignorant that some have an evill eye upon all government in a Nation distinct from civill Magistracy and if it were in their power they would have all Anti-Erastians and so consequently both Presbyterians and Independents lookt upon as guilty of Treason at least as violaters of and encroachers upon the rights and priviledges of Magistracy in respect of a distinct Ecclesiasticall government And indeed it is no new thing for the most faithfull Ministers of Iesus Christ to be reproached and accused as guilty of Treason which was not onely the lot of M. Calderwood and as hath been now shewed of M. Welsch and those that suffered with him but of M. Knox before them as likewise of many Martyrs and confessors and of the Apostles themselves Yet if we will judge righteous judgement and weigh things in a just ballance we doe not rob the Magistrate of that which is his by giving unto Christ that which is Christs We desire to hold up the honour and greatnesse the power and authority of Magistracy against Papists Anabaptists and all others that despise dominion and speake evill of dignities We doe not compare as Innocentius did the civill and the ecclesiasticall powers to the two great lights that to the Moone this to the Sunne We hold it is proper to Kings Princes and Magistrates to be called Lords and Dominators over their Subjects whom they governe civilly but it is proper to Christ onely to be called Lord and Master in the Spirituall government of the Church and all others that beare office therein ought not to usurpe Dominion therein nor be called Lords but onely Ministers Disciples and Servants We acknowledge and affirme that Magistracy and civill Government in Empires Kingdomes Dominions and Cities is an Ordinance of God for his owne glory and for the great good of mankind so that whoever are enemies to Magistracy they are enemies to mankind and to the revealed will of God That such persons as are placed in authority are to be beloved honoured feared and holden in a most reverend estimation because they are the Lieutenants of God in whose seat God himselfe doth sit and judge We teach that not onely they are appointed for civill policy but also for maintenance of the true Religion and for suppressing of Idolatry and superstition whatsoever We confesse that such as resist the supreame power doing that thing which appertaineth to his charge doe resist Gods Ordinance and therefore cannot be guiltlesse And further we affirme that whosoever deny unto them their ayd counsell and comfort whilest the Princes and Rulers vigilantly travell in execution of their Office that the same men deny their help support and counsell to God who by the presence of his Lieutenant doth crave it of them We know and believe that though we be free we ought wholly in a true faith holily to submit our selves to the Magistrate both with our body and with all our goods and endeavour of mind also to performe faithfulnesse and the oath which we made to him so far forth as his government is not evidently repugnant to him for whose sake we doe reverence the Magistrate That we ought to yeeld unto Kings and other Magistrates in their owne stations feare honour tribute and custome whether they be good men or evill as likewise to obey them in that which is not contrary to the Word of God It being alwaies provided that in things pertaining to our soules and consciences we obey God onely and his holy Word We believe that God hath delivered the Sword into the hands of the Magistrates to wit that offences may be repressed not onely those which are committed against the second Table but also against the first We doe agree and avouch that all men of what dignity condition or state soever they be ought to be subject to their lawfull Magistrates and pay unto them Subsidies and Tributes and obey them in all things which are not repugnant to the word of God Also they must poure out their prayers for them that God would vouchsafe to direct them in all their actions and that we may lead a peaceable and quiet life under them with all godlinesse and honesty We teach that it doth belong to the authority and duty of the Magistrate to forbid and if need be to punish such sinnes as are committed against the ten Commandements or the Law naturall as likewise to adde unto the Law naturall some other lawes defining the circumstances of the naturall Law and to keepe and maintaine the same by punishing the transgressors We hold that the lawes of the Realme may punish Christian men with death for heynous and grievous offences And that it is lawfull for Christian men at the command of the Magistrate to beare Arme and to serve in just warres All these things we doe sincerely really constantly faithfully and cheerfully yeeld unto and assert in behalfe of the civill Magistrate So that the cause which I now take in hand doth not depresse but exalt doth not weaken but strengthen Magistracy I doe not plead against
the power of the Sword when I plead for the power of the Keys These two are most distinct they ought not to be confounded neither need they to clash or interfeere between themselves The controversie is not about taking from the Magistrate what is his but about giving to Christ that which is his We hold a reciprocall subordination of persons but a coordination of powers As the Ministers and others of the Ecclesiastical estate are subject to the Magistrate civill so ought the person of the Magistrate be subject to the Church Spiritually and in Ecclesiasticall government And the exercise of both these jurisdictions cannot stand in one person ordinarily Againe b The Magistrate neither ought to preach minister the Sacraments nor execute the censures of the Church nor yet prescribe any rule how it should be done but command the Ministers to observe the rule commanded in the Word and punish the transgressors by civill meanes The Ministers exerce not the civill Jurisdiction but teach the Magistrate how it should be exercised according to the word The Laws and Statutes of Geneva doe at once ratifie the Ecclesiasticall Presbyteriall power of Iurisdiction or censure and withall appoint that Ministers shall not take upon them any civill jurisdiction but where there shall be need of compulsion or civill punishments that this be done by the Magistrate Yea under a Popish Magistrate as in France and even under the Turke himselfe many Churches doe enjoy not onely the Word and Sacraments but a free Church government and Discipline within themselves rectio disciplinae libera which is thought no prejudice to the civill government they that governe the Churches having no dominion nor share of Magistracy Vide D. Chytraei orat de statu Ecclesiarum in Graecia c. I know well that there are other horrid calumnies and mis-representations of Presbyteriall Government besides that of encroaching upon Magistracy but they are as false as they are foule And although we goe upon this disadvantage which Demosthenes being loadened with a heavy charge and grievous aspersions by Aeschines did complaine of that though by right both parties should be heard yet the generality of men doe with pleasure hearken to reproaches and calumnies but take little or no pleasure to heare mens clearing of themselves or their cause and that his adversary had chosen that which was more pleasant leaving to him that which was more tedious Neverthelesse I must needs expect from all such as are conscionable and faithfull in this Cause and Covenant that their eares shall not be open to calumnies and shut upon more favourable informations And however let the worst be said which malice it selfe can devise it shall be no small comfort to me that our Lord and Master hath said Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you and shal say all manner of evill against you falsely for my names sake I know also that a Government and Discipline in the Church the thing which I now undertake to plead for is a very displeasing thing to those that would faine enjoy liberty either of pernicious errors or grosse prophannesse But as Maimonides saith well we must not judge of the easinesse or heavinesse of a Law according to the affections and lust of any evill man being rash in judgement and given to the worst vices but according to the understanding of one who is most perfect among men like unto whom according to the Law all others ought to be More Nevochim part 2. Cap. 39. No marvell that the licentious hate that way wherein they shall finde themselves hemmed in if not hedged up with thornes And that they may the more flatter themselves in their sinfull licentiousnesse they imagine that Christs yoke is easie and his burthen light to the flesh as well as to the Spirit to carnall as well as to spirituall men For my part if I have learned Christ aright I hold it for a sure principle that in so farre as a man is spirituall and regenerate in as farre his flesh is under a yoake and in so farre as he is unregenerate in as farre his flesh is sine jugo without a yoke The healing of the spirit is not without the smiting of the flesh When I speake of this Divine Ordinance of Church Government my meaning is not to allow muchlesse to animate any in the too severe and over strict exercise of Ecclesiasticall discipline and censures It was observed by Hierome as one of the errors of the Montanists Illi ad omne pene delictum Ecclesiae obserant fores They shut the Church doore that is they excommunicate and shut out of the Church almost at every offence I confesse the greater part are more apt to faile in the defect then in the excesse and are like to come too short rather than to goe too farre Yet a failing there may be and hath been both waies The best things whether in Church or State have been actually abused and may be so againe through the error and corruption of men The holy Scripture it selfe is abused to the greatest mischiefes in the world though in its owne nature it serves for the greatest good in the world The abuse of a thing which is necessary and especially of a divine Ordinance whether such abuse be feared or felt ought not may not prejudice the thing it selfe My purpose and endeavour shall be wherein I beseech the Lord to help my infirmities to own the thing to disowne the abuses of the thing to point out the path of Christs Ordinance without allowing either rigour against such as ought to be tenderly dealt with or too much lenity towards such as must be saved with feare and pulled out of the fire or at all any aberration to the right or left hand I have had much adoe to gaine so many â—…orae subâ—…isivae from the works of my publique calling as might suffice for this worke I confesse it hath cost me much paines and I thinke I may say without presumption he that will goe about solidly to answer it will finde it no easie matter Subitane lucubrations will not doe it But if any man shall by unanswerable contrary reasons or evidenees discover error or mistake in any of my principles let truth have the victory let God have the glory Onely this favour I may say this justice I shall protest for First that my principles and conclusions may be rightly apprehended and that I may not be charged with any absurd dangerous or odious assertion unlesse my own words be faithfully cited from which that assertion shall be gathered yea also without concealing my explanations qualifications or restrictions if any such there be Which rule to my best observation I have not transgressed in reference to the Opposites Secondly that as I have not dealt with their Nauci but with their Nucleus I have not scratched at their shell but taken out their kernell such as it
King of all Principalities powers and Dominions then he is as Mediator head and King of Heathenish and Turkish Principality Power might and Dominion and when the Apostle wrote this to the Ephesians it must be granted according to Mr. Husseys glosse that Christ as Mediator was head and King of the Romane Emperour and that Caesar held his office of and under Christ as Mediator for if head of all Principality how shall they except any I further brought severall reasons from the Text it self The first was this The honour and dignity of Jesus Christ there spoken of hath place not onely in this world but in that which is to come vers 21 But the Kingdom and Government which is given to Christ as Mediator shall not continue in the World to come Mr. Hussey answereth pag. 41. this is Ignoratio el nehi it followeth not that which belongeth to him in reference to the World to come belongeth not to him as Mediator therefore that Government that is given to him in reference to this World is not given to him as Mediator But still he beggs what is in Question and divideth asunder what the Text coupleth together not onely in this World but also in that which is to come here is a rising and heightning but no contradistinction nothing here of one exaltation in reference to the World to come another in reference to this World but that exaltation of Christ above every name that is named which this Text speaks of beginnes in this World and shall continue in the World to come Calvin in Eph. 1. 21. Seculi autem futuri disertam facit mentionem ut significet non temporalem esse Christi excellentiam sed aeternam He makes expresse mention of the World to come that he may signifie Christs excellency not to be temporal but eternal This doth well agree to the dignity excellency glory and honour of Christ but it cannot be said that Christ shall for ever continue in his Kingly Office as Mediator The second reason which I fetcht from the Text was from vers 22. He hath put all things under his feet that is all things except the Church saith Zanchius But all things are not yet put under his feet except in respect of Gods decree It is not yet done actually Heb. 2. 8. Now Christ reignes as Mediator before all things be put under his feet not after all things are put under his feet which is clear 1 Cor. 15. 25. Act. 2. 34 35. Mr. Husseys reply pag. 41. 42. saith that the Church is not here to be excepted but Church and all is here put under Christs feet which he proveth by Heb. 2. 8. He left nothing that is not put under him But this cannot be understood to be actually done for the next words say But now we see not yet all things put under him and if not done actually but in respect of Gods decree and fore-knowledge according to the sence I gave out of Hierome on Eph. 1. 22. how can it strengthen him in this particular We see not yet This yet shall not expire till the end when Christ shall put down all authority and power And now when it is said He hath put all things under his feet Ephes. 1. 22. that the Church is not meant to be comprehended but to be excepted in that place as Zanchius saith may thus appear the Apostle distinguisheth the all things from the Church and calls the Church the body of Christ and him the head to that body but the all things are put under Christs feet his body is not under his feet but under the head and he over all things for so runs the Text and hath put all things under his feet and gave him to be the head over all things to the Church which is his body And whereas Mr. Hussey distinguisheth between Christs putting all his enemies under his feet 1 Cor. 15. 25. and the Fathers putting all things under his feet Ibid. vers 27. and maketh this latter to be an actual putting under him of friends foes Church and all whence it seems he would have it to follow that Christ reignes as Mediator even after all things are put under his feet He is herein easily confuted from Heb. 2. ◠Where God the Father his putting all things under Christs feet is plainly declared to be a thing to come and not yet actually done The next reason which I gave out of the Text was from those words And gave him to be the head over all thiags to the Church Christs headship and his Government as Mediator are commensurable Christ is a head to none but to his Church These words of mine Mr. Hussey changeth thus he is head over none saith Mr. Gilespie but his Church and then he addeth Is this to argue out of Scripture or rather to deny and outface the Scripture the Scripture saith he is over all See what unconscionable impudent boldnesse this is to cite my words yea in a different character too that his Reader may beleeve it the better and yet to change not onely my words but my meaning I purposely kept my self to the Text that Christ is a head to none but to his Church yet he that is the Churches head is over all things And since Mr. Hussey will needs hold that Christ as Mediator is head of all things which the Text saith not what were the consequence hereof The Text saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over all things not over all persons onely So Heb. 2 7 8. compared with Psal. 8. 6 7. Whence it followes by Mr. Husseys principles which I tremble to mention that Christ as Mediator is Head and King not onely of men but of sheep oxen fowles and fishes Behold how dangerous it is for men to be wise above that which is written The last reason which I brought from the last verse was this The Church is there called Christs fulnesse in reference to his Headship This Mr. Hussey saith seemeth to come tolerably from the Text but the next words that which makes him full and compleat so farre as he is a Head or King he calls a fallacy How commeth this word King in here saith he First here he yeelds that the Church makes Christ full and compleat so farre as he is a Head whence it followeth that as Mediator he is onely the Churches head and there is no other body of Christ but the Church for if the Church be his fulnesse his compleat body there can be no other body of Christ. Doth not this destroy what he hath been arguing for that Christ as Mediator is head of all Principality and Power And for the word King it may well come in where Head commeth for is not Christs Kingdom as Mediator commensurable with his Headship as Mediator Is he as Mediator King to any to whom he is not Head Surely this very answer as it is his last so it really yeeldeth the cause The tenth objection is that which I my self
moved to prevent my Antagonists Christ is called the Head of all Principality and Power Col. 2. 10. To this I answered out of Bullinger Gualther and Tossanus the scope and meaning of the Apostle is to shew that Christ is true God and therefore we must not understand the Apostle to speak of Christs headship as he is Mediator but as he is the natural and eternal Sonne of God Mr. Hussey pag. 34. thinks it is no good consequence the Apostle speaks not of Christ as Mediator because he speaks of him as true God Is not Christ saith he true God as Mediator I answer As Mediator he is God-man But he must remember the Argument is urged to prove the subordination of all Principality and power to Jesus Christ as Mediator Now let him prove that the Apostle speaketh there of Christ as Mediator I say he speaketh of Christ as God He cannot conclude against what I said except he argue thus that which Christ is as God he is as Mediator which is false as I have made it appear else-where Well but Mr. Hussey proves from the Text that Christ is there spoken of as Mediator vers 9 10. For in him dwelleth the fulnesse of the God-head bodily and ye are compleat in him which is the head of all Principality and power But he draweth no argument from the words Neither is there any thing in them which maketh against me The Apostle shews them that the man Jesus Christ is also true God equal and consubstantial with the Father for the very fulnesse of the God-head is in him that is he is fully and compleatly God so that saith Calvin they who desire something more then Christ must desire something more then God Wherefore our Writers make the right use of this place when they bring it against the Socinians to prove the God-head of Christ. See Christian. Becman exercit 9. This fulnesse of the God-head is in Christ bodily that is either personally to distinguish him from the holy men of God who were inspired by the holy Ghost or substantially as others take the Word in opposition to the Tabernacle and Temple in which the God-head was typically Ye are compleat in him saith the Apostle meaning because he is compleatly God so that we need not invocate or worship Angels as if we were not compleat in Christ. Mr. Hussey admitteth what I said concerning the scope of the place to teach the Colossians not to worship Angels because servants But saith he may they not worship Christ as Mediator yes doubtlesse they may No doubt he that is Mediator must be worshipped because he is God Christ God-man is the object of divine adoration and his God-head is the cause of that adoration but whether he is to be worshipped because he is Mediator or under this formall consideration as Mediator and whether the Mediator ought to be therefore adored with divine adoration because he is Mediator is res altioris indaginis If Mr. Hussey please to read and consider what divers School men have said upon that point as Aquinas tertia part quaest 25. art 1. 2. Alex. Alensis Sum. Theol. part 3. quaest 30. membr 2. Suarez in tertiam part Thomae Disp. 53. sect 1. Valentia Comment in Tho. Tom. 4. Disp. 1. quaest 24. punct 1. Tannerus Theol. Scholast Tom. 4. Disp. 1. quaest 7. Dub. 7. But much more if he please to read Disputatio de adoratione Christi habita inter Faustum Socinum Christianum Francken and above all Dr. Voetius select disput ex poster part Theol. Disp. 14. An Christus qua Mediator sit adorandus Then I beleeve he will be more wary and cautious what he holds concerning that Question But I must not be ledd out of my way to multiply Questions unnecessarily All that I said was that the Apostle teacheth the Colossians not to worship Angels because they are servants but Christ the Son of the living God who is the Head and Lord of Angels and in that place the Apostle speaketh of the honour which is due to Christ as God and if we would know in what sence the Apostle calls Christ the Head of all Principality and Power see how he expounds himsel Coloss. 1. 15 16 17. speaking of the God-head of Jesus Christ. Finally If Mr. Hussey will prove any thing from Coloss. 2. 10. against us he must prove that those words which is the head of all Principality and power are meant in reference not onely to the Angels but to Civil Magistrates and next that they are meant of Christ not onely as God but as Mediator Both which he hath to prove for they are not yet proved CHAP. VII Arguments for the Negative of that Question formerly propounded MY Arguments against the derivation of Magistracy from Jesus Christ as Mediator and against the Magistrates holding of his office of and under Christ as Mediator are these First This Doctrine doth evacuate and nullifie the civil Authority and Government of all Heathen or Pagan Magistratâ— for which way was the authority of Government derived from Christ and from him as Mediator to a Pagan Magistrate or Emperour If he hath not his power from Christ as Mediator then he is but an usurper and hath no just title to reign according to their Principles which hold that all government even civil is given to C rist and to him as Mediator Mr. Hussey forsooth doth learnedly yeeld the argument and answereth pag. 20. that not onely it is a sin to be a Heathen but the government of a Heathen is sinfull and unlawfull for which he gives this reason Whatsoever is not of faith is sin He might as well conclude in that sence that the best vertues of the Heathen were sin because not of faith that is accidentally sin in respect of the end or manner of doing not materially or in their own nature Vpon the same reason he must conclude that the government of a Christian Magistrate is unlawfull if it be not of faith as oftimes it is not through the blindnesse and corruption of mens hearts who govern But whether is the government of a Heathen Magistrate per se simpliciter ex natura sua unlawful and sinful Whether hath he any just right or title to Government and Magistracy If his title to civil Magistracie be just and if his government be in it self materially and substantially lawful then he must have a Commission from Christ and from him as Mediator This I suppose cannot be Mr. Husseys sence for he hath not answered one syllable to the argument tending that way But if the Government of an Heathen Magistrate be in it self materially substantially and in the nature of the tenure sinfull and unlawfull so that as long as he remains an Heathen he hath no reall right nor true title to Government but onely a pretended and usurped title which must needs be Mr. Husseys sence if he hath answered any thing at all to my Argument then he goeth crosse not onely