Testament when nothing hinders but that Kings may be ministers and ministers Kings CHAPTER XVIII The cause of mistakes in stating the nature of the church and calling that the true church which is not Three acceptions of the word church in holy writ The meaning of the word church Math. 18. v. 17. IN treating of the church I conceive a world of writers both Papists and Protestants might have spared themselves much labour about the nature power truenesse fallibility antiquity succession of it if both parties had not walked in the dark and if they had agreed upon some few and very easie common principles consonant to holy Scripture and reason How many volumes on our side are written to state how far the Romish church is a true church to vindicate us from schisme to prove that we have a right succession of churches power and ministry that the English church is a true Catholick church that the reformed in France have likewise a right to that title One party yields more then needs must and fearing to want for themselves a right of church-succession and Baptisme they will acknowledge the Romish church to be a true church and yet with such metaphysicall reservations and modifications that from a metaphysicall goodnesse they insensibly descend to a morall making of a magistrates power an ecclesiast call of a cadaver and carkasse a living body of an aggregation of churches under one presbytery of the same extent with the jurisdiction of the magistrate the only true church of Christ This made the late English hierarchy conceive that their best course was to approach as near as they could to the Romish yea to be one church with them that otherwise they could not make their power calling and succession good nor clear themselves from the guilt of schisme So that as all parties have been equally mistaken in their grounds so have they hardly understood one another raising doubts where there were none some by that weakning their own cause and strengthening that of their adversaries who took all concessions for truths putting their opposites to very great straights For not knowing well how to deny the church of Rome to be a true church and that salvation is to be had in it and not being able to shew an uninterrupted succession from the Apostles time as the Romanists can do nor vindicate themselves from schisme each party is very eager to call his neighbour schismatick rending the seamlesse coat of Jesus Christ that name being liberally bestowed by the Romanists upon the Protestants and by some of these upon those that adhere to the dissenting brethren each of them Papists and Presbyterians challenging that seamlesse coat of Christ even right of church and ecclesiasticall power and therefore for fear of schism rendings they will be sure to cast lots upon it that they may have it whole and entire Whereas had both been well informed of the nature of church and of schisme and that suceession is a needlesse plea neither availing the Romanists a whit nor prejudicing any way the reformers Baronius Bellarmin Stapleton as well as Whitaker Chamier and the like might have saved the world so much labour in reading them the first in putting the reformers upon the task of proving themselves a true church and the latter in taking off the aspersion of schismaticks for then no doubt all the hard task had been on the Romanists side who being not able to make invalid our grounds about the nature of the church the power of the church the calling of pastors their succession and of schisme had been wholly put upon vindicating themselves and not weakning our title for it had been to little purpose so long as we had retained the same grounds which do put us into a firm and unmoveable possession About the nature of schisme Dr. Owen whose grounds which is very strange though we never conferred our notes together are those that I stand upon in treating of the nature of the church hath so well resolved the world that it is but in vain for any one either to write after him or against him And having in my Paraenesis handled the nature of the church intending here only an extract of it I will say only so much of it as will make way to what I mainly intend to prove viz. that the parity and independency of churches each from the other in power of exercising all church acts best agreeth not only with Scripture antiquity and the opinion of Zuinglius Musculus Bullingerus and Erastus but also with the sense of the seven dissenting brethren sitting twelve years agone in Westminster together with the other members of the assembly of Divines yea that many forrain divines and other learned men Salmasius for one no way intending to favour the cause we have in hand have been strong patrons of it in severall of their writings and treating of the right of churches and of the power of the magistrate over them have laid the same foundations as we I find in holy writ specially in the new Testament that the word Church is taken properly three wayes I. for the mysticall body of Jesus Christ the elect justifyed and redeemed whereof the Gospell is full thus Hebr. 12. v. 23. and Ephes 5. v. 26 27. c. II. for the universality of men through the world outwardly called by the preaching of the word yielding an externall obedience to the Gospell and professing visibly Christianity of this mention is made 1 Tim. 3. v. 15. and 2 Tim. 2. v. 20. III. for a particular visible congregation with one accord meeting in one place for the worship of God according to his institution which is spoken of Rom. 16. v. 4. Gal. 1. v. 2. 1 Cor. 16. v. 1. 2 Cor. 8. v. 1. 1 Thess 2. v. 14. Act. 9. v. 31. Act. 15. v. 41. 1 Cor. 16. v. 19. yea such a church as is confined within a private family as Rom. 16. v. 5. St. Hierome upon the 1. of the Galatians takes the word church properly either for a particular church or for that church called the Body of Christ which hath neither spot nor wrinkle dupliciter ecclesia potest dici ea quae non habet maculam rugam vere est Christi corpus ea quae in Christi nomine congregatur relating to the words of Christ Matth. 18. v. 19. where two or three c. which cannot be understood of a nationall church There be two places in the new Testament where the word church is taken otherwise namely Act. 19. v. 41. for a concourse of people Matth. 18. v. 17. a place so much controverted and which when we speak of excommunication requireth we should insist upon it It sufficeth here to say that if by it were meant an ecclesiasticall assembly of pastors and elders some other parallel to it might be found in the old or new Testament I am sure as there is none in the new so neither in the old
Paraenesis and in my Corollarie in a letter of his written but a few weeks before he died where his judgement is wholly consonant to my opinion that all church-government is prudentiall arbitrary and taken up by consent for necessity of order and not for conscience Besides I have the testimony of a very reverend preacher in a famous church in Normandy in a letter of his to me wherein after he hath delivered his own judgement concerning the book he addeth that of one of his fellow-ministers in that church in these words One of my collegues who hath read your first book hath given this testimony of it That he is much satisfied upon the reading of it and that your opinion is so far from weakning our discipline that on the contrary it doth rather streng then it and places it upon its true and naturall bottom Geneva's excommunication had the greater influence upon the minds of the Non-conformists and Puritans in England for the respect they bare to Calvin more then to the Hierarchy metaphorphosed from Romish to English For whatever were the thoughts of some Romish Episcopall Doctors such as the English Hierarchy hath alwayes had the practise of all Bishops courts witnesseth that excommunication was but a law of the Land and of the opiscopall jurisdiction annexed to the Crown Excommunication was not much feared since Prince and subjects left off to be afraid of the Popes thunderbolts Wiclâ—ff begun first to pluck off â—ts vizard and to condemne both the abuse and the use of excommunication for the council of Constance recon'd up amongst his errours this tenet That it was a comfort to the faithfull church that excommunication and suspension and such like lying and feigned censures are not grounded on the law of Christ but are craftily devised by Antichrist But that it may appear that Wicliff held no other excommunication then that which is made in the Court of Heaven the 13. article objected to him as an errour clearly sheweth it Whoever leaves off preaching or hearing the word of God because of mans excommunication they are excommunicated and shall be so held in the day of judgement for betrayers of Christ and the 11. article saith that no man must excommunicate another except he knows him to be excommunicated by God In short whereas our brethren the Scots held that all jurisdiction of ecclesiasticall assemblies synods and presbyteries was derived from Jesus Christ the English people at least the magistrate who would never permit the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction to get up held no jurisdiction but such as was derived from him for even from King Edward the sixths time the soveraign Princes have been very shie of Bishops keeping any courts or calling synods but only in their name Our brethren the Scots had their excommunication from Geneva as well as the reformed churches of France only Andrew Melvin did mightily improve and heighten it But they and the Geneva churches have this disadvantage which those of France never had that these have two pleas for their discipline and excommunication The one is the necessity of a confederate discipline taken up by consent under a cross magistrate by which plea they may justify all the acts of their jurisdiction the other plea if the first prove not strong enough they have in common with all other reformed churches living under an orthodox magistrate and that plea is the discipline of Christ which as it is a second string to the bow of the reformed churches of France if the first should break so it is the only string and hold that the Dutch Scotish and Geneva churches must hold by so that if they cannot make good their jus Divinum of discipline and excommunication they have no plea at all for their jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate as the reformed churches of France have This book would swell too much if I should make it good as I have done in my Paraenesis and Corollarium that they have outgone all the reformed in the task of building an empire within the empire of another or in the endeavour to settle a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate having while they strive to run furthest from Popery gone so far about that they have joined issue with Popery in that particular I find three main causes why in Scotland more then in any other nation where religion was reformed from popery the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction hath highest lifted up its head The first is it was not so much any humour or designe of the godly people as opportunity that brought it in For reformation taking its beginning there not at the head but at the foot and in opposition to a persecuting magistrate it was not possible to settle the pure worship of God without a government and jurisdiction assumed within the jurisdiction and distinct from that of the magistrate They having had it some time under a Romish magistrate conceived it was to continue in the like manner under a reformed magistrate and so turned the nenessity of a confederate discipline taken up by consent as it was by the faithfull people of Iuda under a heathen magistrate and by the reformed churches of France under a Christian into a necessity of Divine ordinance which being much countenanced by the great ones of the land who rescued the soveraign magistrate from the Popish party and brought him up from his infancy in the reformed religion the same men who were assertors of the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction against the magistrate when he was no friend of theirs had a fair opportunity to keep it still up when the magistrate was their friend and in their power and possession who when he was grown up to years found the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction too deep rooted for him to master and overbalancing the power that by right as all other magistrates and Kings in the world he was to have over all causes matters and persons So that from that time when King Iames in his â—…per years came to understand that he was a King and no King till he came to be King of great Britain we read of nothing but clashings and conflicts betwixt church court Parliament and ecclesiasticall assembly it being impossible that two coordinate jurisdictions and of the same nature could stand together amongst one and the same people in the same countrey Another cause is that the members of Parliament specially the nobility and gentry being also members of ecclesiasticall judicatories and the ecclesiasticalls having over and above an addition of strength by all the ministers of the land who were not members of Parliament it could not otherwise fall out but that the jurisdiction assumed in churches presbyteries synods and assemblies should not only appear distinct from that of the magistrate but also be raised to a greater height A third reason is that the Kings of Scotland having never had that majesty power revenue and splendour that other Kings abroad had and yet the land full of nobility and gentry
for succession is Romanish Ministers are no successours in their ministery to the Iudaicall Priests but to the Prophets 133 Chap. XIII The nature of the ministers power and of that of binding and loosing the power of the keyes Amyraldus and Mr. Lightfoots judicious exposition of the power of binding and loosing The power of governing and ruling is not the ecclesiasticall contended for Mr. Gillespies arguments answered 142 Chap. XIV That the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing are not committed to all church-officers but to the ministers of the Gospell only 155 Chap. XV. That God hath not given to the church-officers of the Gospell a certain platform of government and that it is arbitrary and of humane institution and therefore not to be administred by a power distinct from the humane 161 Chap. XVI The 31. chapter of the confession made by the Rever Assembly examined The use of synods Two things are humbly represented first that for a re-union of jurisdictions over all persons and in all causes a convocation made up of ministers only be re-established during the sitting of Parliament the second is that ministers may be put into the same capacity as all other ranks of free-born people to sit and vote in Parliaments Of the power of synods and that of the magistrate in calling of them The synod of the Apostles was extraordinary not exemplary The exception of the brethren of Scotland against the 2. article of the 31. chapter of the confession examined The uses and abuses of synods that they are not the way to compose differences in matters of religion if their canons are beyond counsells and advices 166 Chap. XVII That the Iewish Church-officers had not a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate Mr. Gillespies distinction that they were not materially but formally distinct examined The argument of Amyraldus that though they had a distinct jurisdiction yet the example of the church of the Iewes is no pattern to the Christian church discussed and proved to be of no validity 192 Chap. XVIII The cause of mistakes in stating the nature of the church and calling that the true church which is not Three acceptions of the word Church in holy writ The meaning of the word Church Matth. 18. v. 17. 206 Chap. XIX That a particular assembly of Christians meeting in one place about the worship of God is the only true visible church mentioned in Scripture That that church considered as an assembly of Christians bringeth forth other kinds of acts then it doth considered as a society of men by which the nature and extent of the power of a private church is made clear and evident 213 Chap. XX. That the power attributed to private churches by the reverend dissenting brethren doth very well accord with the power of magistracy in matters of religion as it is held by Erastus Bullingerus Musculus Grotius Mr. Selden and Mr. Coleman This same is proved by reason and by the testimony of Mr. Burroughs writing the sense of all his brethren as also by the practise of the churches in New-England 222 Chap. XXI That a church made up of many particular churches under one presbytery invested with a judiciall power over them is not of the institution of Christ 234 Chap. XXII That the greatest opposers of the dissenting brethren namely Salmasius Amyraldus and others have laid down the same grounds for the right and power of particular churches and so confuted rather their own fancies then invalidated the tenets of the brethren The question whether Rome be a true church briefly resolved That Amesius and Iohn Mestrezat late minister of Paris in their writings have held the power of private churches to be independent from any church-judicatory 242 Chap. XXIII The consistency of the right and power of private churches with the magistrates power in ordering publick worship proved by the example of the Iewes that they had through all the land particular convocations synagogues or churches called also colledges or schools where the Prophets and sons of the Prophets taught especially on the sabbath-day that they were independent from any church-judicatory How synagogues were altered from their first institution and that being converted into Christian churches they retained the same right power and way of government 251 Chap. XXIV That the Christian churches under heathens were governed by a confederate discipline or a power of magistracy as the synagogues were appointing men which Ambrose calls elders to decide such matters as otherwise were to come under the magistrates cognizance This practise is grounded upon 1 Cor. 6. v. 1 2 c. and confirmed by Origen Iustin Martyr Ambrose and Mr. Lightfoot That the power of these elders continued still under Christian Emperours with some alteration they erecting in lieu of them Episcopall courts That all church-power was the Emperours power That the very heathen magistrates knew no other but that all power was annexed to them 267 Chap. XXV That ecclesiasticall jurisdiction as it is held by the Romish church better agreeth with reason and the letter of the Scripture then that of the presbyterian brethren That some Romanists have ascribed more power to the magistrate in sacred things then the presbyterian brethren 287 Chap. XXVI The description of excommunication in terms received by most of our opposites though otherwise variously defined by them That for four thousand years no such excommunication was in use either among the heathens or the Iewes An answer to some objections That the legall uncleannesse was no type of the morall That the Priests judging of the leprosy is no plea for excommunication nor for ecclesiasticall jurisdiction 298 Chap. XXVII That neither in the time of Ezra such an excommunication began That the casting out of the synagogue did not answer that excommunication That there is no ground for it nor practise of it in the new Testament 307 Chap. XXVIII That the whole context Matth. 18. v. 15 16 17 and 18. maketh nothing for excommunication neither Iudas non-admission if granted to the Eucharist nor the delivering of the incestuous person to Satan nor yet the self-examination required 1 Cor. 11. 316 Chap. XXIX That excommunication is contrary to common sense and reason 326 Chap. XXX That excommunication was mainly subservient to the working of the mystery of iniquity That the corrupting of the doctrine of the Eucharist made way for excommunication 337 Chap. XXXI The History of excommunication from the first reformation from Popery how it was received in Geneva but not settled without disputes and clashings betwixt the consistory and the magistrate 342 Chap. XXXII A continuation of the History of excommunication in France the Low-Countreys Scotland the Palatinate How it came to pass that amongst reformed states the Scottish ecclesiasticall jurisdiction ascended to such a height What plea the reformed churches in France have for excommunication That it is more justifiable among them then in churches under an orthodox magistrate 353 Chap. XXXIII The judgement of some
for expressely all kinds of debates about matters criminall not criminall were to be judged by them jointly So then the elders of the Jewish church cannot be a fit parallel with the elders of the church of the new Testament since the elders under the old Testament were judges even in capitall causes but under the new they were not besides that the elders under the old Testament were to make but one councell one judicatorie with the Commonwealth with the Judges and Princes of the land but neither the Rev. Assembly nor M. Gillespie will allow the elders of the new Testament to have any thing to do to sit as church-officers with the judges of the land and to decide causes betwixt blood and blood 3. But the eleventh verse concerning Amariah the chief Priest appointed to be over all matters of the Lord and Zebadiah for the Kings businesses doth further clear that there was no such thing amongst the Jewes as a government distinct from that of the magistrate though many cry here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if it were a strong place for a distinct and double jurisdiction for it is plain here that Amariah the chief Priest was appointed to be as Mr. Gillespie confesseth p. 146. the Nasi or Prince of the Sanedrim and chief ruler of the Senate whereof mention is made in the 8. verse and which was made up of Priests Levites and the elders of the people of Israel and judged of such causes and matters as usually a high court of Parliament do This Amariah in that place of chief-presidency in the Senate is said to be over all matters of the Lord because as all manner of lawes constitutions and ordinances were all from God the author and latour and from Moses under God the giver of them all so every matter or businesse concerning any of those lawes violated and broken or that needeth further explanation by reason of the infinity of cases and the seeming contradictions between one law and another was truely and properly called the matter of the Lord and was debated in the Senate for no doubt all causes about ceremoniall lawes and judgements concerning degrees of marriages inheritances and such like were as well matter of the Lord as the judgement of leprosy sacrifices and the like In that Senate which debated such matters of the Lord was Amariah Mr. Speaker Mr. Gâ—…spie acknowledgeth that he was the ruler and judge of the people for thus he speaketh p. 140. that the high Priest was a ruler of the people as well as of the Priests and Levites is man fest from Act. 23. v. 5. where Paul applyeth to the high Priest that law Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people Thus Mâ— Gillespie pleadeth for us with as strong arguments as we could ever produce for our selves viz. 1. that the jurisdiction of the high Priest as such was not distinct from that of the magistrate neither before nor since Christs time 2. that his jurisdiction was not annexed to the Priestly office but to the office of a judge and â—uler of the land 3. that he judged of the matters of the Lord as judge ruler and Prince of the Senate and not as a high Priest 4. that there being not two Senates as Mr. Gillespie acknowledgeth in Christs time nor before his time one ecclesiasticall another civil that one Sâ—nate that was standing could not properly be called either ecclesiasticall or civil â—ut the magistrates Senate endowed with one and that externall jurisdiction in all causes and matters and over all persons 4. Now for Zebadiah the case is clear that he was appointed either Steward or Mr. Controller it may be chamberlain of the Kings houshold or rather a principall minister not of State but set over his familie lands armies moneys jewels c. 5. This alone that Iehosaphat appointed both Amariah and Zebadiah to be chief magistrates and rulers one over the matters of God the other of the King evinceth that all jurisdiction was united in the King depended on him and was subordinate to him For it is plain out of Iosephus lib. 9. cap. 1. that these two magistrates Amariah and Zebadiah and the setting of them over the matter of God and the businesse of the King was an act of sovereign jurisdiction or of magistracy summos magistratus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex amicorum numero praeposuit 6. The matter judged in that Sanedrim where Amariah was Speaker argueth that it was no ecclesiasticall court Mr. Gillespie understandeth betwixt blood and blood not of capitall offences but concerning forbidden degrees of marriages Which though it were he must prove that matrimoniall causes belonged to the cognizance not of civil but of ecclesiasticall tribunals which no man will ever be able to prove 7. To take away all doubt but that Amariah was appointed the chief ruler of the people of God under the King in all matters that concerned the lawes given by God to his people of whatever nature they were and Zebadiah Governour under the King of the Kings house and affairs there is a pregnant place 1 Chronic. 26. vers 30. and 32. For in the 30. verse Hashabiah and his brethren even one thousand and seven hundred officers on this side Iordan westward are said to be set over the businesse of the Lord and the service of the King and 〈◊〉 the 32. it is said that David made ruiers over the Reubenites the Gadites and the half tribe of Manasseh for every matter pertaining to God and the affairs of the King First here we see neither Priests nor Levites but men of other tribes set promiscuously over both the matter of the Lord and the affairs of the King 2. Who seeth not that the matter of God is the matter of the Commonwealth even all judgements lawes constitutions appointed by God by which the people of God were judged and righted and that the affairs of the King were those that pertain to the Kings demeasnes rents armie c. 3. And who seeth not that all the affairs and all the matters that needed to be ordered and regulated in those places and tribes are divided into two classes viz. into the matter of God or the people of God and the affairs that respected the Kings own businesse and service 4. What absurdity then would it be to imagine that the affairs of the King were civil businesses judged and handled by secular men and the matter of God ecclesiasticall causes judged by ecclesiasticall men in an ecclesiasticall judicatory For even admitting Mr. Gillespies sense why should not the affairs of the church be the affairs of the King since he was set by God and appointed to reform it and why should not the affairs of the Commonwealth be the affairs of God 8. Mr. Gillespie p. 14. is of another mind then he meaneth to be p. 140. whence we have quoted him for us for in the 14. page he approveth that the reverend and learned assembly of
change for the better or hinder a change for the worse The King or another magistrate as he doth not ordain so he doth not depose formally as I may so speak or administratorily yet he doth it of himself not only by his counsell command and authority for he may command it when there is just cause of deposing a minister to those that have that power in the church who in that case and there being just cause for it if they do not obey and do what he commandeth are subject not only to wrath but also to Gods judgement Ministers as ministers are subjects to the soveraign magistrate why then should it not be lawfull to appeal from the judgement of subjects to the supreme magistrate and why may it not be lawfull for the supreme magistrate to review the judgements of his subjects to ratify them if they be good and to abrogate them if they be bad There is a subjection of the magistrate to the ecclesiasticall senat but not of jurisdiction as under a command but of direction and counsell CHAPTER XXXIII The judgement of some Divines yet living both of the argument in hand and of the writings of the Author Of some mens strong prejudices against harsh censures of him I Have through all this book and in the first section of my Corollarium proved that I have digressed nothing in my Paraenesis from Scripture reason about the right of churches and the magistrates power in matters of religion but my opinion is also confirmed by two kinds of authorities of learned and orthodox Divines The first kind of authorities is of those that for the main concur with me or rather I with them such are Zuinglius Musculus Bullingerus Gualterus Mestrezat Mr. Jeremiah Burroughs Mr. Lightfoot c. The second kind is of those that though in generall they profess to be for a church-government distinct from that of the magistrate yet if one take notice of all the positions concerning that argument which each of them admit and grant will be found jointly though not every one of them considered a part to say as much as I just as the Protestants doctrine will be found in all though not in each of the Romish authors overcome by the evidence of truth in the handling of some points controverted betwixt them and us as Scotus confesseth that Transubstantiation hath no ground in Scripture Cajetan denyeth the Popish indulgences Bellarmin after he hath much heightned the merit of works concludeth with a â—utissimum est and flieth to the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith as the safest anchor to stay a staggering Christian Jansenius is right in the doctrine of grace all the rest in some positions or other hold with us And of this kind are Bucer Martyr Jewell Zanchius Reynolds Camero Rivet and many more who besides by yielding an inch have given us a whole handfull to believe that what we have discoursed of the nature of power lawes judgement the right of churches and the magistrates power in matters of religion is both reason and Scripture For whoever admits as most of these authors do that the judgements of Pastors in presbyteries synods are subordinate to that of the soveraign Christian magistrate and that appeals from church-judicatories to the magistrate are grounded upon Scripture reason and the practise of all nations and besides saith that the magistrate is the supreme governour and head of the church over all causes and persons whoever I say grants these to be truths must needs overthrow ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and power of excommunication except it be in subordination to and dependently on the magistrate But among all the reformed Divines who appear in the throng of those that hold an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and a government distinct from that of the magistrate none hath delivered positions in print so near the language of Mr. Coleman as Ludovicus Cappellus pastor and Professor at Saumur yet living hath done which passing currant for truth from the mouth of Cappellus if they had fallen from Mr. Coleman would have been taken by our brethren the Scots for pernicious and dangerous tenets and mere Erastianisme In the first part of his Theses Salmurienses de potestate regimine Ecclesiae thes 12. he saith that pastors have properly no other jurisdiction then that which subdueth the affections of the world and the flesh when the spirit of Christ in the word restraineth the assaults of Satan that there is no other authority of governing the church then what is seated in Christ the head when by the efficacy of his spirit he enlighteneth the mind and convinceth the conscience In his 40. thesis he saith that the constitutions of the church have authority no further then as they agree with reason In his 41. and 42. he puts equall stresse of duty upon the magistrate in governing and ordering the church the commonwealth as being keeper of one table as well as the other These are his words in Latin Porro his de rebus dispiciendi atque statuendi ita penes ecclesiam hoc est ecclesiasticos quos vâ—cant viros est potestas ut si magistratus pius Christianus sit fierâ—id non debeat non modo sine ejus consilio conscientia verum etiam sine ejus authoritate qua ea quae videbuntur in hoc genere conducibilia confirmentur vimque legis obtineant Is nempe est utriusque divinae legis Tabulae vindex atque custos ad quem propterea pertinet etiam pastores si cessent vel peccent in officium movere objurgare ubi opus fuerit castigare denique prospicere atque providere ut omnia tum in ecclesia tum in republica seu politia recte ordinate fiant utque ordinis legitime constituti turbatores violatores pro merito puniantur This he seemeth to speak after Pareus in his Miscellanea Catechetica art 11. aphoris 18. where he layeth upon the magistrate a greater duty in governing the church then the commonwealth and more in keeping the first table then the second Hoc vero jus gubernandi ecclesias sacra Scriptura disertim magistratui attribuit ut ei quemadmodum tenetur procurare ut bonum civile in foro judiciis legitime administretur ita non minor imo longe major ejus cura esse debeat ut jus Divinum bonum illud animarum hoc est vera religio pietas subditis suis in ecclesia scholis ad aeternam eorum salutem proponatur juxta legem testimonium idem docent exempla laudatissimorum regum Davidis c. Sic Paulus affatur Christianos Romanos Minister est Dei tuo bono ubi intelligit omne bonum tam civile terrenum quam ecclesiasticum seu spirituale secus namque magistratus homini Christiano non plus commodaret quam infideli Ac sane dolendum est rectius in hoc capite sensisse olim ethnicos qui unanimi consensu regi suo demandarunt
other part in the other senate which is very impertinent and a needlesse multiplication of businesses yet those two jurisdictions must at length be resolved into an integrall one as when Protectour Lords and Commons that make up one Parliament must unanimously agree that all the votes and orders shall end in the same law and act I confesse there can hardly be clashing of powers judgements votes betwixt these two supreme senates such as Mr. Gillespie supposeth so long as the same men are members of both senates but withall I should count it a needlesse and senselesse multiplication of senates and that in vain the same matter and cause were to be decided by two coordinate senates when as one senate would serve the turn for however at length the two senates as they meet in the same persons so must they in the same accord and agreement which is all one as if it were but one jurisdiction Again it is observable that diversity of things and persons to which lawes and constitutions have relation doth not constitute a diversity of power and jurisdiction specially when the same men are to make the same lawes and constitutions for as the same men making lawes about navigation and the militia cannot be said to act from two powers and jurisdictions they are invested with so neither if the same men do make lawes as for example about Gods worship and the militia Briefly I believe Sir Thomas More in all his Utopia cannot parallel such a piece of constitution of state made up of two jurisdictions both coordinate subordinate each to the other materially the same not formally where of the same men are members A happy state indeed in which there can be no clashing except the same man be opposite to himself or that the members of the ecclesiasticall senate forget to day what they decreed yesterday when they met in a civil senate But since these two senates are materially the same men what need we give them severall names and formes for some accidentall circumstances of time and place either because they do not sit in the same place or that they are upon severall businesses must the same members of Parliament sitting to day upon religion be called an ecclesiasticall senate acting by an ecclesiasticall power and to morrow sitting to order the militia of the state it may be in another place be called a civil or military senate acting by a civil or military power But most of those that are for ecclesiasticall presbyterian jurisdiction finding no probability in the opinion of Mr. Gillespie viz. that among the Jewes there was a jurisdiction in the hands of church-officers distinct from that of the magistrate go another way and admit willingly an identity of jurisdiction but withall say that from the coalition of jurisdictions amongst the Jewes it cannot be inferred that the same ought to be under the Gospell that that church in its pedagogy is no pattern to the church in its maturity thus speaketh Amyraldus in his book of the government of the church chap. 3. p. 91. Whoever commits these two powers into the hands of the same persons he not only brings back the church into its infancy as if it were still under the pedagogy of the law but also casts it into that confusion from which the condition of those times did deliver it A man upon better grounds may invert this paralogisme and make use of this reasoning of Amyraldus to prove the quite contrary to what he drives at and so imitate smiths who with the same tool pull out drive in a nayl for had the Jewes had a government of the church distinct from that of the Commonwealth I would thence inferre there is no further need among Christians of such a division but rather of a coalition of powers that the Jewes being rude and weak in knowledge under a burdensome administration loaden with ceremonies and legall rites where the sixth part of the people was either judge elder leader Priest Prophet Levite or officer in the Leviticall service had need to have many keepers guardians tutours many helps of government so the governours might be very well parted into ecclesiasticall and civil and so the whole government might be shared betwixt the two supreme powers the keepers of each having wherewithall to employ themselves but the Christian church being wholly freed from the burdensome administration of lawes and officers and having no platform of government neither hath it need of an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction when there is no ecclesiasticall law or constitution Thus were I of Mr. Gillespies opinion that among the Jewes the government of the church was distinct from that of the Commonwealth I would speak in the language and words of Amyraldus and infer that for the same reason that the Jewes had a double jurisdiction the Christians may be very well without it But the opinion of Amyraldus that there was no distinction of jurisdiction among the Jewes rendereth his inference for a double jurisdiction under the Gospell much more groundlesse weak and absurd for if under a burdensome administration when they had need of many pedagogues and schoolmasters yet they were governed without distinct government of church and state much lesse do the Christians need such a distinct government seeing they are freed from the necessity of having so many schoolmasters guides watch-men and masters to govern them and teach them so many rudiments and unriddle them all the ceremonies besides that sure God never gives distinct governours but also he giveth a distinct law and discipline to be a rule to govern by which yet God never did Though I am so far of the opinion of Amyraldus that the government of the church was not distinct from that of the state yet I am not of his mind in this to think that identity of government would bring a confusion in Christian states for I count that identity so needfull and necessary whether the state be never so much or never so little burdened by men lawes constitutions and businesses to dispatch that in a state loaden with lawes and businesses as the Commonwealth of the Jewes was two jurisdictions coordinate would have brought an horrible confusion and multiplication of suits and businesses and in a state lesse incumbered with lawes and businesses that double jurisdiction would still bring more work then need be if there was but one jurisdiction The argument of Mr. Gillespie to prove that there were two coordinate jurisdictions among the Jewes because of the wide division and distinction of offices amongst them neither the King being to take upon him the Priesthood nor the Priest the Kingdom as it makes nothing for him so doth it rather plead for an identity of jurisdiction under the new Testament for if when the functions were so distinct that the King could not offer incense and be Priest nor the Priest King yet there was no distinction of jurisdictions much lesse is that distinction needfull under the new