trembling but as we have out-passed those ten Lepers in our uncleanness so we may not come short of them in their holy fear and faith for as their fear made them stand afar off so their faith made them lift up their voices and say Jesus Master have mercy on us S. Luc. 17. 12 13. then will he give us such a purity as will not onely make us shew our selves to the Priest but also to our God such a purity as will wash our eyes to see him and much more our hearts to love him for so saith S. Peter Act. 15. 9. purisying their hearts by faith not a faith which costs the purse no alms the body no fasting the soul no praying for no true Israelite will ever offer that unto the Lord which cost him nothing 2 Sam. 24. 24. but a faith which so purifies the soul by knowing the truth as much more by obeying it for so saith the same Apostle Seeing you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren see that you love one another with a pure heart fervently 1 S. Pet. 1. 22. this is the purity of the true Religion it purifies the soul not onely by faith but also by obedience and by love which yet are now generally farthest from many men who would fain be thought to come nearest Purity Thus we have seen Gods truth in his understanding his goodness in his will and his purity in his action it still remains that we consider his Liberty as belonging to them all for Liberty being nothing else but the dominion and power of action must needs be originally in the understanding which alone is able to judge and deliberate of what is to be done what not formally in the will which resolves to do or not to do but effectually 't is onely in the action which is the product of the said deliberate resolution this liberty is now briefly to be handled First as it is in God and then as it is in Religion for being the service of God Gods Liberty is seen in five respects in that he is free from sin free from misery free from obligation free from servitude and free from coaction which is the reason that he can both will and do what and when and where himself pleaseth I need not insist on the proof of these for to name them is to prove them nor can any man deny Gods Liberty in any of these respects but he must deny him to be God and in all these same respects we may see and must acknowlege the Liberty of Religion and to deny it to be free in any of these is to deny it to be Religion that is to say the service of God and to make it to be state policy that is to say the service of men First Religion is free from sin for the superstition and faction and profaneness and other sins that are so rife among Christians to the dishonour of Christ and the reproach of Christendome is a rust that cleaves to the men who are little better then iron not to the Religion which is as pure as the Refiners fire and therefore it is not safe nor fit to say of any order or kinde of Christians that their Religion is rebellion and their faith is faction though we cannot deny of too too many orders and kindes of men who profess Religion that they are both rebellious and factious Secondly Religion is free from misery ask the three children in the fiery furnace they will say their Religion had made them persecuted they will not say that it had made them miserable they profess that they were delivered into the hands of lawless enemies most hatefull apostates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meaning sure those of their own brethren which had renounced the Law of Moses and their Religion and helped the Babylonians to persecute and infest Jerusalem and to an unjust King and the most wicked in all the world 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus those blessed Martyrs will tell you they were in persecution the greatest that ever was but they will not tell you they were in misery nay it seems they told the quite contrary for none else could have told it but from their mouths that the angel of the Lord came down into the oven and smote the flame of fire and made the midst of the furnace as it had been a moist whistling wind but you will say these men were partial witnesses in their own cause therefore ask their persecutors they will tell you the same for the Princes Governours and Captains and the Kings Counsellours being gathered together saw these men upon whose bodies the fire had no power nor was an hair of their head singed neither were their coats changed nor the smell of fire had passed on them nay ask Nebuchadnezzar himself who was the authour of the persecution and he will tell you that though he had caused these holy men to be so much afflicted yet he could not cause them to be miserable for at that instant when he had thought they had been burnt to ashes he heard them sing in the flames as saith the Greek Translation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that probably made him look about to see whence that melody proceeded and finding so sweet a breath to come from the blast of his fire he was astonied and rose up in haste and went to the mouth of the furnace which before bade him keep his distance in that it consumed his officers and called forth the holy and blessed Martyrs who having been delivered from a present death could not be looked on but as men newly risen from the dead Thirdly Religion is free from obligation there is no greater humane obligation then that of nature and there is no greater natural obligation then that which we owe to our Parents yet that may not be alledged to keep us from serving God so Aquinas determines the case Si ergo cultus parentum abstrahat nos a cultu Dei non jam esset pietatis parentum insistere cultui contra Deum ideo in tali casu dimittinda sunt officia pietatis in parentes propter divinum Religionis cultum 22 ae qu. 101. art 4. If our duty to our Parents take us away from our duty to our God as if the Father should command his son to turn rebel or Idolater or the like we must forsake our parents and cleave to God and shew the prevalency of that duty we owe to God by being undutifull to our parents in such a case again there is no civil obligation greater then that we owe to our Governours yet if they command us to sin against God by not speaking nor teaching by not praying nor preaching in the Name of Iesus we have our answer put into our mouths and God put it into our hearts lest atheism get possession there in stead of Christ whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken
labour that they may be strengthened by piety and godliness yet will I not enter upon a particular enumeration of Gods communicable Properties I have been too long already upon this argument much less upon a particular explication of them for it will be sufficient for my purpose which is the advancement of the true Religion in the hearts and lives of men if I briefly insist onely upon these three to which all the rest may be reduced and they are Truth in his Understanding Goodness in his Will and Purity in his Action for we cannot better consider Gods Activity then in the Purity of his Action unto which we must also annex a short discourse of Liberty as belonging to all three that is to say to Understanding and Will and Action And these three Properties of Truth Goodness Purity as they are eminently in God and evidences of his perfection so are they also eminent in Religion the service of God And first of the Truth of God and of Religion God is true by a metaphysical and by a moral Truth First By a metaphysical Truth as having the true knowledge of all things Psa. 139. 2. thou understandest my thoughts long before God understandeth our thoughts before they are the angels not when they are and therefore they are defective in truth because defective in understanding for Truth metaphysically is a conformity of the thing with the understanding and accordingly our blessed Saviour is particularly called the Truth as being the Omniscient Wisdome of God and the eternal Understanding of the Father even as the holy Ghost is the eternal Love both of Father and Son Secondly God is True by a moral Truth as having his Affection Expression Action agreeable to his knowledge and that in three respects 1. As Truth is opposed to Falshood for God neither wills nor speaks an untruth 2. As Truth is opposed to Dissimulation for God neither dissembleth nor deceiveth 3. As Truth is opposed to Inconstancy for God changeth not his judgement in truths declared or determined he changeth not the event in truths foretold or prophesied for in promises he keeps his word and his truth if man perform the conditions in threats he may not keep his word and yet keep his truth because they are but conditional And as for deceiving the Prophets Ezek. 14. 9. and 1 King 22. 23. we generally and truly answer Tradit diabolo decipiendos he delivereth them over to the devil to be deceived by him so saith the Text Because they received not the love of the Truth that they might be saved for this cause God shall send them strong delusions that they should beleeve a lie that they all might be damned who beleeved not the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness 2 Thes. 2. 10 11 12. a text that gives us a fearful but yet a full account of all those strong delusions among men which led directly to the Father of lies the first step was a voluntary unrighteousness in not loving the truth the second step is a strong delusion in beleeving a lie the third step God keep them from treading in that who have trodden in the two former is a necessary damnation both for not loving the truth and for having pleasure in lies but still God is true though every man be a liar for God deceiveth the Prophet Ez◠14. 9. as he hardeneth the heart Exod. 10. 1. permissivè non efficienter permissively no◠efficaciously by not inhibiting or not purging those ill qualities that are already is the heart not by infusing any ill qualities into it and therefore though he saith I have hardened Pharaohs heart yet he saith unto us Harden not your own hearts and accordingly he threatneth in Ezekiel to destroy such a prophet from the midst of his people whose heart was hardned so fa◠as to deceive himself and others whereas he could not in justice destroy him onely for being that which himself had made him nay this permission is most plainly set forth in that parable of 1 Kin. 22. for all that God doth there is onely to let the evil spirit go forth that is not to inhibite him from going and deceiving not to send him down from heaven For it is evident that the evil spirit never did and never can come into heaven again since he was first thrown down from thence And thus briefly God is True Metaphysically and Morally Metaphysical truth consisting in the right apprehension of things as they are in themselves Moral truth in the right affection and profession of things as they are apprehended and this profession is either in word by veracity or in action by sincerity or in continuance of action by constancy so that moral truth is opposed to falshood because 't is the same with reality to dissimulation because 't is the same with sincerity and to wavering and floating because 't is the same with certainty And this same metaphysical and moral truth is also in Religion passing from the Master into his service for the Father seeketh such to worship him who worship him as he is that is who worship him in spirit because he is a Spirit and who worship him in truth because he is the Truth S. John 4. 23 24. The worship in spirit points at the metaphysical truth of Religion which requires a true apprehension of God the worship in truth points at the moral truth of Religion which requires an Affection Profession Action agreeable to that true apprehension and for both these hath our own Church taught us to pray Collect 7th Sunday after Tri. Graff in our hearts the love of thy Name Increase in us true Religion nourish us with all goodness and of thy great mercy keep us in the same Do you look for the metaphysical Truth of Religion 'T is in the knowledge of Gods Name which must be presupposed before the love of it since no man can love what he doth not know that you know God by his true Name such as himself hath proclaimed Exod. 32. 5 6 7. or that you apprehend God as he is not set up to your self an idol in stead of God as do all those who worship not the Father by the Son in the unity of the Spirit Again do you look for the moral truth of Religion 'T is in the love of Gods Name that you love him according to your knowledge or that you have your affection agreeable to your apprehension for to know God and not to love him is in effect to proclaim you do not truly know him since the same God is the first Truth and ground of our knowledge and also the last good and cause of our love and you may here likewise finde this moral truth of Religion in all respects First in its Reality for it is the very true Religion opposed to falshood or superstition 't is indeed Gods Name Secondly in its Sincerity or Fidelity for it is all Goodness not onely in the tongue but also in the heart
expostulates not with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 filii hominis with the rout or meaner sort but with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 filii viri with the Grandees and chiefest of the people Capita populi alloquitur Primates Ductores called by others Ordines regni he calls out upon the chiefest or principal men the Trustees of the nation and lays the rebellion to their charge as indeed saith he they are generally the causes of all grand miscarriages in the people wherefore it is said Num. 25. 4. Take all the heads of the people and hang them up before the Lord these saith he do most deserve but will least endure to be reproved Non ferunt talem Ecclesiasten qui delinquentes Magistratus corripiat The Minister may not be suffered to tell the Magistrate when he is a delinquent and and indeed saith he few Ministers are willing to take upon them that dangerous part of their office what therefore can be expected but that God should send the Turk or some such extraordinary scourge You will think him a Prophet if you consider how Germany hath been scourged to whip us with scorpions since we regard not his other chastisements but however the Prophet David for he saith this as a Prophet not as a King in Gods not in his own name reproves these great ones in the first place and his reproof consists of two parts first that they blasphemed his honour that is reviled his government which for Subjects to do to their Prince is in the Septuagints phrase to be little better then Sots 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say they Secondly that they did love vanity and seek after leasing Quòdres vanas impossiviles studiosè tentabant that they laboured with might and main to compass that which was impossible and consequently laboured in vain Totius populi rebellionem vanitatem esse vidit ac mendacium They thought they could do great matters by raising up the people against their King but he looking upon his God with the eye of faith and upon their actions with the eye of Religion which is a spiritual not a carnal eye measuring the strength of a party by their cause not by their number calls all their contrivances against him but a lie and vanity a meer lie to deceive them and vanitie to deceive it self After his reproof follows his instruction in the third and fourth verses Quòd non tam adversùs se quà m adversùs Dominum rebellando in surgunt That they did not so much rebell or rise up against him as against God who had chosen him which God was now his Protectour and would in due time be his avenger He will hear me Comminatur adversariis futurum ut nihil contra se efficiant quantumvis moliantur He tells his adversaries they should never be able to prevail to throw him upon his knees was the way to keep his crown upon his head for though they would not yèt God would hear him therefore they were best retreat from their furious march against him and retire into their own consciences v. 4. Stand in aw and sin not or Be ye angry and sin not for so the Septuagint renders the words and S. Paul justifies their translation Eph. 4. 26. by his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we may joyn them together Stand in aw and sin not by being angry with your King or be ye angry and sin not be so angry with him as not to sin in your anger not to provoke the King of Kings Commune with your own hearts not comment upon his actions much less pretend Religion for your rebellion as if you could offer an acceptable sacrifice to God whiles your King lay bound upon the altar therefore he saith v. 5. Offer the sacrifice of righteousness nam omnino verisimile est Davidem iniqua hîc illorum not are sacrificia dum hortatur ut sacrificia justitiae sacrificent he doth seem to blame their ungodly sacrifices in that he calls upon them to offer the sacrifice of righteousness and particularly intimates that sacrifice of Absalom of which it is said 2 Sam. 15. 12. Qûmque immolaret victimas facta est conspiratio magna Whiles they offered sacrifices the conspiracy waxed strong Absalom had pretended a Vow a Covenant which he had made with God v. 7. Absalom said unto the King I pray thee let me go and pay my vow which I have vowed unto the Lord in Hebron but he intended nothing less then Religion onely to use that as a cloke for his rebellion to cover it or as a colour to disguise it hence the people did at first resort to him For it was in their simplicity they knew not any thing v. 11. onely Achitophel may well be suppposed to have been at first the grand contriver because he was all along the grand counseller and yet even he will not seem to come to the conspiracie but rather to the sacrifice because forsooth he had been formerly one of Davids Counsellers therefore he comes not till Absalom sends for him and he sends for him whiles he offers sacrifices v. 12. that the sacrifice not the conspiracie might be thought the reason of his coming thus he could mock men but he could not mock God who takes from him that grace which he had abused to his pretences not applied to his practices though he came to this rebellion by sacrificing yet he went from it by hanging his great wisdom and policie which at first deceived others at last deceived himself which may teach us That nothing can so soon destroy Religion as to use it for a pretence of rebellion a sacrifice that is offered for a conspiracie will at last offer up the conspiratours Achitophel then put the halter about his neck to hang himself when he put the sacrifice upon his conspiracie to blaspheme his God but I may not deviate from the footsteps of my authour who will needs follow Absalom and his conspiratours to the next Psalm also which saith he doth likewise concern the same argument Psalm 5. verses 4 5 6. For thou art a God that hast no pleasure in wickedness neither shall any evil dwell with thee such as be foolish shall not stand in thy sight for thou hatest all them that work vanity Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing the Lord will abhor both the bloud-thirsty and the deceitfull man Notat autem his versibus conjuratorum Absalomi impietatem insipientiam dolos crudelitatem impii erant erga Deum rebellando Uncto Dei Insipientes quòd impossibilia sibique ipsis noxia tentabant Dolosi ac mendaces quòd quum hactenus habiti fuerant ministri Regis malitiosè contra eum conjurârunt Crudeles quòd necem Regi machinabantur so Musculus In these verses he sets forth the impiety folly treachery and cruelty of Absaloms conspiratours they were impious towards God for rebelling against the Lords Anointed they were foolish and unwise in thémselves for attempting impossibilities they were treacherous and
false to the people for pretending to be the Kings Ministers when they were conspiratours and they were cruel to the King for complotting his death and destruction by which we may see what it is in the judgement of Gods word and those Divines that follow it to say unto a King What doest thou It is no less then to be guilty of wickedness of malice of folly of leasing of vanity of cruelty and of hypocrisie and who they are that say it even wicked malicious foolish vain lying bloud-thirsty and deceitfull men which brings me to discuss the second thing wherein consists a Kings Supremacie which is this that there is no Power above him a violence there may be above him a power there cannot be for Who can say unto him What doest thou Our Saviour Christ saith unto Pilate Thou couldest have no power at all against me except it were given thee from above S. John 19. 11. If then Subjects have any power against or above their Sovereign let them shew when and where and how it is given them from above for to say 't is given them by the people is to say 't is given them from below not from above from below as low as earth we are sure for they are but Flii terrae sons of the earth if not as low as hell and indeed this doctrine seems to have risen from the bottomless pit which is like to throw so many souls down headlong thither but certainly not from above for the Doctrine which is from above is like the wisdome which is from thence first pure then peaceable gentle and easie to be intreated full of mercy and good fruits without partiality or wrangling without hypocrisie Jam. 3. 17. But this doctrine is altogether impure unpeaceable ungentle hard to be intreated resolves upon non-addresses 't is void of mercy and all good fruits never without very great partiality or wrangling and greater hypocrisie therefore it cannot be from above The doctrine and wisdom from above saith Per me Reges regnant By me Kings reign Prov. 8. 25. which very Text Pope Adrian in his epistle to Charles the great of France alledgeth to justifie that expression of Constantine and Irene in their writings at the second Council of Nice Per eum qui conregnat nobis Deus a strange expression of theirs By him who reigneth together with us that is God yet had it been more strange if in stead of writing God their Fellow-Sovereign they had writ the people so but yet this expression being justified by a Pope so many hundred years after Christ may well perswade a moderate Papist to turn Protestant and confess that the power of Kings depends not upon the Pope however it must perswade a modest Protestant not to turn Pagan and profess that the power of Kings depends upon the people as the one tenent is Antichristian so the other is unchristian let those men therefore be ashamed that in this may learn of a Pope to be Protestants and of Antichrist to become Christians King David after he had murdered Uriah and with him questionless many more of his subjects yet saith Against thee onely have I sinned Psal. 51. 4. And that very Bishop of Millain which in the same case of murder did most sharply reprove and severely repeal the Emperour Theodosius in his person yet is most zealous from this same very text to justifie him in his authority Is it possible that a son should have a lawful power to destroy his Father a servant his Master or a man his God Did C ham onely discover his fathers nakedness and was he cursed for ever what then would God have done to him if he had whipt his father or if he had butchered him whiles he was naked If Cain were a runagate for killing Abel what would God have made him had he killed Adam I have heard that power belongeth unto God Psal. 62. 11. but I have not heard that it belongs unto the people either to give or to take it away And to shew that no subject can dispose of his Allegiance 't is here grounded upon the Supremacy that like as this is not of his making so that cannot be at his disposing but as the Supremacy is grounded upon the power so the Allegiance is grounded upon the oath of God and since Supremacy of power in Kings is grounded upon Gods power there can be no supreme over them but only God This was the Divinity of the Primitive Christians even before their Kings were Christian and God forbid the Church of Christ should so far act the part of a step-mother as to make them fare the worse for being her sons to make them lose their own Rights for defending hers for it were to reproach Christ to make men losers by Christianity Thus saith Iren. lib. 5. adv haer c. 20. Cujus enim Jussu homines nascuntur hujus Jussu Reges constituuntur By whose command men are brought into the world by his command are Kings appointed to govern them when they are there and to govern them not onely in temporals but also in spirituals or else not to govern them but onely a part of them and that the worst part their bodies whereas they are not men without their souls also But because this truth is strongly opposed on both sides as well by the Consistory as by the Conclave it is requisite that we farther declare this second Maxime concerning the Kings Supremacy That there is no power above him by these two ensuing conclusions First no Power but is inferiour to his in causes Secondly no Person but is inferiour to him in power First no Power but is inferiour to his in causes and that not onely in civil Causes which hath been hitherto asserted but also in Ecclesiastical Thus not Aaron but Moses gave the commands concerning the exercise of Religion from the first beginning of it Thus Joshua not the High priest succeeded afterwards in the same charge and the judges again after him or else one Levites idolatry anothers fornicacation would not have been ushered in with a Non erat Rex in Israel In those days there was no King in Israel to govern the Levites as well as others Judg. 17. 6. 19. 1. afterwards when Kings were established under that Title as Supreme in power over Israel 't is plain that David and Solomon Josiah and Hezckiah did both order Religion in its exercise and reform it from corruptions so that 't is the peculiar commendation of good Kings in the text that they did destroy idolatry and the reproach of wicked Kings that They did set it up and though we finde the people often reproved for worshipping yet we never finde them once reproved for not destroying the calves of Bethel or any other idol so that were there no prohibition in the Text against a popular reformation to conclude it sinfull for want of obedience yet since there is no precept nor example for it none that
and gives this reason why he requires it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We were ordained and appointed of God to preserve the faith holy and incorrupt as we received it the Pope will now tell the Emperour so sed non fuit sic ab initio from the beginning it was not thus no nor in many hundreds of years after and in the sixteenth Action of this Council the acclamations of the Bishops to the Emperour at first calling him Another Constantine another Martian another Theodosius another Justinian are a proof beyond exception for no History is so irrefragable as the Acts of a Council that those Emperours had called the forementioned Councils and the petitions at last of the same Bishops praying for him as the Defender of the Orthodox Religion as the bulwark of the Church and as the Defender of the Faith cannot but assure us that they thought it the Emperours duty to call those Councils because they thought them bound to defend the Faith and to protect the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You see the title of Defender of the Faith to a King is of much greater antiquity then our Henry the eight as well as the reason of it and so many several laws in the Code and in the Novels of the Catholick Faith of the Sacraments of Churches of Bishops of Synods of Hereticks will be an evidence to the worlds end of the Supremacy of Kings in causes Ecclesiastical no less then those other titles in the institutes and digests that concern liberty and property and the affairs of this world will be an invincible evidence of their Supremacy in civil causes But I may not insist longer upon this Argument such kinde of quotations being fitter for the school then for the pulpit I will onely add this one more from Pope Adrian's own mouth to Charles the Great of France whom he calls Spiritualem Compatrem that is either his Spiritual Godfather for his patronage and care over his Person or his Fellow-Father in spirituals for his jurisdiction and government over the Church and he labours to give him such punctual satisfaction in all particulars concerning the second Nicene Council as if he feared that of Franckford called by Charles would as indeed it did over ballance that of Nice procured by himself no less in truth then it did in authority but we think his Compater to his Lord and Master a little too high though his Successours will not stoop so low for as we allow the Supreme no superiour so we must allow him no equal which is my second conclusion No person but is inferiour to him in power as no power but is inferiour to his in causes whether Ecclesiastical or Civil so no person or persons whether Ecclesiastical or Civil but is and are inferiour to him in power we understand not that Singulis major Universis minor or if we understand it think that Omnis anima speaks as well Universis as Singulis and therefore not onely one and one by himself but also one and all Subjects together all are inferiour to their Sovereign because they are all bound to submit unto him Let every soul be subject to the higher powers Rom. 13. 1. Their convening together doth as much take off their souls as it doth their subjection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can never agree but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is joyned with the universis in the text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore of them also no less then of single persons must the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the next verse be necessarily understood Whosoever resisteth or How many soever resist both alike are comprehended in They that resist and they shall receive to themselves damnation The word here used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 subordinetur let every soul be subordinate a word that more particularly points at the Ordines regni in the very signification of it because they can never want power to make resistance and seldom want chaplains that encourage them to make it but Ordines sunt ordinandi and subordinandi or else Ordines will be Confusiones Orders must be ordered and subordinate or though called States yet will be Ruines though called Orders will turn Confusions both of the text and of the kingdom and certainly the reasons alledged by S. Paul as equally concern Ordines regni as other Subjects and those as well all as some Universos as well as Singulos First Gods ordinance which may no more be rejected by all then by some by all together then by single persons in particular Secondly Damnation which may be incurred by all as well as by some by a Parliament as well as by Private Gentlemen 'T is true the King may not be so great a terrour to all as to some because all joyning together may not be afraid of his power What then yet I hope all have consciences as well as some and though happily it may not be said of the all of the whole kingdom Ye must needs be subject for wrath because all subjects holding together need not fear their Kings wrath yet it may and must be said of them all Ye must needs be subject for Conscience sake as 't is in the first verse For be they never so many that combine together that will give no satisfaction to the Conscience in regard of it self nor release in regard of God and yet even this very objection is sufficiently answered in the verse before in that he is said To bear the sword as the Minister of God and therefore Not to bear the sword in vain For though happily or rather unhappily in regard of his Person he may bear the sword in vain and perish under it yet in regard of his office he cannot for so he is the Minister of God and consequently a revenger of wrath that cannot fail of his revenge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Epiph. Haer. 40. adversus Archontichos He hath from God the right of the sword not from any other and he hath it for revenge Would to God those men who follow these Hereticks in multiplying powers and principalities though not in heaven yet in earth and in some other things too for these Archontici did abhor baptism and slight the Communion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. ibid. I say would those men who follow these Hereticks in this gross opinion would likewise seriously go along with this learned Father in his solid confutation there would never again be any cavilling disputes upon the 13 to the Romans His confutation in brief is this You Archontici think by multiplying powers in heaven to overthrow the dominion and power of one God but indeed you rather establish it For if in earth there may be so many principalities and powers in one kingdom all subject not repugnant to one King then much more so in heaven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In every kingdom upon earth there are many principalities but they are all under one King Nothing