heart and one soul and therefore what was then might be again and so could not be impossible Neither doth Origen say much less shew that these differences hindered not their Faith Love and Obedience For the Heresies which he thought Celsus had respect unto and grounded his reproach upon were the Ophitae and Cainitae to whom Origen denies the very name of Christians They pretend also a kindness from Justin Martyr who they say in his second Apologie declares his forbearance and the Churches of those dayes towards those who believing in Christ yet thought themselves obliged to the observation of Mosaical Rights and Ceremonies But this is an open abuse both of Justin and the Reader for there are no words in that Apology tending to that purpose and such indeed would have been impertinent and besides his subject in that Apology and lastly had he said what he doth not it would not have been of advantage to Indulgence Ignatius also is used no better by them whom they would have to say that to persecute men on the account of God and Religion is to make our selves conformable to the Heathen that know not God Whereas Ignatius saith no word like it but that which makes against them * Ignat. Ep. ad Phila delphinos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If any one saith he follows him that hath made a Schism he shall not inherit the Kingdom of God If any one walks in a different opinion he is not complyant with the sufferings of Christ These are the words of Ignatius who in that place by many arguments urges them to continue in the Unity of the Church and therefore could not at the same time speak for indulgence of those who did break that Unity But those words which they refer to are the words of the Interpolator of Ignatius For they are not in Vossius's Edition of Ignatius nor in that Latin Copy which Bishop Usher thought to be Authentick but they are in that corrupt Copy set forth by him yet so set forth and noted in Red Characters that no man could take them for Ignatius's but he that had a mind to prevaricate Which in civil converse is an infamous crime but in Religion we want a name to express its buseness Then they huddle up many witnesses together Tertullian Origen Arnobius and Lactantius Who say they pleaded for a Liberty in Religion as founded in the Law of Nature and the inconsistencie of Faith with Compulsion But where these Authors say such things they do not tell us and the former discoveries show how little reason we have to take their bare Words But whatsoever those Authors may say to justify Christian Religion even by the Law of Nature and that the light of Reason could finde nothing in it that deserved persecution Yet I shall not believe that they ever said Terâ—de Praescrip Haeret. c. 37. Si Haeretici sunt Christiani non sunt Ib. c. 32. Ita omnes Haereses nec recipiuntur in pacem communionem ab Ecclesiis quo quo modo Apostolicis the Law of Nature did give to any persons ground for Liberty of different Opinions and practises contrary to the Rules and Orders of that Christian Church wherein they lived until I see their own words for it And of these certainly Tertullian can have no great favour for them who is so severe against Hereticks in his Book de Praescriptione that he will not allow them the name of Christians and saith that they were not received to peace and Communion in the Churches that were any way Apostolical If therefore we may judge of the rest by one we have no reason to think they are for the the Indulgence till we see it under their hands After these they bring the Synod of Alexandria in the Case of Athanasius who did as they say Condemn all External force in Religion and Reproached the Arians as the first Inventers and Promoters of it The shamefulness of this Allegation will appear to the Reader If he take notice that this Synod made no Acts nor Canons for the Histories of it mention none nor are any Extant and therefore their Judgment in this Case was not definitive Their main business was to inquire into the Sclanders which the Arians had raised against Athanasius and to bear witness against them they being competent to this as being Members of the same Church and conversant with him in his offices This their Testimony they published in a Circulatory Letter to all the Bishops of the Catholick Church and to their beloved Brethren in Christ In this Epistle they speak not at all concerning External force in Religion nor do they say the Arians were the first inventers of it For they only complain of the Arians for offering to the Emperour Letters that did accuse * Siquidem jam denuo Accusatrices Literas contra Athanasium Imperatoribus porrexere iteratis calumniis homicidia ei objicientes quae aunquam facta sunt ac denuo illum conjurationibus suis opprimere student Athanasius of Murders which were never done that by that means they might take away his life by the Sword of Justice And as to this not to any force of the Emperour about Religion they say * Tota enim eorum accusatrix Epistola nihil aliud nisi necem spectat aut necem moliuntur si ipsis liceat aut saltem exules facere c. Ista opera Ethnicorum sunt non vel tenuiter Christianorum minime omnium Episcoporum quos aliis justitiam commonstrare oportuit Their whole Libel designes nothing else but slaughter as much as in them lies or else banishment c. Those are works of Heathens and not of the meanest Christians much less of Bishops whom it becomes to be patterns of Justice to others Now what is all this which is spoken of bloody Slanders to the force which restrains different Apprehensions from disturbing Practices Let the Reader see if he can for I cannot finde any thing to their purpose in that Synodical Epistle and if these Writers had intended sincerity they would have given us the very words which made for them and I conceive they did not because they could not Thus of these Testimonies out of that ancient Christians some are meer Fictions the alledged Authors having no such words as these are cited to have Thus Justin Martyr Origen Ignatius and the Synod of Alexandria are abused Tertullian Arnobius Lactantius brought in as Witnesses without any Testimony Socrates the Historian and the Instance of Victor impertinently mention'd Truth stands not in need of such low shifts SECT 6. The first Christian Emperours were against Indulgence HAving done with Churchmen They come to Emperours And first they lay hold of that Edict of Constantine who having a mind to deliver the oppressed Christians from the persecutions of the Gentiles and not finding it safe Euseb Hist l. 10. c. 5. as yet to appear particularly in their favour having then Licinius and
the marks of those condemned to the Mines they sent out their Notaries to force both Bishops and people to subscribe upon the pain of Plundering Imprisonment and publick shames So that Hilarie saith the Emperours war against Persia was shorter then that against Alexandria where the Cruelties of the Heathen Persecutors were acted over again This was the External force of the Arâ—â—ns for which the Catholicks gave them no precedent And this was that force for which Hilarius writ both to and against Constantius For he wrote after the Council of Milan and was banished in that of Byterris And therefore his words to Constantius concern not our Magistrates who use not his Cruelties but condemn his practices These doing no more then what Orthodox Princes have done ever since there were such in the Church Besides I must mind the Reader that the words of S. Hilarie cited by these Writers are not a continued part of Hilaries discourse but a Rhapsodie out of several places which if considered with the context will appear not to serve the ends they were brought for Valens his cruelty was no more justifiable by any practices of the Catholicks then that of Constantius could be Arianism found his nature cruel and did as all Heresies inflame him higher to a more importunate thirst for blood and direct all his savageness against the Orthodox But these Gentlemen are miserably out when they say Themistius the Philosopher upon the principles of Common Reason and Honesty plainly told Valens That by the way he used he might force some to venerate his Imperial Robes but never any to worship God aright For this was not spoken to Valens but in a Consular speech to Jovian to whom Valens succeeded And that not to restrain his Cruelty but to extol that Prince as being aboue all the arts of Flatterers in that he told the several parties of Christians whom Themistius meant by flatterers making their first addresses to him when he was Emp rour That he would trouble none of what Faith soever but he would have the greatest kindness for those who should endeavour most for the Unity of the Church Soc. Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 25. And the observation of Themistius thereupon was not grounded on the Principles of Common Reason and Honesty but was a meer Scoff and Jeer so much contempt doth Dissentions expose Christianity unto for his Words are They worshipped not God but the Emperial Robe and they were like an Eddie or Whirlpoole that was hurried one while this way another that It is true indeed Themistius laboured to restrain the cruelty of Valens towards all as well as towards Christians even in the beginning of his Reign and he made the same attempt towards the latter end of it advising him Socr. Hest l. 4. c. 32. Sozom. l. c. 36. That he should not persecute the Orthodox Christians because they differed from him And that by this Argument That he ought not to wonder at the Dissentions in Church-mens Opinions because it was much less then that which was among the Gentiles with whom there were above 300 different Opinions and from such a multitude there must necessarily arise very many Contentions and perchance it seemed fit to God that it should be so for when he would not easily be known every one would the more reverence him because they could not exactly comprehend him But I think this argument would not do well in the mouth of a Christian Howsoever this prevailed not upon him wholly to forbear his Cruelty though it somewhat allayed it for he still was Barbarous to the Orthodox Clergie and it was the troubles of his Empire that hindred the further Executions of his Wrath on them There is no more truth in what they say next But the best Emperours in the mean time bewailed those fierce Animosities whereby every Sect and Party laboured to oppress their Adversaries and kept themselves from putting forth their Authority against any Dissenters in Christian Religion who retained the Foundation of the Faith in any Competent measure Cod. Theodosian 16. Tit. 5. Edit Lugd. 1664. For let the Reader but look in the Code of Theodosius and he shall finde that there are no less then sixty two Laws made against Hereticks and Schismaticks and that of all the Emperours from Constantine the Great to Valentinian the Third except Julian the Apostate who sought by a Toleration to ruin Christianity Constantius and Valens who were reputed Hereticks and made Laws against the Catholick Christians And these Laws were not only against such Hereticks as destroyed the Foundation of the Faith but those also who in a competent measure did retain it as the Aeriani Audiani Novatiani Euchitae and several of the same Nature And besides these 62 Laws against Hereticks in general There are Severall Laws against those that did Rebaptize How securely therefore not to say unfaithfully do these men say that the best Emperours did not put forth their Authority against Dissenters in Religion But they say Valentinianus by publick Decree granted Liberty of Religion unto all Christians For which they cite Sozomen and Ammianus Marcellinus But this is said by neither For Sozomen l. 6. c. 6. And the Adversaries tell us not any other place there we should finde this Testimony Saith only this He was of the same Opinion with those of the Council of Nice and these he did benefit and to those that were otherwise perswaded he gave no trouble Here is no mention of a Publick decree Neither doth Ammianus speak of any such thing Amm. Marc. l. 30. Inter Religionum diversitates medius stetit nec quemquam inquietavit but among the other Characters he gives that Prince at his Death he describes his Moderation That he unconcerned himself in the differences of Religion nor did he disquiet any c. This of Ammianus a Gentile is to be understood of Valentinian's Toleration of Gentilism which having been so much revived and caressed by Julian was not presently to be depressed lest it might burden the beginnings of his Empire with too great difficulties Besides by such a general permission for a time he should more safely deliver Christianity from the Injuries the Apostate had done unto it But I cannot see what reason these Protestants have to boast in a Toleration that gives equal Priviledges to Idolaters or Atheists as themselves As to that which Sozomen saith that he gave no trouble to those that were otherwise perswaded it was in the beginning of his Empire also for that he did not persevere in that Humor appears by the several Laws he made against Hereticks and Schismaticks Câ—d Th. l. 16. Tit. 5. l. 13. That against the Manichees for he commanded that wheresoever the meetings and company of Manichees should be their Teachers being censured the House and dwelling where they were taught should be confiscated in the ninth year of his Reign and in the tenth he made another against Rebaptizing 2 Ib. Tiâ— 6.
distinct Sect from all of that name beyond the Seas Pub. Disp Salm. Part. 3. de Liturg Nuperririme exorti sunt in Anglia Morosi scrupulosi c. And they produce this Testimony of a Foreign Learned Man Ludovious Capellus who saith There are of late arisen in England certain Morose Scrupulous and too tender not to say Superstitious Men to whom that Liturgie which their Church hath hitherto used seems not only reprovable but they have wholly abolished it together with the whole Hierarchical Government of Bishops and in its place have substituted that which they call their Directory And however they may agree with those abroad in some things Yet they do not in this principle which was observed to be the reason of their Instability For 1. The French Churche's sense is exprest by Mr. Calvin We confess all and every Church hath just Authority to make Laws and Injunctions Confes Fidei oblata Caesari c. Inter opuscula Calvini Fatemur tum omnes tum etiam singulas Ecclesias hoc jus habere ut Leges statu ta sibi condâ—nt Spanhem de Labert Christiana Thes 23. to Constitute a Common Polity among themselves 2. The Dutch Church doth not countenance such a principle For Spanhemius a Professor among them saith Every Church hath a Power that is not abrogated to make Laws nor are all humane Traditions to be utterly prescribed for Traditions of Doctrine are to be distinguished from those of Rites the Church indeed hath no Legislative power about those things yet it hath about these 3. As for the Helvetian Churches this Discourser hath been told by the Learned Durel in his Treatise p. 6. That they are not Presbyterian For they have a Subordination of Ministers as Antistites Deans Canons Pastors who have the Care of Souls and Deacons as here amongst us in England they have set forms of Prayer Holy dayes Organs and other instrumental Musick and sure the principles of these men as well as their Practices are not Presbyterian and those Churches that are have not the principles of giddiness which are maintained here If the Scotch Church were so pure as the Author saith we may assign their Purity to their Severities which frighted all Dissenters of drawing their principles farther than they would endure In the next place this Maxim That an Indifferent thing becomes unlawfull by being commanded which was said to be common among the Dissenters gives us little hopes of Stability For since some things Indifferent i. e. neither commanded nor forbidden by God will necessarily fall into practice in the Worship of God and through the weakness of men there may and will arise contradictory Opinions and so consequently through Interest Humour and Corruptions Dissentions about them if there be no power left to the Church to determine those things and whatsoever she determines doth therefore become sinful as these men imagine what way is left to us to come to an Establishment and what hopes of Peace and rest between the contending Parties when none can determine and enjoyn That this Maxime is common among them this Author doth not deny but only gives us the Speech of some of them out of Papers they have printed Which does not disown what was imputed to them but by several ambages seek to hide their sense in that point But I conceive their judgment in this point is clear under their own hands when in the Conference at the Savoy Where this Proposition That command which commandeth an Act in it self Lawfull and no other Act whereby any unjust penalty is injoyned nor any Circumstance whence directly or per accidens any Sin is consequent which the commander ought to provide against hath in it all things requisite to the lawfulness of a Command and particularly cannot be guilty of Commanding an Act per accidens unlawful nor of Commanding an Act under an unjust Penalty was denied by the joynt Consent of those who disputed for the Non-Conformists Let this be considered whether this be sound speech that cannot be proved Another ground of discouragement from having any hopes of Stability by admitting their Comprehension is their shyness to give us the particulars wherein they will rest and what will satisfy them to an acquiescence For though the Discourser saith that the propounded Latitude leaves out nothing necessary to secure the Churches Peace Yet he refuses to give us the boundaries of his Latitude and putting us off as he did before with these General things necessary to Faith and Life and godly Order he quarrels the Answerer for saying this Establishment is not enough for settlement because it doth not secure the Churches Peace Yet he doth not answer any thing to that which proved it as the Instance of the present Dissentions Wherein though the Church of England and the Presbyterians agree in things necessary to Life Faith and Order Yet we finde no peace betwixt them To which we may add that the Presbyterians and Independents have a further agreement yet there was no peace among them but they mutually writ and preached one against the othrr the first declaring and petitioning that the last should not have a Toleration and the last by Subtlety and force weakening and exposing the first to Contempt and Ruin And therefore sure there is something else necessary to Peace It was also instanced that in Government and Worship in both which some particulars are not absolutely necessary there might arise Differences This he doth not disprove but replies with gravity Verily it may much amuse one to think what that thing should be in the Ecclesiastical Polity which is not necessary to the Christian Faith and Life or Godly Order in the Church and yet necessary to secure the Churches Peace To take of this amusement let it be considered how the Great things of Christianity differ from the peace of the Church The Principles of Faith Good Life and Order are the Foundation of that Christian Society which is the Church But Peace being as the agreement and mutual fitness of all the parts of the edifice must necessary be of larger extent There may be breaches in an House where the Foundation remains firm and entire and there have been often fierce contentions among Christians that yet have agreed in things necessary to Salvation and essential to Christian Worship These truths of Faith and principles of Life have a continual existence and though the World should not receive them and wicked men Contradict them yet they have still their being in Nature and are commensurate with Eternity But peace may be and as experience tells us is but Temporary In civil Societies the meanest and vilest Persons have been able to make Seditions and Mutinies even to the overthrow of an Established Government and we may finde Schisms and Divisions have been made in the Societies of Christians by persons who through Ignorance have wrested the Scriptures and men of perverse minds whose glory was their shame and that also
to their own Condemnation which they may and ought to lay aside So that they have not proved what they intended And if they had done so yet they would gain nothing by it Because the 2 d. proposition which they included in their inference The exercise of mens consciences or the Practices of men upon their apprehensions of things Spiritual are not in their power Is also false For the practices of Men which are the Subject of Laws whether conformable or not to their apprehensions are within their power either to act or not act as shall seem most for the benefit of the Society the Church This is plain by that principle of Order which the Apostle layes down 1 Cor. 14.32 The Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets where by the Spirits of the Prophets the Context shews were signified some Inspirations and gifts of the Holy Ghost as to Prophesie or to sing a Psalm or to speak in an unknown Tongue and these certainly were more vigorous had a stronger impulse and more efficacious impressions upon the minde of the Prophet then a bare apprehension of a thing could effect and yet the Apostle saith these Spirits were subject to the Prophets whether it were the Prophets that received it so that they might forbear or speak as it seemed most for Order and edifying or else to the other Prophets that were to judge so that they might give Rules and Laws for the use of those gifts Of which sort soever you take these Prophets to be to whom the Spirits were to le subject it argues that it was in their power and therefore the Apostle commands that they should use it to the benefit of others The same is in the Apostles counsel when he directs him that had a particular perswasion of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of some things to restrain that to his own breast * Rom. 14.22 Hast thou faith have it to thy self and therefore he was Master of his own practice notwithstanding his perswasion This the Apostle supposes in all these admonitions which are given to men of different perswasions to preserve the peace of the Church For if they were by their perswasions to be acted violently like the Enthusiasts among the Idolaters that were not able to contain themselves in their extasies it had been in vain to have given counsels to them who were not able to observe them Besides if God should have concluded us under an Impossibility of having all the same apprehensions of Spiritual and supernatural things and bad also condemned us all to such a slavery to those apprehensions as that it should not be in our power to manage our selves under them to the peace and tranquillity of the Church it had been in effect to have created us to mutual Destructions concluded us under a worse condition then Brutes and given us Apprehensive Faculties only to destroy our selves and others all which are contrary to the Divine goodness amd the gentle meek and charitable commands of Christ But say they To teach men that their consciences towards God are not concerned in their not acting according to their Light in his Worship or in acting against it is to teach them to be Atheists We answer That to teach men not to be over confident in their own apprehensions but to be so moderate as may be for the Peace of the Church is not to act contrary to their Consciences but most agreeably to a well ordered Conscience this being a plain clear and confessed duty by all Christians the particular apprehensions of one person or party being subject to many suspicions whether they be the right measures of a duty or no. And in doing this they are so far from being Atheists that they become the better Christians following the Rules of Christ and his Apostles SECT 3. Indulgence not justified from the Example of Christ THeir second Argument is drawn from the Example of our Saviour in which we confess we are not only to adore and admire but also to imitate all that Meekness Lowlyness which rendred his life glorious in holiness yet these men dare not say that the number of our duties is bounded by his example and that we are to forbear every thing whereof we have no pattern in his holy Conversation For then they should not keep holy the first day of the Week nor Baptize Children nor gather particular Congregations nor impose Congregational Covenants all which these men do and we no where read that Christ did Besides these men are not so ignorant as to believe a negative argument to be of any force though they make use of it to commend this doctrine of their interest to the Vulgar and therefore when they say Coerce Fine Imprison Banish those that apprehend not aright all and every thing that I would have you instructed in are words that never proceeded out of his mouth c. We reply 1 That this does not inforce that no Church and State by good Laws and well proportioned Penalties should reduce erroneous and disagreeing Christians to Peace and Order 2. This makes nothing against Our Laws who do not say Coerce Fine c. those that apprehend not aright all and every thing which Jesus would have us instructed in for there be many different opinions in the Church of England which the Laws of the State and Church take no notice of And it is not their intent to make men of one minde in all and every thing Which yet is to be wished But coerce those who do things contrary to the Peace of Christians and will not submit to their Lawful Superiors when they command things just and in their power And this we are sure may be collected from the words that proceeded out of our Saviours mouth Nor is it any more to the purpose when they say That it is a marveilous difficulty for any to think seriously That he who was so full of compassion towards all the sons of men should ever give the least consent unto the Punishment and gradual Destruction of those who in sincerity desire to Love and Obey them and do yet unavoidably mistake in their apprehensions of some few things pleaded to be according to his minde For 1. It is our duty and also the duty of all who do pretend to be true Christians seriously to think of those many and very pressing commands of our Lord Jesus Christ that his Disciples should preserve unity among themselves and it is our great marvel that these men who pretend so high to the name of Christ should yet take no notice of those Precepts Secondly when we seriously think of them we cannot but conclude That these Commands of Vnity preceeded from the fulness of his compassion towards the Sons of Men. 1. Towards those men who should desire to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven that these should not be distracted in their choice what party to apply themselves unto with whom they might joyn themselves to
seek the Lord and where they might most assuredly receive the Word of Life Which distractions it was not possible for them to avoid if the Christians were divided into several parties 2. Towards those of the World who though they would not believe and so should not be concerned in the truth of Christians yet they must be in the Quiet and Peace of them For experience shews that when Divisions and Contentions turmoild the Church the State and even the mixt company of unbelievers soon found themselves under many miseries while the contending parties mutually armed to a destruction of their Opposites Thirdly These commands of Christ and this compassion to mankinde do oblige every man to endeavour to preserve that unity by all wayes proper for them in their several Callings And therefore Christian Kings may and ought to do it in their way which is by just Laws and the Church by wise and pious Injunctions and all are to avoid and mark them that cause Divisions among them to restrain their furious and carnal heats in prosecuting their own private apprehensions to the reproach of Religion and Disturbance of Mankind Fourthly Such wayes to preserve Peace can never be to the destruction of those who in sincerity desire to Love and obey Christ although they should mistake in their apprehensions of some few things c. For 1. It is not true which these writers say that such persons are concluded under an unavoidable mistake and being not so they will in sincerity indeavour after a full and clear information in those things that are pleaded to be according to the mind of Christ 2. All such persons will in that Christian humility which the Spirit of Christ works not oppose their private apprehensions to the judgment and practise of that Church of God from which they have received the Doctrine of Salvation and therefore will not think of themselves above what they ought to think but think soberly according as God hath dealt to them the measure of faith And being thus lowly in their own eyes knowing themselves lyable to mistakes and errors they will not be so fond of their own apprehensions as for their sakes to bring a scandal upon the Church of God and set the World in Flames Besides 3. having a desire to Obey God they will be careful to testify their obedience in a manifest and undeniable Duty as is the Peace and Unity of Christians and obedience to Governours and not think to justify the breach of that with the observance of what their singular and private apprehensions represent especially being secur'd that the Church from whom they differ do retain all things necessary to salvation as these men do profess they agree with the Church of England in all things of that degree Therefore such persons are secur'd enough from those severities which are necessary to preserve the Peace of a Church and Nation And such sincere humble enquirers after Truth and those that walk up to what they have already attained are the only persons dear to Christ Not every one that cries Lord Lord that pretend to preach and prophesie in his name for he himself hath told us that he shall reject the pleas of many such to his indulgence And indeed should every one that is so kinde to himself as to publish to the World that he in sincerity desires to obey and love Christ be believed upon his own word and have an indulgence for his differing practises the greatest Impostors that ever appear'd among Christians must be permitted to practise their Cheats and Impieties For the Gnosticks the Manichees Montanists Circumcelliones of old and those among us who are yet Red and polluted with the blood of their Lawful Soveraign that violated the known Laws of the Land of their nativity rob'd the Churches and invaded the just rights of every one within the compass of their lust and their power These I say would have perswaded the World and it may be were so mad as to believe themselves that they were the men that loved Christ when in their works they did deny him And yet 4. It cannot be said that the gradual destruction even of these men is intended by such Laws as do command nothing but what may be for the Security Peace and welfare of Christian Communities and it is an high slander of any Law-givers to say that they intended Punishment and not Obedience That instance of Christs reproof to his Disciples for being so forward to call Fire down from Heaven upon the neglectful Samaritans is altogether impertinent especially as they interpret those words You know not of what Spirits you are To be an unacquaintedness with their own Spirits imagining that for Zeal which was indeed self-Revenge So that in their Sense Christ reprov'd their revengeful Spirits Now it cannot be said of Laws made to restrain violations of Peace that they are the Dictates of Revenge since Revenge looks at acts past but Laws indeavour to prevent those to come SECT 4. No ground for Indulgences in the Practice of the Apostles THe third Argument is drawn from the practice of the Apostles whom we may well wonder that they should be suspected as Patrons for indulgence of Dissentions and Schisms in Religion Since we finde them describing the Authors of them as Monsters and Prodigies that dishonour the Generation they live in and fill the place wherein they appear with confusion and danger and threaten a Tempest at their first rising Therefore the Apostles dealt with them as such in their dayes For although they did not exercise on them Coertions Restaints and Corporal punishments as these Writers wisely observe because indeed they had no Temporal power yet they used their Ecclesiastical power and delivered them over to Satan which in those times was a giving them up to that Tormenter to be afflicted in their flesh a severer punishment then the Sword of the Magistrate can inflict Rom. 16.18 1 Tim. 6.4 They commanded the sound Christians to avoid them as contagious Pests and to cut them off as cankerd and infested members that would bring destruction to the whole body of the Church if a just severity prevented them not nay they call'd for Gods assistance to cut off these troublers of the Israel of God Gal. 5.12 I would they were even cut off that trouble you They also commended nothing more to the conversation of Christians then Peace and Unity to minde the same things to walk in one minde to follow after those things that made for Peace and Edification which are impossible to be attained in Dissentions It would be very strange therefore to imagine that they who do all this to Dissentions should yet give any ground for an Indulgence of them But yet these men have found out that St. Paul is for this forbearance Phil. 3.15 16. Which Text if they had faithfully set down would have discovered their Sophistry For the Apostle saith Let us therefore as many as be perfect