this that he preserveth strengtheneth and delivereth the Church invisible and all the members of his mysticall body from the malice of the Divell and the wicked world and also ruleth and commandeth their hearts by his spirit to walk in the wayes of his obedience But that the Kingly office of Christ reacheth so farre as to the externall government and order of a visible politicall ministeriall Church that I still doubt of Divine You observe not that my argument did conclude this very thing at which you stick that Christ hath appointed a certain policy and government and certain kinds of officers for the Church because hee hath fully and faithfully discharged his Kingly office in providing for all the necessities of his Church And that hee raignes and rules in his Church not only mystically but politically considered I suppose you cannot deny if you observe that otherwise a visible politicall Church is a body without a head and subjects without a King Therefore it is the ordinary expression of our Divines against Papists that the government of the Church is partly Monarchicall in regard of Christ our King and Law-giver partly Aristocraticall in regard of the Ministers and Officers and partly Democraticall in regard of certaine Liberties and Priviledges belonging to people Civilian I would understand whether the Reformed Churches hold the forme of their Ecclesiasticall government to be jure divino for I have heard that it was introduced among them only in a prudentiall way Divine I shall give you some cleare instances of their judgement such as come to my remembrance In the Book of the policy of the Church of Scotland I read thus This power and policy of the Church should leaâ—e upon the word immediately as the onely ground thereof and should bee taken from the pure fountaines of the Scriptures the Church hearing the voice of Christ the only spirituall King and being ruled by his Lawes In the French confession it is said we beleeve that this true Church ought to bee governed by that Regiment or Discipline which our Lord Iesus Christ hath established â—n the Belgick Confession I find words to the same purpose We beleeve say they That this Church ought to be ruled and governed by that spirituall Regiment which God himselfe hath delivered in his word See Harm Confes. Sect. 11. If the question were only this whether the Divine right of this or that form of Church-Government is to be mentioned and held forth in the ordinance of Parliament for my part I should not contend much for that the businesse going right otherwise But it belongeth at least to the Assembly of Divines to satisfie the consciences of men by holding forth the institution and ordinance of Jesus Christ which if it bee not done our proceedings shall not be conformable to those of other Churches Civilian Well then goe on you did bring an argument from the Kingly office of Jesus Christ Let me heare what other arguments you have to make it appeare that God hath in his word descended so farre into paricularities with us as to appoint a certain forme of Church-government Divine This will appeare best when the particular forme of Church-government with the Scripturall grounds of it shall be taken into consideration This government is Iure divino Ergo a government is Iure diviâ—â— This were too large a subject for our conference But I â—â—mit you to what is largely written concerning it I shall only put you in mind that in all ages God hath by positive Lawes descended into many particularities with man Take for instance beside the positive Law before the fall the Commandement not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evill other positive Lawâ— before the Law such as that of the distinction of clean and uncleane beasts Gen. 7. the Law not to eat blood Gen. 9. the Law of circumcision Gen. 17. Under the Law beside morall and forensicall observances there were many ceremoniall Statutes And under the Gospell Christ and his Apostles have left another Law which though it lay opon us neither many nor burthensome performances yet bindeth us to such and such things in Ecclesiasticall policy The particulars we find in the Acts of the Apostles and in the Epistles especially to Timothy and Titus and Rom. 12. and 1. Cor. 12. Civilian Many particulars of that kind there are in the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles But that those things were intended as perpetuall and binding ordinances is a great question And beside I have heard some learned men make a distinction betwixt Ius diâ—inum and Ius Apostolicum Divine This distinction was used by those that denyed the jus divinum of the Lords day But surely iâ— iâ— an iâ—â— grounded distinction and those that make most use of it are forced also to distinguish betwixt Ius divinum and Ius Mosaicum holding that though God was the Author of the morall Law yet Moses noâ— God was the Author of the judiciall and ceremoniall Law as the Apostles did write some things as Christs Heraulds other things as Pastors or Bishops of the Churches that they were Authors of the latter promulgators only of the former and that therefore the former only were Iure divino Thus saith Salmeron but hee is in this contradicted by Bellarmine Maldonat Suarez and others Lorinus in Psal. 88.32 noteth that it was one of the errors of Valentinus and of the Gnosticks that the Decalogue only was from God and other Lawes from Moses and the Elders of Israel But what saith the Apostle himselfe after hee hath given rules concerning the policy of the Church Let the Prophets speak two or three and let the other judge and the Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets Let your women keep silence in the Churches c. Then he addeth 1. Cor. 14.37 If any man think himselfe to be a Prophet or spirituall let him acknowledge that the things that I writ unto you are the Commandements of the Lord Doe wee not also find the laying on of hands reckoned among those catâ—cheticall heads which the Apostles did deliver as perpetuall to all the Churches Heb. 6.2 Papists understand the Episcopall confirmation Dwerse of our writers understand ordination of Ministers and the severall kinds of Church officers However it is agreed on both sides it is a thing belonging to the policy of the Church not to the foundation of faith or piety I adde that the directions given to Timothy and Titus are standing ordinances for all the Churches as may be proved from 1. Tim. 3.15 and 6.14 and 2. Tim. 2.2 Civilian But Ratio mutabilis facit praeceptum mutabile The reason why there were ruling Elders and Deacons and Church-censures at that time was because there was no Chriâ—â—ian Magistrate So that under a Christian Magistrate there is no necessity of such officers government or censures in the Church Divine I answer First there is no ground at all in Scripture for such a
was given by Erastus and Bilson that is That in the case of private and civill injuries the injured party should first of all seek right and reparation of the wrong of the injuring party which if it take not effect then to doe it before witnesses and if that also prevaile not then to tell the Church that is the Sanedrim of the Jewes which was a civill Judicature and if the man that hath done wrong will not stand to the sentence of the Sanedrim that then one should deale with him as with an Heathen or a Publican that is complain of him to the Roman Emperor or his Deputies Mr. Prynne in his late Booke called Independency examined pag. 10. following Master Seldens judgement holdeth that by the Church Matth. 18.17 is not meant any Ecclesiasticall Judicatory but the Civill Court or Sanedrim of the Jewes Even as Ib. pag. 11. he holdeth the Assembly of the Apostles Elders and Brethren Act. 15. to be an undeniable Scripture Authority for Parliaments as well as for Synods to come together upon all like occasions And as for these words let him be thee as an Heathen and a Publicane he understandeth the meaning to be that not the Church but the party offended is to avoid his company taking the same to be meant 2 Thes. 3.14 a place which I have also heard alledged for Church Dicipline and Censures Divine Though Mr. Prynne be a man much esteemed by me both for his sufferings and much good service done by him in the Church yet I must say he wrongs both the Truth and himself in taking upon him to goe against the whole current of Interpreters antient and moderne without any evidence of reason and he must remember that in these particulars hee doth not so much oppose the Independents as all the Reformed Churches while as he goeth about to throw out of their hands the chief Scriptures upon which they ground Church Discipline Now all the circumstances of the Text make against that Exposition and prove That it is not a Civill but a Spirituall Court which Christ there establisheth For 1. those words If thy Brother trespasse against thee are not ment of personall or civill injuries of which our Saviour Christ would not be Judge Luke 12.14 but as Augustine Tostatus and others doe rightly expound them they are to be understood of all manner of scandalls by which we trespasse against our Brother in as much as we trespasse against the law of Charity which commandeth us to edify one another and to promote the spirituall good one of another now when a Christian doth not only not edify but scandalize which is a deterioration yea so farre as lieth in him a destruction of his brothers soule this is undeniably a great trespasse against his brother which kind of trespasse as the King and head of the Church Jesus Christ whose Kingdom is not of this World was to take speciall notice of so the coherence and dependâ—nce of the Text giveth further evidence that this and no other kinde of trespasses is here intended there being so much spoken of scandalls in the preceeding passages of that Chapter 2. As the case supposed so the end proposed is spirituall that is that the offended brother should reprove the offanding brother and tell him his fault and that for the good of his soul If he shall heare thee thou hast gained thy brother that is thou hast rescued his soule by Repentance from sinne and so from the wrath of God wherein Christ had respect to that Law Lev. 19.17 Thou shalt not hate thy Brother in thy heart thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour and not suffer sinne upon him 3. The persons judging are not civill but Ecclesiasticall Tell it unto the Church now in all the New Testament the name of the Church is not given to any Civill Magistrate Nay Christ himself doth immediately give us notice that by the Church there he means the Ministers and Rulers of the Church for thus he applyeth it unto the Apostles and their successors Whatsoever ye shall binde c. and if two of you shall agree c. And here by the way I must tell you that if the Jewish Sanedrim were here meanâ— as it is not you could not thence conclude that a civill Court is meant for there was an Ecclesiastical Sanedrim distinct from the civill as beside many other great Authors is proved by Constantinus l' Emp. Annot. in Câ—â— Middoth p. 188. and de Rep. Iud. p. 389. Which Ecclesiasticall Sanedrim were the rather to be understood in this Text because the other Sanedrim was destroyed by Herod 4. The way and manner of proceeding is also Ecclesiasticall not civill when Church Governours meet about those things it must be with Prayer vers. 19. and it must be in the Name of Christ vers. 20. which places though they well agree to all holy Assemblies and meetings for Worship yet the context sheweth that they are principally intended concerning Assemblies for Discipline and Church censures and so Tostatus Hugo Cardinalis with our own Divines doe expound the Text 5. The censure is spirituall as appeareth both by the â—llusion to the Jewish Excommunication of which I have spoken before in those words let him be unto thee as a Heathen or a Publican and by the phrase of binding the soule or retaining of sinnes vers. 18. which power our Lord elsewhere giveth to his Apostles Mat. 16.19 Io. 20.23 formes of speech which no where the Scripture useth of any civill power only it is to be observed that in these two places last cited the Apostles get power to binde and loose by their Doctrine and Preaching but here Mat. 18. to binde and loose by Discipline as appeareth by the use to be made of witnesses vers. 16. that is potestas clavium doctrinalis this potestas clavium disciplinalis That is misticall this politicall And whereas it is objected that the Text saith not let him be to the Church but let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican I answer it is supposed that he must be such in the judgement of the Church before he be such to me This Pareus upon the place proveth from the words that follow Whatsoever ye shall bind c. therefore saith he the Church is first to bind him that is Excommunicate him and then he is to be to me as an Heathen and a Publican Beside if it were not so horrible confusion should follow while as any private man may Excommunicate and cast off whomsoever he judgeth to be disobedient to the Church though peradventure he hath no just cause to judge so 6. It was very farre from the minde of Jesus Christ that his Disciples should for private injuries prosecute one another before the Roman Emperour or his Deputie This being so much blamed by the Apostle Paul 1 Cor. 6.1 Dare any of you having a matter against another got to law before the unjust vers. 6 7. Brother goâ—th to law
against Brother and that before the unbeleavers Now therefore there is utterly a fault amongst you Civilian Can you shew any example or practice of such an Excommunication in the New Testament for that place 1 Cor. 5.5 I doubt shall not prove there being not only great Authors but great reasons for another Exposition as Moâ—liâ—s sheweth in his Vâ—tes l. 2. tc 11. namely that this delivering to Sathan was for bodily afflictions and torments which was not in the power of ordinary Ministers to doe but was a Prerogative of the Apostles Divine If you will I can debate that with you both from that very Text and from other reasons that this delivering to Sathan was an act not of the Apostle alone but of the Presbytery of Corinth whereby is meant Excommunication which is a cutting off from the Fellowship of the Church and so coâ—sequâ—ntly â— delivering to Sathan who reignes without the Church and holdeth captive at his pleasure the children of disobedience Or if you will I can take a shorter course with you For whatsoever may be the meaning of that phrase tradere Satana it is most plaine that Excommunication is in that Chapter vers. 6 7. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lumpe purge out therefore the old leaven verse 11. If any man that is called a Brother be a fornicatour c. with suâ—h an one no noâ— to â—â—â—e vers. 12. doe not ye â—udge them that are within vers. 13. Therefore put away from among your selves that wicked person 2 Cor. 2.6 Sufficient to such a man is this punishment or censure inflicted by many But I suppose I shall not need to prove Church-censures and Excommunication in the Church of Câ—rinâ—h which Moulins himself doth fully acknowledge to be held forth in that same place Civilian I will thinke further upon these things Devine You may doe so and withall read what 〈◊〉 hath written against Erastus and Walaâ—â— against Witeâ—â—ogardus Civilian But tell me now your opinion of another matter and that is concerning liberty of Conscience and toleration of Hereticks and Seâ—taries for which there are so many bookes written of late and so few against iâ— I doe not know what you will pronounce of it from the Principles of your Profession but I beleeve that as in Germany France Holland Poland yea under the Turkish Tyranny contrary religions and opposite professions and practises have been and are tolerated upon State-principles so it shall be Englands unhappinesse though not to chose yet to be necessitated to grant such a tolleration for avoiding a rupture in the Kingdome and for preserving an Union against the common Enenmy Divine This Question about the Toleration of those whose way is different from the common rule which shall be established must be both stated and resolved cum â—rano salis We must remember to distinguish personâ— from Corporations or Churches and both these from errors Againe to distinguish persons whâ—ther godly and gratious or loose and libertin whether moderate and peaceable or â—actious and turbulent whether such as have deserved well oâ— the publike or such as have done either no service or a disservice To distinguish Corporation whether the Quâ—stion be of such onely as have a present existence or of all who shall joyne to such a way afterward To distinguish errâ—rs whether Practicall or Doctrinall onelâ— whether fundamentall or circafundamentall or neither of the two To distinguish Toleration whether absolute or Hypotheticall and conditionall whether anywhere or in somâ— few certaine places onely whether indifinite and generall or limited and bounded and if bounded how far and how much Whether â—uch Toleration as may stand with the solemne league and Covenant or such as is inconsistent therewith whether such as is profitable for the publike peace or such as is apparently destructive thereto These and the like particulars I doe not intend to fall upon at this instant Only this I say that to open a wide doore and to grant an unbounded liberty unto all sort of Hereticks and Sectâ—ries which is the thing that the good Samaritan and Iohn the Baptist the blood Tenent and others of that kind do plead for as it is inconsistent with the solemne league and Covenant of the three Kingdomes by which we are obliged to endeavour the extirpation of Popery Prelacie Superstition Heresie and Schismâ— least we partake in other mens sinnes and thereby be in danger to receive of their plagues So it is in the owne nature of it an error so pernicious so abominable so monstâ—ous that it maketh all learned men to stand amazed and taken with horrour in so much that they can not at first gather their thoughts to put pen to paper against it I know this liberty and Toleration was maintained by the Donatists of old and by the Socinians Arminians and Anabaptists of late but it hath beene constantly opposed by all that were sound and orthodoxe both Ancient and Moderne who have asserted the lawfull use of a coercive poweâ— against those things whereby though under pretence of conscience God is openly dishonoured soules ensnared and destroyed faith or piety subverted and overthrowne and further the compelling of the outward man though not to the practise of things indifferent which compulsion I doe not allow yet to the practise of necessary duties and to the externall use of meanes and ordinances by which through the blessing of God mens hearts and consciences may be savingly affected and wrought upon And I beseech you what else meaneth Asa's Covenant That whosoever would not seeke the Lord God of Israel should be put to death whether small or great whether man or woman And what else meaneth Iosiahs Covenant whereof it is said he caused all that were present in Ierusalem and Benjamin to stand to it And what else is that in Ezra that whosoever would not come to Ierusalem to make a Covenant and to put away the strange wives all his substance should be forfeited and himselfe separated from the Congregation of those that had beene carried away that is Excommunicated And what else is that other act of Iosiah in putting downe the Priests of the high Places And what say you to the Law of stoning those who did intice the people to turne out of the way wherein the Lord commanded them to walke saying Let us goe after other Gods and serve them Civilian I would rather heare some Arguments from the New Testament for I doubt these from the Old Testament shall be more subject to exception Divine To me it is plaine that these things doe as much concerne us now as the Jewes of old which whosoever denieth must shew that either we may take no rules nor patternes from the Old Testament or that the foresaid Lawes and practises were not intended by the holy Ghost to binde us as other things in the Old Testament doe but were ceremoniall and typicall intended to bind the Jewes onely Mr. Williams in
his bloody Tenant though I doe not remember that anywhere he answereth to those particular passages which I have cited yet perceiving that such arguments from the Old Testament can not be taken off without this answer that all these were typicall and figurative he therefore goeth much upon that ground and so deviseth more types and figures in the Old Testament then ever any body did before him and pleaseth himselfe with such fancies and conjectures therein as I dare say will satisfie no indifferent Reader and in effect making void by his principles all arguments from the Old Testament so that we may not from the examples of the godly Kings of Iudah teach Christian Magistrates what their duty is nor argue thus God commanded that the Kings of Iudah should have a copy of the Book of the Law by them and read therein that they should not multiply wives c. Therefore Christian Princes should search the Scriptures should not multiply wives c. or thus The Priests and Levites had a sufficient maintenance Therefore so should the Ministers of the Gospell or thus The Jewes were commanded to rest from all servile labour on the Sabbath day Therefore so should Christians on the Lords day or thus Warres were lawfull in the old Testament Therefore they are lawfull still Or the like All these shall be cast aside upon this ground they were tipicall therefore no patterns to us But because you desire an Argument from the New Testament I will convince your judgement from thence also Sure I am I have better grounds in the New Testament against the Toleration now in question then Master Iohn Goodwin hath found for it in his Text Act. 5.38.39 He holdeth that we may build upon Gamaliels speech as Authorised by God there being nothing in all this speech excepting only the Historicall Instances the truth of which it seems was generally known and is attested by Iosephus their great Historian but what is fully consonant with the Word of God saith he And so he approveth the Sceptik Principles of that Nullifidian who razeth the very foundation of the Christian Faith and maketh it a very doubtfull case whether the Apostles Doctrine was from God or from men But I proceed to my Arguments First you shall doe well to remember what I said concerning Church censutes from Matth. 18. under which scandalous and obstinate delinquents doe fall the pretence of Conscience being no exception for them The Ministers of the Gospel have in readinesse to revenge all disobedience 2 Cor. 10.6 The Angel of the Church of Ephesus is commended because of his zeal in that he could not beare those who called themselves Apostles and were not Revel. 2.2 Contrariwise the Angel of the Church of Pergaâ—â—â— is blamed for this reason because then hast there them that teach the doctrine of Balaam c. so hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans Revel. 2.14.15 that is because thou hast tolerated them and hast not cast them out It is thy fault that they are there in the Church The like challenge is sent to the Angel of the Church of Thyatira vers. 20. I have a few things against thee because thou sufferedst that woman Iezebell who calleth her self a Prophetesse to teach and to seduce my servants c. That chapter is so cleare for the point that Master Williams acknowledgeth it proves fully that Christ hath endued the Ministers and Governours of his Church with power to suppresse Heresy and errour and the spreaders thereof be who they will be See the bloody Tenent c. 57. So Iohn the Baptist pag. 63. confesseth that the Church of Thyâ—â—ra was justly taxed not only for not controuling and reproving Iexebel but also in that they permitted her to seduce weak Christians without cutting her off by the sword of the Spirit the power of excommunication Civilian I was about to answer the same that if those places prove any thing it is onely the suppressing of Hereticks and Schismaticks by Church censures not at all by the civill coercive power of the Magistrate Divine I thought with my selfe I should neede say no more having proved that Heriticks and Shismaticks though miscarrying with so much opinion of conscience as to thinke themselves Apostles or Prophets may be censured and cast out of the Church which is the case Revel. 2. I did never imagine but where the soule is punished with the greatest punishment which can be inflicted on earth that is Excomunication much more may the body be punished by the Magistrate as the degree of the offence shall require especially considering that the Magistrat is a nursing father to the Church and is to protect and assist her not to suffer her authority and censures to be despised and set at nought But to satisfie you yet more touching the Magistrats part consider well that passage Rom. 13.4 For he is the Minister of God to thee for good but if thou doe that which is evill be afraid for he beareth not the sword in vaine for he is the Minister of God a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evill Civilian This place and all that you can say in that kind doth not warrant nor iustifie persecution for the cause of conscience but onely the punishment of all such evill doers as doe disturbe the peace of the Kingdome or the course of civill justice oppose Magistrats or lawes traitors rebells murtherers felons and the like Iohn the Baptist pag. 57. saith If a breach of peace the civill powers ought to redresse it 1. Tim. 2.1.2 But for the Magistrate to interpose in matters meerly Ecclesiasticall otherwise then spiritually and as a Minister of the Gospell I find no warrant for it in all the Gospel Divine Now you are come to your last refuge wherein I know you put great confidence but I am as confident it cannot serve your turne which I prove thus 1. By this Tenent you give a more dangerous wound to the power of the civill Magistrate then you are aware of for in stead of mâ—king him keeper of both Tables you make him keeper of the second Table onâ—ly at least vindex of â— onely whereas God hath made him as well vindex as Custos utriusque Tabula 2. In tâ—e place I last cited the Apostle maketh no exception nor restriction but will have all evill doers to which category I suppose Heretickes and Seduâ—ers doe belong to be afraid of vengeance by the hand of the Magistrate 3. The Apostle there doth once and againe call the Magistrate The Minister of God as it were purposely putting him in mind that he judgeth not for man but for the Lord and that he is to looke most to things pertaining to God 4. There may be a coincidencie of those things which you put assunder for example suppose a Jesuite killing a Magistrate or some other Hereticke killing one who hath beene most opposite to him or as sometime the case was suppose men