was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or it was a white stone by which they did loose remit and absolve and that stone was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was the thing that Tully calleth Solvere crimine So where it is said her iniquity is pardoned Isa. 40. 2. the 70 read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 her iniquity is loosed And because there is usually some kind of expiation before a loosing and remitting of sinnes which expiation being performed the loosing follows therefore the Graecians called such necessary and râ—quisit expiation by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is loosing and they had their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they expiatory Gods who did chiefly take care of those expiations That in Scripture the power of binding is judiciall and authoritative is cleared by my Reverend and Learned Colleague Maâ—er Rutherford in The Divine right of Church Government pag. 234. 235 I adde that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto which Grotius sends â—s is â—sed for that binding or incarceration which is an act of 〈◊〉 authority as Gen. 40. 3. Gen. 42. 16. 19. 24. Num. 15. 34 Levit. 24. 12. 2 Kings 17. 4. Isa. 42. 7. Jer. 40. 1. Ezek. 3. 25. It is also used for an authoritative prohibition Num. 11. 28. my Lord Moses forbid them Thence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 interdictum a decree forbidding somewhat Dan. 6 7 8 9. As binding and loosing are Acts of authority and power such as doth not belong to any single person or brother offended so the binding and loosing mentioned Matth. 18. 18. are Acts of Ecclesiasticall and spirituall authority belonging to the Kingdom and Government of Christ in his Church but not belonging to the civill Magistrate And as the authority is Ecclesiasticall and spirituall so it is more than Doctrinall it is a power of inflicting or taking off Church Censures These two things I will endeavour to prove 1. That this power of binding and loosing belongeth neither to private Christians nor to civill Magistrates but to Church Officers 2. That this power is juridicall or forensicall and not Doctrinall onely that is that Church-Officers are here authorised to bind with censures or to loose from censures as there shall be cause In both which we have Antiquity for us Which I doe the rather observe because Erastus and Grotius alledge some of the Antients for their exposition of Math. 18. 18. that this binding or loosing is by the offended brother That which Augustine Origen and Theophylact say of one brother his binding or loosing is but spoken tropologically and not as the literall sence of the Text yea Theophylact in that passage cited by Erastus and Grotius doth distinguish between the Ministeriall or Ecclesiasticall binding and loosing and the party offended his binding and loosing Non enim solùm quae solvunt sacerdotes sunt soluta sed quaecunque nos c. Theophylact doth also find excommunication in that Text Illam autem Ecclesiam si non audierit tunc abjiciatar ne suae malitiâ—… participes faciat alios I further appeal to Augustine himself Epist. 75. where speaking of Excommunication and Anathema he distinguisheth it from corporall punishment and after he hath spoken of the temporall sword he addeth Spiritualis autem paena qua fit quod scriptum est Quae ligaveris in terra erunt ligata in caelo animas obligat But the spirituall punishment by which that thing is done which is written What thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven doth bind soulâ—… Againe in his sixth Tome lib. 1. contra adversarium legis prophetarum â—…ap 17. he doth most plainly interpret Math. 18. 18. of Church discipline and binding by Censure Hierome both in his Commentary upon Matth. 18. and in his Epistle to Heliodorus speaketh of this power of binding as a judiciall forensicall power belonging to the Ministers or Officers of the Church by which they judge and censure offenders But to save my self the labour of more citations I take help from Bishop Bilson of the perpetuall Government of Christs Church cap. 4. where though he expound the binding and loosing Matth. 18. 18. to be Acts of the Magistrate yet he acknowledgeth hat the Antient writers leane vere much another way and understand that Text of the ministeriall and spirituall power of Excommunication for which he citeth Chrysost. de sacerdotio lib. 3. Ambros. de paenitent lib. 1. c. 2. Hierom. in Matth. cap. 18. Hilar. in Mat. can 18. Vnto these I also adde Isidorus Polusiota in the third Book of his Epistles Epist. 260. where he applieth this Text Matth. 18 19. to this sence that impenitent finners are to be bound and penitent sinners loosed and thence argueth against the absolving of a perjured person who had not declared himself penitent but had purchased his absolution by a gift Nor can I passe Chrysostome upon this very Text where he tells that Christ will have such a one to be punished 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both with a present Chastisement and with a future punishment or both in earth and in heaven and would have the offender to fear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 casting out of the Church He addeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he cuts not off immediately but after admonitions I will now proceed to a further confirmation of the two propositions afore mentioned Touching the first That this binding and loosing Matth. 18. 18. belongeth nei her to private Christians nor to civill Magistrates but to Church Officers I clear it thus There are two things by which as Schoolemen observe mens soules and consciences are bound 1. They are bound by their sinnes Prov. 5. 22. His own iniquities shall take the wicked himself he shall be holden with the cords of his sins Act. 8. 23. thou art in the bond of iniquity 2. Men are bound by precepts Matth. 23. 4. They bind heavy burthens and grievous to be born and lay them on mens shoulders This binding by precept or law some take to be meant Ezech. 3. 25. O Sonne of man behold they shal put bands upon thee shall bind thee with them that is thou shalt in vision see thy self bound with bands upon thee to signifie that I have forbidden thee to be a reprover to the rebellius house So the Chaldee paraphrase But thou a Sonne of man behold I have put my word upon thee as a band of cords with which they bind and thou shalt not goe forth into the midst of them Now in both these respects the Scripture elsewhere doth ascribe to Church-Officers a power of binding and loosing 1 In respect of sinne Io. 20. 23. Whosesoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whosesoever sin s ye retaine they are retained It is spoken to the Apostles and their successors in the Ministery of the Gospell Matth. 16. 19. I will give unto thee the Keyes of the Kingdome of heaven and whatsoever thou shalâ—… bind on earth shall be
bound in heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven Where the power of binding and loosing is given to the Apostles Grotius upon the place cleareth it from 2. Cor. 5. 19. 20. God hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation Now then we are Ambassadours for Christ. So that we find in Scripture Church Officers inabled and authorised ex officio as the Heraulds and Ambassadours of the King of Zion to loose from the bands of sinne all repenting and beleiving sinners and to bind over to eternall justice and wrath the impenitent and unbeleevers 2 They are also authorised dogmatically and authoritatively to declare and impose the will of Christ and to bind his precepts upon the shoulders of his peeple Matth. 28. 20. as likewise to loose them and pronounce them free from such burthens as men would impose upon them contrary or beside the word of God 1 Cor. 7. 23. An example of both we have Act. 15. 28. The Synod of the Apostles and Elders bindeth upon the Churches such Burthens as were necessary by the Law of love for the avoiding of scandall but did pronounce the Churches to be free and loosed from other burthens which the Judaizing Teachers would have bound upon them Now therefore if we will expound Matth. 18. 18. by other Scriptures it being the onely surest way to expound Scripture by Scripture it is manifest and undeniable that Church-Officers are by other Scriptures inabled and authorised to bind loose in both those respects afore-mentioned But we no where find in Scripture that Christ hath given either to all private Christians or to the civill Magistrate a Commission and Authority to bind or loose sinners I know a private Christian may and ought to convince an impenitent brother and to comfort a repenting brother ex charitate Christiana But the Scripture doth not say that God hath committed to every private Christian the word of reconciliation and that all Christians are Ambassadours for Christ nor is there a promise to ratifie in heaven the convictions or comforts given by a private Christian No more then a King doth ingage himself in verbo principis to pardon such as any of his good Subjects shall pardon or to condemne such as any of his good Subjects shall condemne but a King ingageth himself to ratifie what his Ambassadours Commissioners or Ministers shall doe in his name and according to the Commission which he hath given them to pardon or condemne Besides all this if Christ had meant here of the brother to whom the injury was don his private binding or loosing not condemning or forgiving then he had kept the phrase in the singular number which Erastus observeth diligently all along the Text vers 15 16 17. But he might have also observed that vers 18. carries the power of binding and loosing to a plurality VVhatsoever ye bind c. As for the Magistrate it belongeth to him to bind with the cords of corporall or civill punishments or to loose and liberat from the same as he shall see cause according to law and justice But this doth n t belong to the spirituall Kingdome of Jesus Christ for his Kingdome is not of this world neither are the weapons thereof carnall but spirituall And beside the Magistrate may lawfully and sometime doth bind on punishment when the soule is loosed in Heaven and the sinne remitted Again the Magistrate may lawfully and sometime doth loose and absolve from punishment when a mans soule is impenitent and sinne is still bound upon his conscience There is no such promise that God will forgive whom the Magistrate forgiveth or condemne whom the Magistrate condemneth Neither hath God any where in Scripture committed to the Magistrate the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven or the word of reconciliation as to the Ambassadours of Christ. Binding and loosing in the other sence by a dogmaticall authoritative declaration of the will of Christ is not so principally or directy intended Matth. 18. 18. as that other binding and loosing in respect of sinne Howbeit it is not to be excluded because the words preceding Vers. 17. mention not onely the execution of Excommunication Let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a Publican but also the Churches judgement and determination of the case if he neglect to heare the Church which words implie that the Church hath declared the will of Christ in such a case and required the offender to doe accordingly but he shewing himselfe unwilling and contumacious as it were saying in his heart I will breake their bands asunder and cast away their cords from me thereupon the promise reacheth to this also that what the Church hath determined or imposed according to the will of Christ shall be ratified and approved in Heaven Now Christ hath no where given a Commission either to every particular Christian or to the Magistrate to teach his people to observe all things which he hath commanded them and authoritatively to determine controversies of faith or cases of conscience As in the old Testament the Priests lips did preserve knowledge and they were to seeke the law at his mouth Mal. 2. 7. so in the new Testament the Ministers of Christ have the Commission to make known the counsell of God My second proposition that the power of binding and loosing Matth. 18. 18. is juridicall or forensicall and meant of inflicting or taking off Ecclesiasticall Censures this I will make good in the next place against M r Prynne who to elude the argument for Excommunication from Matth. 18. answereth two things concerning the binding and loosing there spoken of 1. That these words have no coherence with or dependence upon the former 2. That this binding and loosing is meant onely of preaching the Gospell Touching the first of these I confesse if by the Church vers 17. be meant a civill Court of Justice and by those words Let him be unto thee as an Heathen c. be meant no more but keepe no civill fellowship with him which is his sence of the Text I cannot marvell that he could finde no coherence between vers 17. and vers 18. yet if there be no coherence between these verses the generality of Interpreters have gone upon a great mistake of the Text conceiving that Christ doth here anticipate a great objection and adde a great encouragement in point of Church discipline for when the offender is excommunicated that is all the Church can doe to humble and reduce him put the case he or others despise the censures of the Church What will your censure doe saith M r Hussey To that very thing Christ answereth It shall be ratified in Heaven and it shall doe more then the binding of the offenders in fetters of Iron could doe But let us heare what M r Prynne saith against the coherence of Text because saith he that of binding and loosing is spoken onely to and of Christs disciples as is evident by the parallel Text
by the Word of God and by the Confessions of Faith of the Reformed Churches doth belong to the Christian Magistrate in matters of Religion Which I do but now touch by the way so far as is necessary to wipe off the aspersion cast upon Presbyterial Government The particulars I refer to Chapter 8. Our sixth Concession is That in extraordinary cases when Church-government doth degenerate into tyranny ambition and avarice and they who have the managing of the Ecclesiastical power make defection and fall into manifest Heresy Impiety or Injustice as under Popery and Prelacy it was for the most part then and in such cases which we pray and hope we shall never see again the Christian Magistrate may and ought to do diverse things in and for Religion and interpose his Authority diverse wayes so as doth not properly belong to his cognizance decision and administration ordinarily and in a Reformed and well constituted Church For extraordinary diseases must have extraordinary remedies More of this before A seventh Concession is this The Civil Sanction added to Church-government and Discipline is a free and voluntary Act of the Magistrate That is Church-government doth not ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 necessitate the Magistrate to aid assist or corroborate the same by adding the strength of a Law But the Magistrate is free in this to do or not to do to do more or to do lesse as he will answer to God and his conscience it is a cumulative Act of favour done by the Magistrate My meaning is not that it is free to the Magistrate in genere moris but in genere entis The Magistrate ought to adde the Civil Sanction hic nunc or he ought not to do it It is either a duty or a sin it is not indifferent But my meaning is The Magistrate is free herein from all coaction yea from all necessity and obligation other then ariseth from the Word of God binding his conscience There is no power on Earth Civil or Spiritual to constrain him The Magistrate himself is his own Judge on Earth how far he is to do any cumulative Act of favour to the Church Which takes off that calumny that Presbyterial Government doth force or compel the conscience of the Magistrate I pray God we may never have cause to state the Question otherwise I mean concerning the Magistrate his forbidding what Christ hath commanded or commanding what Christ hath forbidden in which case we must serve Christ and our consciences rather then obey Laws contrary to the Word of God and our Covenant whereas in the other case of the Magistrate his not adding of the Civil Sanction we may both serve Christ and do it without the least appearance of disobedience to the Magistrate Eighthly We grant that Pastors and Elders whether they be considered distributively or collectively in Presbyteries and Synods being Subjects and Members of the Common-wealth ought to be subject and obedient in the Lord to the Magistrate and to the Law of the Land and as in all other duties so in Civil subjection and obedience they ought to be ensamples to the Flock and their trespasses against Law are punishable as much yea more then the trespasses of other Subjects Of this also before Ninthly If the Magistrate be offended at the sentence given or censure inflicted by a Presbytery or a Synod they ought to be ready in all humility and respect to give him an account and reason of such their proceedings and by all means to endeavour the satisfaction of the Magistrate his conscience or otherwise to be warned and rectified if themselves have erred CHAP. IV. Of the agreements and differences between the nature of the Civil and of the Ecclesiastical Powers or Governments HAving now observed what our opposites yeeld to us or we to them I shall for further unfolding of what I plead for or against adde here the chief agreements and differences between the Civil and Ecclesiastical powers so far as I apprehend them They both agree in these things 1. They are both from God both the Magistrate and the Minister is authorized from God both are the Ministers of God and shall give account of their administrations to God 2. Both are tyed to observe the Law and Commandments of God and both have certain directions from the Word of God to guide them in their administration 3. Both Civil Magistrates and Church Officers are Fathers and ought to be honoured and obeyed according to the fifth Commandment Utrumque scilicet dominium saith Luther Tom. 1. fol. 139. both Governments the Civil and the Ecclesiastical do pertain to that Commandment 4 Both Magistracy and Ministery are appointed for the glory of God as Supreme and for the good of men as the subordinate end 5. They are both of them mutually aiding and auxiliary each to other Magistracy strengthens the Ministery and the Ministery strengthens Magistracy 6. They agree in their general kinde they are both Powers and Governments 7. Both of them require singular qualifications eminent gifts and endowments and of both it holds true Quis ad haec idoneus 8. Both of them have degrees of censures and correction according to the degrees of offences 9. Neither the one nor the other may give out sentence against one who is not convict or whose offence is not proved 10. Both of them have a certain kind of Jurisdiction in foro exteriori For though the Ecclesiastical power be spiritual and exercised about such things as belong to the inward man onely yet as Dr. Rivet upon the Decalogue pag. 260. 261. saith truly there is a two-fold power of external jurisdiction which is exercised in foro exteriori one by Church-Censures Excommunication lesser and greater which is not committed to the Magistrate but to Church-Officers Another which is Civil and coercive and that is the Magistrates But Mr. Coleman told us he was perswaded it will trouble the whole World to bound Ecclesiastical and Civil Jurisdiction the one from the other Maledicis pag. 7. Well I have given ten agreements I will now give ten differences The difference between them is great they differ in their causes effects objects adjuncts correlations executions and ultimate terminations 1. In the efficient cause The King of Nations hath instituted the Civil power The King of Saints hath instituted the Ecclesiastical power I mean the most high God possessor of Heaven and Earth who exerciseth Soverainty over the workmanship of his own hands and so over all mankind hath instituted Magistrates to be in his stead as gods upon Earth But Iesus Christ as Mediator and King of the Church whom his Father hath set upon his holy Hill of Zion Psal. 2. 6. to reigne over the House of Jacob for ever Luke 1. 33. who hath the key of the House of David laid upon his shoulder Isa. 22. 22. hath instituted an Ecclesiastical power and goverment in the hands of Church-Officers whom in his name he sendeth forth 2. In the matter Magistracy or Civil
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Greek Scholia which he useth to cite hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fourthly Peter addeth not as being Lords or over-ruling 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we might understand he condemneth the ruling power of the Lord Bishop not of the Lords Bishop of Episcopus Dominus not of Episcopus Domini Just as Ezek 34. 4. the shepheards of Israel are reproved for lording it over the flock with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them It was their duty to rule them but it was their sin to rule them with force and with cruelty The twentieth Argument I take from 1 Cor. 4. 1. Let a man so account of us as of the Ministers of Christ and Stewards of the mysteries of God Moreover it is required in Stewards that a man be found faithfull And Tit. 1. 7. a Bishop is the Steward of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This name doth exclude Lordship and dominion but withall it noteth a ministeriall rule or government as in the proper so in the metaphorical signification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a name diverse times given by Aristotle in his Politicks to the civil Magistrate The Septuagints have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as fynonymous with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Esthâ—…r 8. 9. To the Lieutenants and the Deputies The 70. thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The holy Ghost by the same word expresseth Government Gal. 4. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is under Tutors and Governors Rom. 16. 23. Erastus is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theophylact thinks he was Governour of the City Erasmus that he was praefectus aerario Town-Treasurer The English Translators call him the Chamberlain of the City Yea setting aside the metaphorical signification of this name often used for a name of rule the very literall and native signification of the word will serve to strengthen this Argument in hand Ministers are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is house-stewards or over the house but what house Aristotle at the beginning of the second book of his Oeconomicks distinguisheth a fourfold oeconomy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 kingly noble civil private The Ministers of Christ are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the first sort They are stewards in the house of the great King He that is steward in a Kings house must needs have a ruling power in the house 1 Kings 4. 6. Ahishar was over Solomons houshold 1 Kings 18. 3. And Ahab called Obadiah which was the Governour of his house 2 Kings 18. 18. Eliakim which was over the houshold In all which places the 70. have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I hold therefore with Peter Martyr upon 1 Cor. 4. 1. that Ministers being by their calling and office stewards in the house of God ought to cast out prophane impure persons out of the house and receive them again upon their repentance And why are they called Stewards of the mysteries of God surely the Sacraments are part and a chief part of those mysteries and Christ hath made his Ministers not the civil Magistrates stewards of these mysteries to receive unto or to exclude from the Sacraments and as they may not keep back any of the children of the house so they may not suffer dogs to eat at the childrens Table The one and twentieth Argument which shall claudere agmen shall be drawn from Act. 15. where we find an Ecclesiastical Assembly or Synod of the Apostles Elders and other choice brethren snch as Iudas and Sylas These did so assemble themselves and proceed with authority in a businesse highly concerning the truth of the Gospel Christian liberty the healing of scandal and the preserving of peace in the Church as that it is manifest they had and executed a power of government distinct from Magistracy Mr. Selden de Jure natur Gent. lib. 7. cap. 12. hath sufficiently expressed that which is the ground of my present Argument and I rather choose to speak it in his words then in my owne Now a dispute being had of this thing at Antioch Paul and Barnabas who having used many Arguments against that Pharisaical opinion yet could not end the controversie are sent to Hierusalem that there the thing might be determined by the Apostles and Elders It is agitated in a Synod In it it is determined by the Apostles and Elders that the Gentiles who had given their names to Christ are not indeed bound by the Law of Moses or of the Hebrewes as it is Mosaicall and prescribed to the Church or Common-wealth of the Iewes but that they ought to enjoy their Christian liberty And so much for that which the Synod loosed them from But what dorh the Synod bind upon them The Synod doth also impose certain things namely abstinence from fornication and from things offered to Idols and from blood and things strangled VT QUAE NECESSARIO OBSERVANDA EX AUTHORITATE SYNODI saith Mr. Selden BEING SUCH AS WERE NECESSARILY TO BE OBSERVED IN REGARD OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE SYNOD by those who giving their names to the Christian Religion should live with the Jewes they also giving their names to the Christian Religion and so enter into religious fellowship with them I shall adde two other Testimonies of Mr. Prynns The first I shall take out of his twelve considerable serious Questions concerning Church-Government pag. 5. where arguing against the Independency of particular Congregations he askes whether the Synodâ—…l Assembly of the Apostles Elders and Brethren at Hierusalem Act. 15. who MADE AND SENT BINDING DECREES to the Churches of the Gentiles in Antioch Syria and Cilicia and other Churches be 〈◊〉 an apparent subversion of Independency So that by Mr. Prynns confession the Scripture holds forth other Governours or Rulers in the Church beside Magistrates and the authority of these other Governours to be such as to make and send to the Churches BINDING DECREES in things and causes Ecclesiastical Another Testimony I take from his Independency examined pag. 10 11. where he argueth against the Independents and proveth from Act. 15. the authority of ordinary Ecclesiastical Synods bringing also six Arguments to prove that the Apostles did not there act in their extraordinary Apostolical capacity or as acted by a spirit of infallibility but in their ordinary capacity Thereafter he concludeth thus Therefore their assembling in this Councel not in their extraordinary capacity as Apostles onely buâ—… as Elders Ministers and the Elders Brethrens sitting together in Councell with them upon this Controversie and occasion is an undeniable Scripture authority for the lawfulnesse use of Parliaments Councels Synods under the Gospel upon all like necâ—…ssary occasions and FOR THEIR POWER TO DETERMINE CONTROVERSIES OF RELIGION TO MAKE CANONS IN THINGS NECESSARY FOR THE CHURCHES PEACE AND GOVERNMENT Loe here Mr. Prynn gives us an undeniable Scripture authority for a diataktick governing power in the Church distinct from Magistracy How he will draw from Act. 15. the use of Parliaments or their authority I do not imagine It is enough
of all such as may be satisfied this I avouch and averre It is Jure divino It is the will of God and of his Sonne Iesus Christ the King and Head of his Church that there be a Church-Government in the hands of Church-Officers distinct from the Civil Government It is de necessitate praecepti of the necessity of precept that it be sâ—… It is sin and a violation of Christâ—… Institution if it be not so I am confident the Arguments which I have brought Chap. 9. will reach this point and fully conclude it especially if the strength of them be put together Yet now to drive the nail to the head I adde these following Arguments directly inferring and proving an Institution First The Scripture speaks of Church Government in the same manner and with the same height fulnesse and peremptorinesse of expression as it speaketh of other things which are without controversie acknowledged even by the Erastians themselves to be Institutions of Christ. For instance Let the Erastians prove against the Socinians the necessity and perpetuity of the Ordinance of Baptisme that it ought to continue alwais in the Church and that by vertue of an Institution and precept of Christ I will undertake by the like medium to inferre the like conclusion concerning Church-Government Again let them prove the necessity perpetuity and institution I say not now of the Word it self or of preaching but of the ministery or of the Pastoral office I will bring the like Argument concerning Church-Government I do not now compare or paralel the Government with the Ministery of the Word quo ad necessitatem medii vel finis as being equally necessary to salvation nor yet as being equally excellent but this I say The one is by the Scripture language an Institution and Ordinance of Christ as well as the other One Ordinance may differ much from another and still both be Ordinances Secondly Church-Government is reckoned among such things as had an Institution and which God did set in the Church 1 Cor. 12. 28. It is a good Argument for the Institution of Pastors and Teachers that God set them in the Church as we read in that place and Christ gave them to the Church Ephes. 4. 11. Will not this then hold as well for the Institution of a Government in the Church That the Governments mentioned 1 Cor. 12. 28. are Ecclesiastical and distinct from civil is already proved Chap. 6. Thirdly If it be the will and commandement of God that we be subject and obedient to Church-Governors as those who are over us in the Lord as well as to civil Governors then it is the will of God that there be a rule and Government in the Church distinct from the civil For Relata se mutâ—…o ponunt vel tollunt If we be obliged by the fifth commandement to honour Magistrates as Fathers then it is the will of God that there be such Fathers So when we are commanded to know them which are over us in the Lord and to esteem them highly 1 Thess. 5. 12. to honour doubly Elders that rule well 1 Tim. 5. 17. to be subject and obedlent unto Ecclesiasticall Rulers Heb. 13. 17. with verse 7. 24. doth not this intimate the will of God that Pastoâ—s and Elders be over us in the Lord and rule us Ecclesiastically Fourthly That which being administred is a praise and commendatiâ—n to a Church and being omitted is a ground of controversie to Christ against a Church can be no other then an Ordinance and necessary duty But Church-Government and Discipline is such a thing as being administred it is a praise and commendation to a Church 2 Cor. 2. 9. Revil 2. 2. and being omitted is a ground of Controversie to Christ against a Church 1 Cor. 5. 1. 2. 6. Revel 2. 14. 20. Ergo. Fifthly The rules and directions concerning an Ecclesiastical Government and Discipline are delivered preceptwise in Scripture 1 Cor. 5. 13. Put away that wicked person from among you 2 Thess. 3. 14. Note that man Tit. 3. 10. A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition reject Augustine lib. contra Donatistas post Collationem Cap. 4. saith that Church-censurâ—s and discipline are exercised in thâ— Church secundum praeceptum Apostolicum according to the Apostolick precept for which he citeth 2 Thess. 3. 14. Sixthly There is an Institution and command Matth. 18 17. Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a Publican In which place there are three Acts of the Church that is of the Assembly of Church-Officers 1. They must be met together to receive complaints and accusations Tell the Church 2. They give sentence concerning the case if he neglect to hear the Church c. Where heareing is required and obedience there must needs be an authoritative speaking or judging So that they who would prove the Church here hath onely power to admonish doctrinally because it is said If he hear not the Church they may as well prove that the Judges of Israel had no more power but to admonish doctrinally because it is appointed Deut. 17. 12. that the man who will not hearken to the Judge shall die and it is not there expressed that the Judge shall put him to death more then it is expressed here that the Church shall declare the offender to be as a heathen and a publican 3. They must bind such a one by Excommunication Whatsoever ye bind on earth c. Neither could it ever enter in the thoughts of Jesus Christ to command one Church-member or private brother to esteem another brother as an heathen and a publican whom he would not have so esteemed by the whole Church and least of all can it be the will of Christ that one and the same person should be esteemed by one of the Church to be as a heathen and a publican and withall be esteemed by the whole Church as a brother a good Christian a Church-member and accordingly to be freely admitted to the Ordinances CHAP. XI The necessity of a distinct Church-Government under Christian as well as under Heathen Magistrates SOme when they could not denie but there was a Church-Government in the Primitive and Apostolick Churches distinct from all civil Government and Churchcensures distinct from all civil punishments yet they have aledged though no such thing was alledged of old neither by Constantine and other Christian Emperors nor by others in their behalf that this was for want of Christian Magistrates and that there is not the same reason for such a Church-Government or censures where there is a Christian Magistracy See Mr. Husseys plea pag. 24. As likewise Mr. Prynne in his Diotrephes catechised Master Colemans re-examination pag. 16. calls for an instance where the State was Christian. For taking off this exception I shall observe First of all Grotius otherwise no good friend to Church-Government being poisoned with the Arminian Principles who have endeavoured to weaken extremely the authority of
his place against the holy Ghost the said holy Spirit bearing the contrary record to his Conscience Testimonies taken out of the Harmony of the Confessions of the Faith of the 〈◊〉 Churches Râ—printed at London 1643. Pag. 238. Out of the confession of Helvetia FUrthermore there is another power of duty or ministerial power limited out by him who hath full and absolute power and authority And this is more like a Ministry then Dominion For we see that some master doth give unto the steward of his house authority and power over his House and for that cause delivereth him his keyes that he may admit or exclude such as his master will have admitted or excluded According to this power doth the Minister by his office that which the Lord hath commanded him to do and the Lord doth ratifie and confirm that which he doth and will have the deeds of his ministers to be acknowledged and esteemed as his own deeds unto which end are those speeches in the Gospel I will give unto thee the keyes of the Kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou bindest or loosest in earth shall be bound and loosed in heaven Again whose sins soever ye remit they shall be remitted and whose sins soever ye retain they shall be retained But if the minister deal not in all things as his Lord hath commanded him but passe the limits and bounds of Faith then the Lord doth make void that which he doth Wherefore the Ecclesiastical power of the Ministers of the Church is that function whereby they do indeed govern the Church of God but yet so as they do all things in the Church as he hath prescribed in his Word which thing being so done the faithful do esteem them as done of the Lord himself Pag. 250. Out of the confession of Bohemia THe 14th Chapter of Ecclesiastical doctrine is of the Lords keyes of which he saith to Peter I will give thee the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and these keyes are the peculiar function or Ministery and administration of Christ his power and his holy Spirit which power is committed to the Church of Christ and to the Ministers thereof unto the end of the world that they should not onely by preaching publish the holy Gospel although they should do this especially that is should shew forth that Word of true comfort and the joyful message of peace and new tydings of that favour which God offereth but also that to the beleeving and unbeleeving they should publikely or privately denounce and make known to wit to them his favour to these his wrath and that to all in general or to every one in particular that they may wisely receive some into the house of God to the communion of Saints and drive some out from thence and may so through the performance of their Ministery hold in their hand the Scepter of Christ his Kingdom and use the same to the government of Christ his Sheep And after Moreover a manifest example of using the power of the keyes is laid out in that sinner of Corinth and others whom St. Paul together with the Church in that place by the power and authority of our Lord Jesus Christ and of his Spirit threw out from thence and delivered to Sathan and contrariwise after that God had given him grace to repent he absolved him from his sins he took him again into the Church to the communion of Saints and Sacraments and so opened to him the Kingdom of Heaven again By this we may understand that these keyes or this divine function of the Lords is committed and granted to those that have charge of souls and to each several Ecclesiastical Societies whether they be smal or great Of which thing the Lord sayeth to the Churches Verily I say unto you whatsoever ye bind on earth shall be bound in heaven And straight after For where two or three are gathered together in my Name there am I in the middest of them Pag. 253. Out of the French Confession VVE beleeve that this true Church ought to be governed by that regiment or discâ—pline which our Lord Jesus Christ hath established to wit so that there be Pastors Elders and Deacons that the purity of doctrine may be retained vices repressed c. Pag. 257. Out of the Confession of Belgia VVE beleeve that this Church ought to be ruled and governed by that spiritual Regiment which God himself hath delivered in his word so that there be placed in it Pastors and Ministers purely to preach and rightly to administer the holy Sacraments that there be also in it Seniors and Deacons of whom the Senate of the Church might consist that by these means true Religion might be preserved and sincere doctrine in every place retained and spread abroad that vicious and wicked men might after a spiritual manner be rebuked amended and as it were by the bridle of discipline kept within their compasse Pag. 260. Out of the Confession of Auspurge AGain by the Gospel or as they term it by Gods Law Bishops as they be Bishops that is such as have the administration of the Word and Sacraments committed to them have no jurisdiction at all but onely to forgive sin Also to know what is true doctrine and to reject such Doctrine as will not stand with the Gospel and to debarre from the communion of the Church such as are notoriously wicked not by humane force and violence but by the word of God And herein of necessity the Churches ought by the law of God to perform obedience unto them according to the saying of Christ He that heareth you heareth me Upon which place the Observation saith thus To debar the wicked c. To wit by the judgement and verdict of the Presbyterie lawfully gathered together c. A Testimony out of the Ecclesiastical Discipline of the Reformed Churches in France Cap. 5. Art 9. THe knowledge of scandals and the censure or judgement thereof belongeth to the Company of Pastors and Elders Art 15. If it befalleth that besides the admonitions usually made by the Consistories to such as have done amisse there be some other punishment or more rigorous censure to be used It shall then be done either by suspension or privation of the holy communion for a time or by excommunication or cutting off from the Church In which cases the Consistories are to be advised to use all prudence and to make distinction betwixt the one and the other As likewise to ponder and carefully to examine the faults and scandals that are brought before them with all their circumstances to judge warily of the censure which may be required Harmonia Synodorum Belgicarum Cap. 14. Art 7. 8. 9. PEccata sua natura publica aut per admonitionis privatae contemtum publicata ex Consistorii totius arbitrio modo formâ ad aedificationem maximè accomodatis sunt Corrigenda Qui pertinaciter Consistorii admonitiones rejecerit à S. Coenae communione
Intention and it being accordingly declared and Resolved by them That all sorts of notorious scandalous Offenders should be suspended from the Sacrament Which is the very point so much opposed by Master Prynne for the controversie moved by him is not so much concerning the manner or who should be the Judges as concerning the matter it selfe he contending that all sorts of notorious scandalous offenders should not be suspended from the Sacrament but onely such as are excommunicated and excluded from the hearing of the Word Prayer and all other publique Ordinances Having now removed so many mistakes of the true state of the question that which is in controversie is plainly this Whether according to the word of God there ought to be in the Elderships of Churches a spirituall power and authority by which they that are called brethren that is Church members or Officers for the publique scandall of a prophane life or of pernicious doctrine or for a private offence obstinately continued in after admonitions and so growing to a publique scandall are upon proofe of such scandall to be suspended from the Lords Table untill signes of repentance appeare in them and if they continue contumacious are in the name of Jesus Christ to be excommunicate and cut off from all membership and communion with the Church and their sinnes pronounced to be bound on earth and by consequence in Heaven untill by true and sincere repentance they turne to God and by the declaration of such repentance be reconciled unto the Church The affirmative is the received doctrine of the reformed Churches whereunto I adhere The first part of it concerning Suspension is utterly denyed by M r Prynne which breaketh the concatenation and order of Church discipline held forth in the question now stated Whether he denieth also Excommunication by Elderships to be an Ordinance and Institution of Christ and onely holdeth it to be lawfull and warrantable by the word of God I am not certaine If he do then he holds the totall negative of this present question However I am sure he hath gone about to take away some of the principall Scripturall foundations and pillars upon which Excommunication is builded As touching the gradation and order in the question as now stated it is meant positively and exclusively that such a gradation not onely may but ought to be observed ordinarily which M r Prynne denieth although I deny not thaâ— for some publique enormous haynous abominations there may be without such degrees of proceeding a present cutting off by Excommunication But this belongs not to the present controversie CHAP. II. Whether Matth. 18. 15 16 17. prove Excommunication THe second point of difference is concerning Matth. 18. M r Prynne in the first of his foure questions told us that the words Matth. 18. 17. Let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a Publican are meant onely of personall private trespasses between man and man not publique scandalous sinnes against the Congregation and that t is not said Let him be to the whole Church but let him be to Thee c. This I did in my Sermon retort For if to thee for a personall private trespasse much more to the whole Church for a publique scandalous sinne whereby he trespasseth against the whole Congregation Yea it followeth upon his interpretation that he may account the whole Church as Heathens and Publicans if all the members of the Church doe him a personall injury whereupon I left this to be considered by every man of understanding whether if a private man may account the whole Church as Heathens and Publicans for a personall injury done to himselfe alone it will not follow that much more the whole Church may account a man as a Heathen and Publican for a publique scandalous sinne against the whole Church M r Prynne in his Vindication pag. 3. glanceth at this objection but he takes notice onely of the halfe of it and he is so farre from turning off my retortion that he confirmeth it for pag. 4. he confesseth that every Christian hath free power by Gods word to esteeme not onely a particular brother but all the members of a Congregation as Heathens and Publicans if he or they continue impenitent in the case of private injuries after admonition Now my exception against his Quere remains unanswered If I may esteem the whole Church as Heathens and Publicans when they doe me an injury and continue impenitent therein may not the whole Church esteem me as an Heathen man and a Publican when I commit a publique and scandalous trespasse against the whole Church and continues impenitent therein Shall a private man have power to cast off the whole Church as Heathens and Publicans and shall not the whole Church have power to cast off one man as an Heathen and Publican I know he understands those words Let him be to thee as a Heathen man and a Publican in another sence then either the reformed Churches doe or the ancient Churches did and takes the meaning to be of avoyding fellowship and familiarity with him before any sentence of Excommunication passed against the offender But however my argument from proportion will hold If civill fellowship must be refused because of obstinacy in a civill injury why shall not spirituall or Church-fellowship be refused to him that hath committed a spirituall injury or trespasse against the Church If private fellowship ought to be denied unto him that will not repent of a private injury why shall not publique fellowship in eating and drinking with the Church at the Lords Table be denied unto him that will not repent of a publique scandall given to the Congregation Are the rules of Church fellowship looser and wider than the rules of civill fellowship or are they straiter Is the way of communion of Saints broader than the way of civill communion or is it narrower Peradventure he will say that the whole Church that is all the members of the Church have power to withdraw from an obstinate scandalous brother that is to have no fraternall converse or private Christian fellowship with him Well then If thus farre he be as a Heathen and a Publican to the whole Church distributively how shall he be as a Christian brother to the whole Church collectively If all the members of the Church severally withdraw fellowship from him even before he be excommunicated how shall the whole Church together be bound to keepe fellowship with him till he be excommunicated Instead of loosing such knots M r Prynne undertakes to prove another thing that this Text of Matthew is not meane of Excommunication or Church censures and that the Church in this Text was not any Ecclesiasticall Consistory here he citeth Iosephus as if he had spoken of that Text but onely the Sanhedrin or Court of civill Justice But though all this were true which he saith yet there may be a good argument drawn by necessary consequence from this Text to prove Excommunication Which
pray and worship This also he hath to prove not that religious publicans of whom Christ means not but that impious infamous Publicans came to the Temple 6. That passage Luke 18. 10. concerning the Publicans goe ing up to the Temple to pray first it is expressely declared to be a parable Vers. 9. and therefore can not prove the reality of the thing according to the letter no more than an audible conference between Abraham and the rich man in Hell can be proved from Luke 16. 24. to the end of the Chapter though I believe that be a History related parabolically as Vâ—…ssius proveth in his Theses farre lesse can a parable properly so called prove an historicall narration The meaning may be no other but this that if such a Publican and such a Pharisee should goe up to the Temple to pray then the one should depart justified and the other not 7. I can also grant without any prejudice to the businesse of Excommunication that the Publican yea an execrable Publican did goe up to the Temple to pray For an excommunicate person among the Jewes as many thinke so long as there was hope of his repentance had leave to come into the utter Court of the Temple yet so that they came in at the gate of the mourners and excommunicate persons were known by all that saw them to be excommunicate persons More of this Booke 1. cap. 4. 8. This very Text Luke 18. helpes us For t is said Vers. 13. The Publican stood afarre off that is in the opinion of Diodati in some remote part of the first Court of the Temple 1 Kings 8. 41. It is very probable whereof see Book 1. chap. 9. that the Intermurale or atrium Gentium is meant which sometime hath the name of the Temple To the Publicans standing afarre off is opposed the Pharisees standing by himselfe Vers. 11. where I construct 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Camero doth So Camerarius and Beza following the Syriack and some old Greek copies he stood apart by himselfe the very custome making it so that the Publican should not come neere him but stand in atrio Gentium 9. The reason why Publicans are named as hatefull and execrable persons was not for civill respects nor because Publicans for the Jewes themselves did not refuse to keep company with good and just Publicans as I shall prove afterwards particularly it was not for their Tax-gathering a particular mentioned by M r Prynne it seems to strengthen his exposition of civill injuries but for divers scandalous sinnes and abominable prophanesse therefore publicans and sinners publicans and harlots publicans and gluttons and wine-bibbers are almost synonyma's in the Gospell Matth. 9. 11. 11. 19. 21. 32. Murke 2. 16. Luke 5. 30. and Publicans are named as the worst of men Matth. 5. 46 47. the most of them being so reputed From all this which hath been said in answer to his fourth reason it appeareth that let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican is more than he would make it keepe not any familar company or have no civill fellowship with him And whereas page 4. he saith that Paul expresly interprets it so 1 Cor. 5. 10 11 12. 2 Thess 3. 4. Ephes. 5. 11. Rom. 16. 17. I answer out of himselfe in that same place and pag. 5. Let him be to thee as an Heathen c. is a phrase never used elsewhere in Scripture How then saith he that Paul doth expresly interpret it Paul commandeth to withdraw fellowship and that for any scandalous sin in a Church-member although it be no private injury to us as the places quoted by himselfe make it manifest Therefore Paul doth expresly interpret that phrase Mat. 18. to be meant of withdrawing civill fellowship only What consequence is there here I come to his fifth and last reason the words runue only Let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a Publican not to the whole Church Answ. 1. This is the very thing he said in his first Quaere which is answered before I shall onely adde here another answer out of Erastus who argueth thus One brother should forgive another seventy times in a day if the offending brother doe so oft turn againe and crave pardon Therefore so should the Church doe to a sinner that craveth pardon even as often as he doth crave pardon For saith he there can be no just reason given wherefore the whole Church ought not to doe herein what Church members ought to doe severally If this be a good argument when Christ saith If thy brother repent forgive him Luke 17. 334. by which place M r Prynne expoundeth Matth. 18. 15. will it not be as good an argument Let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican therefore let him be such to the whole Church when the whole Church is offended by his obstinacy and impenitency 2. Those words Let him be to thee cannot be restrictive It must be at least extended to all such as are commanded to rebuke their brother and if he continue obstinate to tell the Church Now the commandement for rebuking our brother that fals into a scandalous sinne is not restricted to him that is personally or particularly wronged but it is a common Law of spirituall love Levit. 19. 17. Yea saith M r Hildersham lect 36. on Psal. 51. Every man hath received â—… commandement from Christ to informâ—… the governours of the Church of such a brother as cannot otherwise be reformed Matth. 18. 17. Tell the Church If it belong to every Church member to reprove a scandalous sinne which his brother committeth in his â—ight or hearing or to his knowledge and if he repent not to tell the Church then it also belongs to every Church member to esteeme him as an Heathen man and a Publican if he heare not the Church 3. The next words Whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Hraven being spoken to the Apo les and in them to other Miniâ—ers of Jesus Christ doe expound the former words Let him be unto thee c. to be meant not of private withdrawing of fellowship but of a publique Church censure 4. The reason why Chriâ— will have such an offender to be esteemed as an Heathen man and a Publican is not the offence and fault first committed but his obstinacy and contumacy in that offence and his neglecting to heare the Church So that suppose the offence had been a private or personall injury yet that for which theÌ„ offender is to be esteemed as an Heathen and a Publican toucheth the whole Church and is a generall scandall to them all namely his contumacy and not hearing the Church How can it then be imagined that Christ would onely have one Church member to esteem a man as an Heathen and a Publican for that which is a common generall scandall to the whole Church Munsterus in his Annotations upon Matth. 18. doth
a Publican qua Publican and so every Publican Now what can be the sence of Christs words in reference to every Publican saith he unlesse this be it that it was lawfull to pursue any Publican at a Tribunall of the Romans I answer his argument goeth upon a most false supposition which I cleare by the like instances Matth. 6. 7. Use not vaine repetitions as the Heathen doe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shall we thence conclude that the Heathens as Heathens and so all Heathens without exception did use repetitions in prayer or that they were all so devout in their way as to make long prayers Luke 15. 11. I am not as other men are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 extortioners unjustâ—… c. Did the Pharisee meane that every man eo ipso that he was another man and so the rest of the Pharisees as well as others were extortioners c. Iohn 15. 6. he is cast forth as a branch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If the rule of Erastus hold then a branch as a branch and so every branch is cast out Many such instances might be given If in these Texts there must be a restriction of the sence notwithstanding of the prepositive article so that by Heathens we must understand devout or praying Heathens by other men vulgar men or the common sort of men by a branch a fruitlesse or withered branch Why shall we not also understand by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the prophane loose or unjust Publican and as Grotius doth rightly expound it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let him be esteemed saith he as an Heathen man that is as an alien from religion or as a Publican that is if he be a Jew esteeme him as an infamous sinner or one of a flagitious life Since therefore Erastus confesseth pag. 194. that as the office of the Publicans was lawfull so likewise many Publicans were honest chast religious and pious men I may safely conclude that Let him be unto thee as a Publican cannot be meant universally of all Publicans For how can it be supposed that Christ would tacitely allow of alienation from or severity to pious Publicans Tenthly whereas the Erastians lay great waight upon that forme of speech Let him be to thee not to the whole Church as an Heathen man and a Publican which is also one of Sullivius his exceptions de Presbyterio cap. 9. in this also they do abuse the Text for 1. The same offence which is a sufficient ground to one Church-member to esteem another Church member as an Heathen man or a Publican being a publique and known scandall such as is contumacy and disobedience to the Church must needs be a sufficient ground to all other Church members or to the whole Church to esteem so of him Surely Christ would not have contradictory judgements in his Church concerning so high a point as is the esteeming of a Church member to be as a Heathen man and a Publican 2. The Erastians herein argue no better than the Papists Christ said to Peter I will give unto thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven Therefore unto Peter alone Peradventure Mr. Hussey was so sagacious as to prevent this objection with his popish concession these Keyes were never given to any of the Apostles but to Peter saith he in his plea for Christian magistracy pag. 9. It seems he will farre lesse sticke to grant the Prelaticall argument Timothy laid on hands and Titus ordained Elders therefore each of these had the power of ordination by himselfe alone 3. It is a good observation of Luther Tom. 1. Resolv super propos 13. de potest Papae fol. 299. in the sixteenth of Matthew Christ begins with all his disciples Whom say ye that I am and he endeth with one Unto thee will I give c. In the eighteenth of Matthew he beginneth with one If thy brother trespasse against thee c. and he endeth with all Whatsoever he binds on earth c. Whence he concludeth that in both these places what is said to one is said to all of them CHAP. V. That Tell it to the Church hath more in it then Tell it unto a greater number THere is yet another interpretation of these words invented to elude the argument for Ecclesiasticall government and censures from Mat. 18. Tell it unto the Church that is if the offending brother will neither hearken to private admonition nor to admonition before two or three witnesses then tell it unto many or unto a greater company This cals to mind D r Sutcliffes glosse upon the word Presbytery 1 Tim. 4. 14. that it signifieth Presbyters or Ministers non juris vinculo sed utcunque collectos as if the occasionall meeting of some Presbyters in Westminster Hall or upon the Exchange or in a journey or at a buriall were a Presbytery with power to lay on hands That interpretation of the word Church is no better But that I may reject nothing without reason I desire it may be considered 1. Whether either in Scripture or in any Greeke Lexicon or in any Classick author it can be found that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was ever used to signifie meerly a greater number or company then two or three not called out and imbodied together for government or worship For my part I could never yet finde where the simple majority of the number maketh the denomination of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I finde the word sometimes yet very seldome used of an unlawfull assembly combining or joyning together to evill the reason I take to be this because they pretended to be authorised as a lawfull assembly so Christ called Iudas friend when he came to betray him with a kisse But since the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matth. 18. 17. doth signifie a lawfull assembly as all doe confesse I desire some testimony of Scripture or approved authors where this name is given to a lawfull assembly which was not imbodied for worship or government but had the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 simply because of the majority of number Sure I am 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is at least caetus evocatus an assembly called forth and every offended brother hath not from Christ the priviledge of gathering a Church 2. If by tell it unto the Church were meant no more but this tell it unto a greater number then if the offender doe not heare the Church there must be recourse unto some others distinct from the Church for the more authoritative and ultimate determination unlesse it be said that there is no remedy for offences but in a greater number which each man shall make choice of But where is their more effectuall remedy or where will they fixe the ultimate degree of proceedings 3. When Christ saith Tell it unto the Church and if he neglect to heare the Church c. whether respect be had to the forme of the Hebrews or to the forme of the Grecians the Church will still have a ruling power
of Joh. 20. 23. not of the Jewish Church It maketh the more against him I am sure that it s spoken to and of Christs Disciples for this proveth that the Church vers 17. is not the Jewish Sanhedrin but the Christian Presbytery then instituted and afterwards erected and that the thing which makes one as an Heathen and a Publican is binding of his sinnes upon him And for the context immediatly after Christ had said If he neglect to heare the Church let him be unto thee c. he addeth Verily I say unto you whatsoever ye shall bind on earth c. The dependency is very cleare A Christian having first admonished his brother in private then having taken two or three witnesses after this having brought it to the publique cognizance of the Ecclesiasticall Consistory and after all that the offender being for his obstinacy excommunicate here is the last step no further progresse Now might one thinke what of all this what shall follow upon it Nay saith Christ it shall not be in vaine it shall be ratisied in Heaven And as the purpose cohereth so that forme of words Verily I say unto you is ordinarily used by Christ to signifie his continuing and pressing home the same purpose which he had last mentioned as Matth. 5. 26. Matth. 6. 2. Matth. 8. 10. Matth. 10. 15. Matth. 11. 11. Matth. 18. 3. Matth. 19. 23 28. Matth. 21. 31. Matth. 23. 36. Matth. 26. 13. Matth. 24. 34 47. Marke 10. 15. 12. 43. 13. 30. Luke 12. 37. and many the like passages To my best observation I have found no place where Christs Verily I say unto you begins a new purpose which hath no coherence with nor dependency upon the former This coherence of the Text and the dependency of vers 18. upon that which went before which dependency is acknowledged by Erastus who perceiving that he could not deny the dependency fancieth that the binding and loosing is meant of the offended brothers pardoning or not pardoning of the offender Confirm Thes. pag. 157. doth also quite overthrow Master Prynnes other answer that this binding and loosing is onely meant of preaching the Gospell and of denouncing remission of sinnes to the penitent and wrath to the impenitent Nay That potestas clavium conoionalis is instituted in other places but here its potestas clâ—…vium disciplinalis as is evident First by the coherence of the Text and by the taking of two or three more and then telling of the thing to the Church all which intimateth a rising as from one or two or three more so from them to the Church which cannot be meant of one man as hath been argued against both Pope and Prelate for no one man can be called a Church neither hath one man the power of jurisdiction but one man hath the power of preaching Secondly the Apostles and those who succeed them in the worke of the Ministery have the same power of the Keys committed from Christ to them ministerially which Christ hath committed from the father to him as Mediator authoritatively For in the parallel place Ioh. 20. v. 21 23. where he gives them power of remitting or retaining sinnes he saith As my Father hath sent me even so send I you But the Father gave Christ such a power of the Keyes as comprehends a power of Government and not meerely doctrinall Isa. 22. 21 22. I will commit the government into his hand c. And the Keyes of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder Thirdly It may be proved also by that which immediately followeth vers 19. Againe I say unto you that if two of you shall agree on earth c. which cannot be meant of the power of preaching for neither the efficacy of preaching nor the ratification of it in Heaven nor the fruit of it on Earth doth depend upon this that two preachers must needs agree in the same thing But it agreeth well to the power of Discipline concerning which it answereth these two objections First it might be said the Apostles and other Church-governours may fall to be very few in this or that Church where the offence riseth shall we in that case execute any Church-discipline Yes saith Christ if there were but two Church-officers in a Church where no more can be had they are to exercise Discipline and it shall not be in vaine Againe it might be objected be they two or three or more what if they doe not agree among themselves To that he answereth there must be an agreement of two Church-officers at least otherwise the sentence shall be null we can not say the like of the doctrinall power of binding or loosing that it is of no force nor validity unlesse two at least agree in the same doctrine as hath been said two must agree in that sentence or censure which is desired to be ratified in Heaven and then they binding on Earth and unanimously calling upon God to ratifie it in Heaven it shall be done Fourthly this binding and loosing can not goe without the Church it is applicable to none but a Church member or a Brother So the threed of the Text goes along from vers 15. If thy Brother trespasse against thee and vers 16. thou hast gained thy Brother And when it is said Tell the Church it is supposed that the offender is a member of the Church over whom the Church hath authority and of whom there is hope that he will heare the Church And when it is said Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a Publican it is supposed that formerly he was not unto us as an Heathen man and a Publican For these and the like reasons Tostatus in Matth. 18. quaest 91. and divers others hold that this rule of Christ is not applicable to those who are without the Church But if the binding and loosing be meant onely of preaching the Gospell as Master Prynne would have it then it were applicable to those that are not yet baptised nor made Church members for unto such the Gospell hath been and may be preached The binding and loosing which is proper to a Brother or to a Church member must be a juridicall power of censures of which the Apostle saith 1 Cor. 5. 12. What have I to doe to judge them also that are without Doe not ye judge them that are within Therefore Chrysostome Hom. 61. in Matth. according to the Greeke Hom. 60. doth parallel Matth. 18. with 1 Cor. 5. proving that this rule of Christ is not applicable to one that is without but onely to a brother Which Paul also saith in these words What have I to doe to judge them also that are without But he commandeth us to convince and reduce brethren 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to cut off the disobedient this he Christ doth also in this place Theophylact also on Matth. 18. noteth the same restriction of this rule of Christ to a Christian Brother Fifthly this binding power is
of Kings and Lord of Lords How all power in Heaven and in Earth is said to be given to him That the Governments set in the Church 1 Cor. 12. 28. are not civill Magistrates fully proved Ephes. 1. 21 22 23. and Colos. 2. 10. vindicated CHAP. VII Arguments for the negative of that Question formerly propounded THe lawfull authority of the Heathen Magistrates vindicated It can not be shewed from Scripture that Christ as Mediator hath given any Commission of Vice-gerentship to the Christian Magistrate That the worke of the Ministery is done in the name and authority of Jesus Christ the worke of Magistracy not so The power of Magistracy or civill Government was not given to Christ as Mediator shewed from Luke 12. 14. Iohn â—8 36. Luke 17. 20 21. Magistracy founded in the Law of nature and Nations The Scripture holds forth the same origination of Heathen Magistracy and of Christian Magistracy CHAP. VIII Of the power and priviledge of the Magistrate in things and causes Ecclesiasticall what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not and what it is THat no administration formally and properly Ecclesiasticall and namely the dispencing of Church censures doth belong unto the Magistrate nor may according to the Word of God be assumed and exercised by him proved by six Arguments That Christ hath not made the Magistrate head of the Church to receive appeales from all Ecclesiasticall Assembles There are other sufficient remedies against abuses or Mal-administration in Church-Government Reasons against such appeales to the Magistrate The Arguments to the contrary from the Examples of Ierenâ—…y and of Paul discussed Of the collaterality and coordination of the Civill and Ecclesiasticall powers What is the power and right of the Magistrate in things and causes Ecclesiasticall cleared first generally next more particularly by five distinctions 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 belong to the civill power but non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. The Magistrate may imperare that which he may not elicere 3. Distinguish the directive power from the coercive power 4. The Magistrates power is cumulative not privative 5. He may doe in extraordinary cases that which he ought not to doe ordinarily A caution concerning the Arbitrary power of Magistrates in things Ecclesiasticall CHAP. IX That by the Word of God there ought to be another Government besides Magistracy or civill Government namely an Ecclesiasticall Government properly so called in the hands of Church-officers THe Question stated and the Affirmative proved by one and twenty Scripturall Arguments Who meant by the Elders that rule well 1 Tim. 5. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 names of government The words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb 13. 7 17. examined Of receiving an accusation against an Elder Of rejecting an Hereticke Of the excommunication of the Incestuous Corinthian and the sence of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of the subjection of the spirits of the Prophets to the Prophets The Angels of the Churches why reproved for having false Teachers in the Church Note that man 2 Thess. 3. 14. proved to be Church-censure Of the Ruler Rom. 12. 8. and Governments 1 Cor. 12. 28. A patterne in the Jewish Church for a distinct Ecclesiasticall government What meant by cutting off Gal. 5. 12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly what Of the Ministeriall power to revenge all disobedience 2 Cor. 10. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 2. 8. what Of the visible administration of the Kingdome of Christ by his Laws Courts Censures The Arguments for Excommunication from Matth. 18. and 1 Cor. 5. briefly vindicated That Elders are rulers of the flock 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a name of Government Ministers why called Sâ—…ewards of the Mysteries of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a name of government Church-Government exercised by the Synod of the Apostles and Elders Acts 15. CHAP. X. Some objections made against Ecclesiasticall Government and Discipline answered Mr Husseys objection doth stricke as much against Paul as against us The fallacy of comparing Government with the word preached in point of efficacy Foure ends or uses of Church-government That two coordinate Governments are not inconsistent The objection that Ministers have other worke to doe answered The feare of an ambitious ensnarement in the Ministery so much objected is no good Argument against Church-government M. Husseys motion concerning Schooles of Divinity examined Church Government is no immunity to Church-officers from Censure Though the Erastian principles are sufficiently overthrown by asserting from Scripture the may be of Church-government yet our Arguments prove a must be or an Institution Six Arguments added which conclude this point CHAP. XI The necessity of a distinct Church-government under Christian as well as under Heathen Magistrates THis acknowledged by Christian Emperours of old Grotius for us in this particular Christian Magistracy hath never yet punished all such offences as are Ecclesiastically censurable Presbyteries in the primitive times did not exercise any power which did belong of right to the Magistrate No warrant from the word that the Ordinance of a distinct Church government was onely for Churches under persecution but contrariwise the Churches are charged to keep till the comming of Christ the commandement then delivered No just ground for the feare of the interfeering of the civill and of the Ecclesiasticall power The Churches liberties enlarged not diminished under Christian Magistrats The Covenant against this exception of the Erastians The Christian Magistrate if he should take upon him the whole burthen of the corrective part of Church-government could not give an account to God of it The Erastian principles doe involve the Magistrate into the Prelaticall guiltinesse The reasons and grounds mentioned in Scripture upon which Church-censures were dispenced in the Primiâ—ive Churches are no other then concerne the Churches under Christian Magistrâ—tes The end of Church-censures neither intended nor attained by the administration of Christian Magistracy The power of binding and loosing not temporary They who restrict a distinct Church-government to Churches under Heathen or persecuting Magistrats give a mighty advantage to Socinians and Anabaptists Gualther and Master Prynne for us in this Question APPENDIX A Collection of some testimonies out of a Declaration of King Iames the Helvetian Bohemian Augustane French and Dutch confessions the Ecclesiasticall Discipline of the reformed Churches in France Harmonia Synodorum Belgicarum the Irish Articles a Book of Melanchton and another of L. Humfredus The third Booke Of Excommunication from the Church AND Of Suspension from the Lords Table CHAP. I. An opening of the true state of the question and of Master Prynnes many mistakes and mis-representations of our Principles A Transition from Church-government in generall to Excommunication and Suspension in particular The present controversie ten waies mis-stated by M. Prynne That which was publiquely depending between the Parliament and Assembly did rather concerne the practicall conclusion it selfe then the Mediums to prove it The strength of the Assemblies proofes
bondage Grotius his Interpretation of the word Church not inconsistent with ours Divers Authors of the best note for our Interpretation that is that by the Church here is meant the Elders of the Church assembled The name of the Church given to the Elders for four considerations CHAP. VI. Of the power of binding and loosing Matth. 18. 18. OUr Opposites extreamly difficulted and divided in this point Binding and loosing both among Hebrews Grecians authoritative forensicall words Antiquity for us which is proved out of Augustine Hierome Ambrose Chrysostome Isidorus Pelusiota Hilary Theophylact. That this power of binding and loosing belongeth neither to private persons nor to civill Magistrates but to Church officers and that in reference 1. to the bonds of sinne and iniquity 2. To the dogmaticall decision of controversies concerning the will of Christ. That this power of binding and loosing is not meerely doctrinall but juridicall or forensicall and meant of inflicting or taking off Ecclesiasticall censure This cleared by the coherence and dependency between verse 17. and 18 which is asserted against M. Prynne and further confirmed by eleven reasons In which the agreement of two on earth verse 19. the restriction of the rule to a brother or Church-member also Matth 16. 19. John 20. 23. Psalm 149. 6 7 8 9. are explained Another Interpretation of the binding and loosing that it is not exercised about persons but about things or Doctrines confuted by â—ive reasons How binding and loosing are acts of the power of the Keys as well as shutting and opening CHAP. VII That 1 Cor. 5. proveth Excommunication and bâ— a necessary consequence even from the Erastian Interpretation Suspension from the Sacrament of a person un excommunicated THe weight of our proofs not laid upon the phrase of delivering to Sathan Which phrase being set aside that Chapter will prove Excommunication verse 8. Let us keepe the Passeover c. applied to the Lords Supper even by M. Prynne himselfe Master Prynnes first exception from 1 Cor. 10. 16 17. 11. 20 21. concerning the admission of all the visible members of the Church of Corinth even drunken persons to the Sacrament answered His second a reflection upon the persons of men His third concerning these words No not to eate confuted Hence Suspension by necessary consequence His fourth exception taken off His three conditions which he requireth in Arguments from the lesser to the greater are false and doe not hold Our Argument from this Text doth not touch upon the rock of separation Eight considerations to prove an Ecclesiasticall censure and namely excommunication from 1 Cor. 5. compared with 2 Cor. 2. More of that phrase to deliver such a one to Sathan CHAP. VIII Whether Judas received the Sacrament of the Lords Supper THe Question between M. Prynne me concerning Iudas much like unto that between Papists and Protestants concerning Peter Two things premised 1. That Matthew and Marke mentioning Christs discourse at Table concerning the Traytor before the Institution and distribution of the Lords Supper place it in its proper order and that Luke placeth it after the Sacrament by an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or recapitulation which is proved by â—ive reasons 2. That the story Iohn 13. concerning Iudas and the sop was neither acted in Bethany two daies before the Passeover nor yet after the Institution of the Lords Supper The first Argument to prove that Iudas received not the Lords Supper from Ioh. 13. 30. he went out immediately after the sop Mr Prynnes foure answers confuted His opinion that Christ gave the Sacrament before the common supper is against both Scripture and Antiquity Of the word immediately The second Argument from Christs words at the Sacrament That which M. Prynne holds viz. that at that time when Christ infallibly knew Iudas to be lost he meant conditionally that his body was broken and his blood shed for Iudas confuted by three reasons The third Argument from the different expressions of Love to the Apostles with an exception while Iudas was present without an exception at the Sacrament M. Prynnes Arguments from Scripture to prove that Iudas did receive the Sacrament answered That Iudas received the Sacrament is no indubitable verity as Mr. Prynne cals it but hath been much controverted both among Fathers Papists and Protestants That the Lutherans who are much of M. Prynnes opinion in the point of Iudas his receiving of the Lords Supper that they may the better uphold their Doctrine of the wicked their eating of the true body of Christ yet are much against his opinion in the point of admitting scandalous persons not Excommunicated to the Sacrament M. Prynnes bold assertion that all the Ancients except Hilary onely doe unanimously accord that Iudas received the Lords Supper without one dissenting voyce disproved as most false and confuted by the testimonies of Clemens Dionysius Areopagita Maximus Pachymeres Ammonius Alexandrinus Tacianus Innocentius 3. Rupertus Tuitiensis yea by those very passages of Theophylact and Victor Antiochenus cited by himselfe Many moderne writters also against his opinion as of the Papists Salmeron Turrianus Barradius of Protestants Danaeus Kleinwitzius Piscator Beza Tossanus Musculus Zanchius Gomarus Diodati Grotius The testimonies cited by M. Prynne for Iudas his receiving of the Sacrament examined some of them found false others prove not his point others who thinke that Iudas did receive the Sacrament are cleare against the admission of known prophane persons The confession of Bohemia and Belgia not against us but against Master Prynne CHAP. IX Whether Judas received the Sacrament of the Passeover that night in which our Lord was betrayed THat Christ and his Apostles did eate the Passeover not before but after that Supper at which he did wash his Disciples feet and give the sop to Iudas These words before the Feast of the Passeover Joh. 13. 1. scanned The Jewes did eate the Passeover after meale but they had no meale after the Paschall supper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ioh. 13. 2. needeth not be turned supper being ended but may suffer two other readings Christs sitting down with the twelve is not meant of the Paschall supper and if it were it proves not that Iudas did eate of that Passeover more than 1 Cor. 15. 5. proves that Iudas did see Christ after his resurrection A pious observation of Cartwright Another of Chrysostome CHAP. X. That if it could be proved that Judas received the Lords Supper it maketh nothing against the Suspension of known wicked persons from the Sacrament CHrists admitting of Iudas to the Sacrament when he knew him to be a divell could no more be a president to us then his choosing of Iudas to be an Apostle when he knew also that he was a divell Iudas his sinne was not scandalous but secret at that time when it is supposed that he did receive the Sacrament The same thing which M. Prynne makes to have been after the Sacrament to prove that Iudas did receive the Sacrament
be previous admonitions and the party admonished prove obstinate and impenitent The eighth difference stands in their correlations The Correlatum of Magistracy is people embodied in a Common-wealth or a Civil corporation The Correlatum of the Ecclesiastical power is people embodied in a Church or Spiritual corporation The Common-wealth is not in the Church but the Church is in the Common-wealth that is One is not therefore in or of the Church because he is in or of the Common-wealth of which the Church is a part but yet every one that is a Member of the Church is also a Member of the Common-wealth of which that Church is a part The Apostle distinguisheth those that are without and those that are within in reference to the Church who were notwithstanding both sorts within in reference to the Common-wealth 1 Cor. 5. 12 13. The Correlatum of the Ecclesiastical power may be quite taken away by persecution or by defection when the Correlatum of the civil power may remain And therefore the Ecclesiastical and the civil power do not se mutuò ponere tollere Ninthly There is a great difference in the ultimate termination The Ecclesiastical power can go no further then Excommunication or in case of extraordinary warrants and when one is known to have blasphemed against the holy Ghost to Auathema Maranatha If one be not humbled and reduced by Excommunication the Church can do no more but leave him to the Judgement of God who hath promised to ratifie in Heaven what his Servants in his Name and according to his Will do upon Earth Salmasius spends a whole chapter in confuting the Point of the coactive and Magistratical Jurisdiction of Bishops See Walo Messal cap. 6. He acknowledgeth in that very place pag. 455 456 459 462 that the Elders of the Church have in common the power of Ecclesiastical Discipline to suspend from the Sacrament and to excommunicate and to receive the offender again upon the evidence of his repentance But the Point he asserteth is That Bishops or Elders have no such power as the Magistrate hath and that if he that is excommunicate do not care for it nor submit himself the Elders cannot compel him But the termination or Quo usque of the civil power is most different from this It is unto death or to banishment or to confiscation of goods or to imprisonment Ezra 7. 26. Tenthly They differ in a divided execution That is the Ecclesiastical power ought to censure sometime one whom the Magistrate thinks not fit to punish with temporal or civil punishments And again the Magistrate ought to punish with the temporal Sword one whom the Church ought not to cut off by the Spiritual Sword This difference Pareus gives Explic Catech. quaest 85. art 4. and it cannot be denied For those that plead most for Liberty of conscience and argue against all civil or temporal punishments of Hereticks do notwithstanding acknowledge that the Church whereof they are Members ought to censure and excommunicate them and doth not her duty except she do so The Church may have reason to esteem one as an Heathen and a Publican that is no Church-Member whom yet the Magistrate in prudence and policy doth permit to live in the Common-wealth Again the most notorious and scandalous sinners blasphemers murtherers adulterers incestuous persons robbers c. when God gives them repentance and the signes thereof do appear the Church doth not binde but loose them doth not retain but remit their sins I mean ministerially and declaratively Notwithstanding the Magistrate may and ought to do Justice according to Law even upon those penitent sinners CHAP. V. Of a twofold Kingdom of Iesus Christ a general Kingdom as he is the eternal Son of God the Head of all Principalities and Powers raigning over all creatures and a particular Kingdom as he is Mediator raigning over the Church onely THe Controversie which hath been moved concerning the civil Magistrate his Vicegerentship and the holding of his Office of and under and for Jesus Christ as he is Mediator hath a necessary coherence with and dependance upon another Controversie concerning a twofold Kingdom of Jesus Christ one as he is the eternal Son of God raigning together with the Father and the holy Ghost over all things and so the Magistrate is his Vicegerent and holds his Office of and under him another as Mediator and Head of the Church and so the Magistrate doth not hold his Office of and under Christ as his Vicegerent Wherefore before I come to that Question concerning the origination and tenure of the Magistrate's Office I have thought good here to premise the enodation of the Question concerning the twofold Kingdom of Jesus Christ. It is a distinction which Master Hussey cannot endure and no marvel for it overturneth the foundation of his opinion He looks upon it as an absurd assertion pag. 25. Shall he have one Kingdom as Mediator and another as God He quarrelleth all that I said of the twofold Kingdom of Christ and will not admit that Christ as Mediator is King of the Church onely pag. 25 26 27 35 36 37. The Controversie draweth deeper then he is aware of for Socinians and Photinians finding themselves puzzled with those arguments which to prove the eternal Godhead of Jesus Christ were drawn from such Scriptures as call him God Lord the Son of God also from such Scriptures as ascribe Worship and Adoration to him and from the Texts which ascribe to him a Supreme Lordship Dominion and Kingdom over all things For this hath been used as one Argument for the Godhead of Jesus Christ and his consubstantiality with the Father The Father raigns the Son raigns the holy Ghost raigns Vide lib. Isaaci Clari Hispani adversus Varimadum Arianum Thereupon they devised this answer That Jesus Christ in respect of his Kingly Office and as Mediator is called God and Lord and the Son of God of which see Fest. Honnij Specimen Controv. Belgic pag. 24. Ionas Schlichtingius contra Meisnerum pag. 436. and that in the same respect he is worshipped that in the same respect he is King and that the Kingdom which the Scripture ascribeth to Jesus Christ is onely as Mediator and Head of the Church and that he hath no such Universal Dominion over all things as can prove him to be the eternal Son of God This gave occasion to Orthodox-Protestant-Writters more fully and distinctly to assert the great difference between that which the Scripture saith of Christ as he is the eternal Son of God and that which it saith of him as he is Mediator and particularly to assert a twofold Kingdom of Jesus Christ and to prove from Scripture that besides that Kingdom which Christ hath as Mediator he hath another Kingdom over all things which belongs to him onely as he is the eternal Son of God This the Socinians to this day do contradict and stisly hold that Christ hath but one Kingdom which he exerciseth as
that for that end one ought to give place to another upon the other hand that a boundlesse liberty and confusion and immunity from censure may not be introduced into the Church To this latter branch belongs vers 29. 32. 33. Let the Prophets speak two or three and let the other judge He will have two or at most three Prophets to speak in one Congregation at one diet or time of assembling and those Prophets saith he must be examined judged and censured by the other Prophets for the Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets that is every particular Prophet distributively is subject to all the Prophets collectively or to the colledge of Prophets add and of other spirituall persons intrusted with the government of the Church together with the Prophets as from vers 37. and Gal. 6. 1. is well observed by our Country-man Mr. Dickson upon this place Therefore Walaeus Tom. 1 pag. 468. doth rightly collect from this place an authority of Church-Government Protestant Writers prove hence the authority of General-Councels above the Pope and that the Pope is a false Prophet because he refuseth to be subject to the Prophets Iunius in divers places applieth this Text to the authority of Presbyteries and Synods Gualther upon the place applyeth it against the Pope who will judge all men and be judged of no man whereas saith he the Apostle here will have no man how eminent soever to be free from censure when he is censurable So then we have in this Text a subjection and an authority of judging and censuring And this Judgement which the Apostle here speaks of is neither the Judgement of the civil Magistrate nor the Judgement of discretion common to the whole Church but it is the Judgement or censure of Prophets and that not School-wise according to Mr. Husseys notion of Schooles that is by the Prophets disputing a man out of his error and no more no vote no decision no result except he that hath taught an error do agree to the arguments of the other Prophets and so all end in a brotherly accord and in the unanimous consent of the whole Clergy for so doth he advise the Parliament so that he shall be no more subject to all the Prophets then all the Prophets to him Yea in Mr. Husseys sence the Pope will not refuse to be subject to a Councel of Prophets and then Protestant Writers have been far out of their way who have disputed against the Pope from this Text supposing it to hold forth a binding authoritative Judgement of the Prophets whereunto any one Prophet is bound to be subject the Judgement of his private discretion being alwaies reserved to him that he give not blind obedience Eighthly I argue from Revel 2. 14. 20. The Lord Jesus reproveth the Angel of the Church in Pergamus for suffering those that taught the doctrine of Balaam and the Angel of the Church in Thyatira for suffering Iezebel which called her self a Prophetesse to seduce his people The fault here reproved must be the neglect of Church-censures and corrective government which is so manifest that they who plead most for liberty of Conscience from the Magistrate do acknowledge that the Angels of these Churches are reproved for not censuring Ecclesiastically those that did thus seduce Gods people Neither is it said because thou art silent and dost not reprove nor convince but because thou hast there them that hold the Doctrine of Balaam that is because thou dost not cast them out of the Church that they may not hurt others So the English Annotations upon the place referring us also to 1 Cor. 5. The Angel of the Church was guilty in this that those who had so much scandalized the Church by their Doctrine were still in the Church and not yet cast out of the Church And who can imagine that the Angels of those Churches whom Christ himself commendeth for holding fast his name and for their love service faith and patience were so void either of prudence as not to observe or of zeal as not to gainsay and confute by sound doctrine those soul and scandalous errors Certainly their sin was like that of Eli they did not together with the doctrinal and monitory part make use of that Jurisdiction and corrective power which God had put in their hands Ninthly We have another Argument from 1 Thess. 3. 14. And if any man obey not our word by this Epistle note that man and have no Company with him that he may be ashamed Here the Syriack helpeth us much And if any man obey not these words which are contained in this Epistle let that man be separated from you neither have company with him that he may be ashamed Gualther upon the place saith the Apostle speaks de disciplina Ecclesiastica what discipline they ought to have in the Church and the end thereof So Calvin Beza Piscator Zanchius Diodati The Dutch Annotations Gomarus also Mariana Cajetan Salmeron Gorranus Esthius in lib. 4. Sent. Dist. 19. Sect. 7. and diverse others following Augustine Ambrose Chrysostome Theophylact Theodoret Aquinas all these do apply it to Ecclesiasticall discipline and censure Some controversie there is whether this Text reach as far as Excommunication which doth not belong to this present Argument but certainly it reacheth to a publick Church-censure and is more then the withdrawing of private Company and Fellowship either because of personal or private injuries or because of prophanesse For 1. the offence spoken of by the Apostle is not a matter of Civil or Personal injury but of scandal he speaks of idle bodies that walked disorderly not working at all and if these must be noted and separated how much more saith Theoylact those who commit crimes and wickednesse 2. Here is contumacy added to the offence if any man obey not our word by this Epistle intimating that upon occasion of this Epistle those that walked disorderly were to be solemnly admonished and required to work in quietnesse and to eat their owne bread which if after admonition they would not do then to note them Aquinas clears it by 1 Sam. 15. 23 for rebellion is as the sin of witck-craft and stubbornesse is as iniquity and as idolatry 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 note that man signate as Menochius rendreth it rather then either significate or notate set a mark upon him even as saith Erasmus we set a mark upon pushing oxen that we may avoid them which agreeth well with the Syriack Let that man be separated from you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is some what more then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The latter usually signifieth no more but significo indico signum do but the former is signum notam imprimo obsigno insignio The Septuagints make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to answer to the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 levavit elevavit sustulit So Psal. 4. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. signatum est
consolatoria promissione nanâ—… dieitur Sunt quidam de hinc 〈◊〉 qui non gustabuâ—…t mortem donec videant regâ—…um Dei The very same words hath Bedâ—… on Mark. 9. 1. following it seemes Gregory Grotius on Matth. 16. 28. doth likewise understand the promulgation of the Gospel and the Scâ—pter of Christ that is his law going out of Zion to be here meant I conclude as the Church is not onely a mystical but a political body So Christ is not onely a mystical but a political Head But peradventure some men will be bold to give another answer that the Lord Jesus indeed reigneth over the Church even in a political respect but that the administration and influence of this his Kingly office is in by and through the Magistrate who is supreme Judge Governour and Head of the Church under Christ. To this I answer Hence it would follow 1. That Christs Kingdom is of this World and commeth with observation as the Kingdoms of this World do which himself denieth Luke 17 20 Iohn 18 36. Next It would follow that Christ doth not reigne nor exercise his Kingly office in the Government of his Church under Pagan Turkish or persecuting Princes but onely under the Christian Magistrate which no man dare say 3. The Civil Magistrate is Gods Vicegerent but not Christs that is the Magistrates power hath its rise origâ—nation institution and deputation not from that speciall dominion which Christ exerciseth over the Church as Mediator and Head thereof But from that Universal Lordship and Soveraignity which God exerciseth over all men by right of Creation In so much that there had been for orders sake Magistrates or superior Powers though man had not fallen but continued in his innocency and now by the Law of Nature and Nations there are Magistrates among those who know nothing of Christ and among whom Christ reigneth not as Mediator though God reigneth over them by the Kingdom of power 4. If the Magistrate be supreme Head and Governour of the Church under Christ then the Ministers of the Church are the Magistrates Ministers as well as Christs and must act in the Magistrates name and as subordinate to him and the Magistrate shall be Christs Minister and act in Christs Name The seventeeth Argument I draw from the institution of Excommunication by Christ Matth. 18. 17. Tell it unto the Church But if he neglect to hear the Church Let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a Publican In which Text 1. All is restricted to a brother or a Church-member and agreeth not to him who is no Church-member 2. His treâ—pasle is here lookt upon under the notion of scandal and of that which is also like to destroy his owne soule 3. The scope is not civil but spiritual to gain or save his soul. 4. The proceedings are not without witnesses 5. There is a publick complaint made to the Church 6. And that because he appeares impenitent after admonitions given privatly and before two or three 7. The Church speaks and gives a Judgement concerning him which he is bound to obey 8. If he obey not then he is to be esteemed and held as a heathen man and a Publican 9. And that for his not hearing the Church which is a publike scandal concerning the whole Church 10. Being as as an Heathen and Publican he is kept back from some ordinances 11. He is bound on earth by Church-Officers Whatsoever ye bind c. 12. He is also bound in Heaven More of this place else-where These hints will now serve The Erastians deny that either the case or the court or the censure there mentioned is Ecclesiastical or Spiritual But I prove all the three First Christ speaketh of the case of scandals not of personal or civil injuries whereof he would be no Judge Luk. 12. 14. and for which he would not permit Christians to go to Law before the Roman Emperor or his deputies 1 Cor. 6. 1. 6. 7. But if their interpretation stand they must grant that Christ giveth laws concerning civil injuries and that he permitteth one of his disciples to accuse another for a civil injury before an unbeleeving Judge Beside Christ saith not If he shall hear thee thou hast from him a voluntary reparation of the wrong or satisfaction for it which is the end why we deal with one who hath done us a civil injury But he saith If he shall hear thee thou hast gained thy brother intimating that the offending brother is told and admonished of his fault onely for a spiritual end for the good of his soul and for gaining him to repentance All which proveth that our Saviour meaneth not there of private or civil injuries as the Erastians suppose but of scandals of which also he had spoken much before as appeareth by the preceding part of that chapter A civil injury done by one brother to another is a scandal but every scandal is not a civil injury The Jewes to whose custome Christ doth here allude did excommunicate for diverse scandals which were not civil injuries And Paul saith of a scandal which was not a civil injury when ye sin so against the brethren c. 1 Cor. 8. 12. 2. The court is Ecclesiastical not civil for when it is said Tell it unto the Church must we not expound Scripture by Scripture and not understand the Word Church to be meant of a civil Court for though the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used Act. 19. reoitative of a heathenish civil assembly called by that name among those heathens yet the pen-men of the holy Ghost have not made choice of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in any place of the new Testament to expresse a civil court either of Jewes or Christians So that we cannot suppose that the holy Ghost speaking so as men may understand him would have put the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place to signifie such a thing as no where else in the new Testament it is found to signifie Nay this very place expoundeth it self for Christ directeth his speech to the Apostles and in them to their Successors in the government of the Church Whatsoever ye shall bind c. And if two of you shall agree c. So that the church which here bindeth or judgeth is an Assembly of the Apostles Ministers or Elders of the church 3. The censure is spirituall as appeareth both by these words Let him be unto thee as a Heathen and a Publican which relate to the Excommunication from the church of the Jewes and comprehendeth not onely an exclusion from private fellowship and company which was the condition of the Publicans with whom the Jewes would not eat but also an exclusion from the Temple Sacrifices and communion in the holy things which was the condition of heathens yea of prophane Publicans too of which elsewhere And further it appeareth by these words Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth c. The Apostles had no power to inflict any
civil punishment but they had power to bind the soul and to retain the sin Ioh. 20. 23. And this power of binding is not in all the Scripture ascribed to the civil Magistrate The eighteenth Argument shall be drawn from the example of excommunication 1 Cor. 5. 4 5. The Apostle writeth to the church of Corinth to deliver to Sathan for the delivery to Sathan was an act of the church of Corinth as the Syriack explaineth it the incestuous man which is called a censure inflicted by many 2 Cor. 2. 6. that is by the whole Presbytery of the Church of Corinth And whereas some understand by delivering to Sathan the putting forth of the extraordinary Apostolicall power to the working of a miracle upon the offender by giving him over into the hands of Sathan so as to be bodily tormented by him or to be killed and destroyed as Erastus takes it I answer 1. It cannot be meant of death for it is said that Hymeneus and Alexander were delivered to Sathan and to what end that they might learne not to blaspheme 1 Tim. 1. 20 which had been too late to learn after death 2. Nor is it at all meant of any miraculous tormenting of the body by the divel for beside that it is not likely this miracle could have been wrought Paul himself not being present to work it it is utterly incredible that the Apostle would have so sharply rebuked the Church of Corinth for that a miracle was not wrought upon the incestuous man it not being in their power to do or that he would seek the consent of that Church to the working of a miracle and as a joynt act proceeding from him and the Church by common counsell and deliberation for where read wee of any miracle wrought that way Therefore it is much more safe to understand by delivering to Sathan as Gualther himself doth Excommunication which is a shutting out of a Church-member from the Church whereby Sathan commeth to get dominion and power over him for he is the God of this World who reigneth at his pleasure in and over those who are not the Church and people of God 2 Cor. 4. 4. Eoh. 2. 2. And if any shall be so far unsatisfied as not to admit this sence which we put upon that phrase of delivering to Sathan Yet our Argument for Excommunication drawn from 1 Cor. 5. standeth strong the weight of it not being laid upon tradere Satanae onely but upon vers 6. 7. 11 12. compared with 2 Cor. 2. 6. which undeniably prove Excommunication from Church fellowship The nineteenth Argument shall be drawn from Act. 20. 28. Take heed therefore unto your selves and to all the flock over the which the holy Ghost hath made you Overseers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compared with 1 Pet. 5. 2. 3. Feed the flock of God which is among you taking the oversight thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which Texts as they hold forth a Bishop and a Presbyter to be one and the same Iure divino so they hold forth the ruling power of Presbyters or Elders First Because otherwise the simile so much made use of in these Scriptures of overseeing the flock mentioned and joyned together with the feeding thereof will fall short in a main and most materiall point for the overseers of flocks do not onely make them to lye down in green pastures and lead them beside the still waters but they have also rodds and staves for ruling the flocks and for correcting and reducing the wandring sheep which will not be brought home by the voice of the shepheard Psal. 23. 2. 4. The Pastorall rod there mentioned by David is corrective as Clemens Alexandrinus paedag lib. 1. cap. 7. who doth also paralel it with that 1 Cor. 4. Shall I comâ— unto you with a rod Secondly Paul requireth the Elders of the Church of Ephesus to take heed unto and to oversee the whole flock which did consist of more then did or could then meet together ordinarily into one place for the worship of God as appeareth by the Church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla which was one but not the onely one Church assembly at Ephesus by the great and wonderfull increase of the Gospel at Ephesus and such other Arguments which I do but point at the full debate of them not being my present work Peter also writing to the Churches of the strangers in severall provinces calls them the flock not flocks and commends unto the Elders the feeding and oversight of that flock Now what is it that can denominate many particular visible Churches or Congregations to be one visible ministeriall flock or Church unlesse it be their union and association under one Ecclesiasticall Government No doubt they had the administration of the Word and Sacraments partitive or severally Nor do I deny but they had a partitive several Government but there was also an union or association of them under one common Government which did denominate them to be one visible Ecclesiastical flock Thirdly The very name given to the Elders of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a name of authority rule and government especially in the Christian and Ecclesiasticall use of the Word H. Stephanus in Thes. ling. Gr. in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith that the Elders of the Church were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to wit saith he those qui verbo gubernationi praeeraâ—…t Where he tells us also that the Magistrate or Praetor who was sent with a Judiciall power into those Townes which were undâ—r the power of the Athenians was called by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Septuagints use the word Nehem. 11. 9. Ioel the son of Ziâ—…hri was their overfeer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Judah the son of Senuah was second over the City He that had but the second place was a Ruler how much more he that was in the first place Loe here the head and chief Ruler of the Benjamites called by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Numb 31. 14. 2 Kings 11. 15. the chief officers of the Host the Captains over thousands and captains over hundreds are called by the Septuâ—gints 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The same Hebrew words which they render by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they render in other places by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praefectus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Antistes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praepositus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Princeps Yea the name of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they render by this word Iob. 20. 29. This is the portion of a wicked man from God and the heritage appointed to him by God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Greek by the overseer even as the same name of Bishop is given to Christ 1 Pet. 2. 25. Conradus Kirchâ—…rus in the word Pakad tells us also that Gen. 41. 34. Lâ—…t Pharaoh do this and let him appoint Officers over the Land where the 70. read
Classical and Synodical Assemblies and to give a kind of Papal power to the Magistrate yet in this particular he argueth strongly for us and not against us Secondly Where is that Christian Magistracy which hath suppressed or punished all such offences as did fâ—ll under Ecclesiastical cognizance and censure in the Primitive and Apostolick Churches Or where is that Christian Magistrate that will yet undertake to punish all those offences and scandals which were censured in the Apostolick Churches Till some such instance be given this exception against Church-discipline and censures under a Christian Magistrate hath not so much as colour enough Aliae sunt leges Caesarum aliâ—…e Christi aliud Papinianus aliud Paulus noster praecipit saith Hierome in Epitaph Fabiâ—…lae Caesars Lawes and Christs Lawes are not the same but different Papinianus commands one thing Paul another thing Chrysostome Homil. 12. in 1. Epist. ad Cor. tells us that the best and wisest Law-givers had appointed no punishment for fornication for consuming and trifling away of time with playing at dice for gluttony and drunkennesse for Stage-plaies and lascivious whorish gestures therein Is there not some cause to apply all this and much more of this kind even to Christian Law givers and Magistrates Put the case that he who is called a brother as the Apostle speaks that is a member of the visible Church be found grossely ignorant of the Principles of Religion and so far from growing in knowledge that he loseth the knowledge of the Scriptures and of the truth of God which he had for this hath been diverse times observed through neglect of the means or if he be known to neglect ordinaâ—lly prayer in and with his Family and to continue in that offence after admonition or if he live in known or scandalous malice and envie and refuse to be reconciled with his neighbour or if he be a known lyar and dissembler or if by his words and actions he do scandalously and manifestly shew himself covetous drowned in sensuality ambitious proud or if he give a foul scandal by filthy and obscene speeches by lascivious obscene whorish-like gestures or actions where the act it self of adultery or fornication cannot be proved I suppose that for these and such like scandals which are causes deserving not onely the Elderships enquiry and admonition but suspension from the Lords Table the Christian Magistrate neither doth nor by the civil or municipal Laws is bound to arraign and punish all such as are guilty thereof Thirdly whereas Arch-bishop Whitgift Answ. to the Admon pag. 114. did alledge that the Church may not be governed under a Christian Magistrate as it may under a Tyrant which he brings as an exception against ruling Elders and Elderships while he could not denie but such there were in the Primitive Church Mr. Cartwrigh in his Reply pag. 140. answereth that if these Elders under a Tyrant had medled with any office of a Magistrate then there had been some cause why a godly Magistrate being in the Church that office should cease but since they did onely assist the Pastor in matters Ecclesiastical there is no distinction between times of persecution and times of peace as touching the office of Elders The like say I of Church-censures and discipline If the Government of the Church by Presbyteries and Synods if suspension and excommunication in the Apostles times had been an usurping of any thing belonging to the Magistrate then there had been some reason to lay aside all Church-censures and Ecclesiastical Government when the Magistrate turned Christian and willing to do his duty But if not then the civil and Church-government may still remain distinct even where the State is Christian. Fourthly Every Institution or Ordinance of Christ must continue as a perpetual obligation unlesse we can find in the Word that Christ hath given us a dispensation or taken off the obligation and set a period to the Ordinance that it shall continue so long and no longer I mean every Ordinance of Christ must be perpetual which we cannot prove from the Word to be but temporal or extraordinary Now in the Word Christ hath not appointed the governing the Church and correcting scandals to be onely under a Tyrant and to cease under a Christian Magistrate neither is there any such thing held forth in Scripture which yet our opposites must shew if they will make good what they say But contrariwise what Christ delivered to the Apostles and they to the Churches is to be kept and continued till our Lord come again 1 Cor. 11. 23. 26. 1 Tim. 6. 14. and he himself saith Rev. 2. 24. 25. That which ye have already hold fast till I come These things were not spoken to the Apostles to Timothy to the Churches of that time personally for they were not to live till Christs comming again but the charge was given to them in name of and with respect unto all the Ministery and Churches of Christ. Fifthly This exception made against Church-censures under a Christian Magistrate supposeth that such censures will make an interfering and clashing between the civil and Ecclesiastical power But there is no cause for that fear these powers being so hugely differenced in their efficient causes matters formes ends effects objects adjuncts correlations and ultimate terminations as I have made it to appear in the particulars Chap. 4. Sixthly The Churches liberty and power is not to be infringed diminished nor taken away but preserved maintained enlarged and augmented under a Christian Magistrate Were it not a sad case if there should be cause to say that the Churches of Christ have not so much liberty under a Christian Magistrate to keep themselves and the Ordinances from pollution as they had under Pagan and Infidel Magistrates Seventhly Why may not Christian Church-government consist with Christian Magistracy as well as the Jewish Church government did consist with the Jewish Magistracy being of the same Religion Or if we please to look to later Presidents who can be ignorant that civil government and Church-discipline have rather strengthened then destroyed each other not onely in France where the Magistracy is not Protestant but in Scotland in the Low-Countries in Geneva and else-where Eightly We have covenanted to endeavour a Reformation of Church-Government and discipline according to the word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches Now both the Word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches leadeth us to a Church-government distinct from civil Government and the example of the best Reformed Churches doth undeniably lead us to a Church-discipline even where he Magistrate is Christian neither doth the word make any exception of Christian States but contrariwise chargeth us to keep the commandement and Ordinances till Christ come again Ninthly The Magistrate hath other work to do and such as will take up the whole man and if he should take upon him the whole burthen of Church-Government the enquiring into examining and correcting of all
have suffered in his person or estate all the punishment which he ought to suffer so that he hath now made a civil atonement as I may call it for his offence and the Christian Magistrate hath no further to charge him with Suppose also that he is by such corporal or civil punishments as by a bit and bridle over-awed and restrained from committing again the like extâ—rnal acts Notwithstanding he hath not the least signe of true repentance and godly sorrow for his former foul and scandalous sins and he is known to be not an accuser but an excuser of himself for those faults and scandals Such a one comes and desires to receive the Sacrament Must his poenal satisfaction to the Christian Magistrate be a sufficient poenitential satisfaction to the Church Here is a rock which the Erâ—…stians dash upon unlesse they admit of a distinct Ecclesiastical Judgement concerning the signes of repentance in a scandalous sinner according to which as these signes shall appear or not appear he is to be admitted or not admitted to the Sacrament Twelfthly the power of binding and loosing is not a temporary but a perpetual power that is appointed by Christ to continue in his Church alwaies unto the end Now this power is given onely to Church-officers and Christ hath not given the keyes of discipline and the power of binding and loosing of which else-where to the Magistrate nay not to the Christian Magistrate more then to the Infidel Magistrate Let the least hint be found in Scripture where Christ hath given any such power to the Christian Magistrate and I yeeld the cause Thirteenthly The new Testament holdeth out as little of the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments under a ChriÌ„stian Magistrate as it doth of a Church-government under a Christian Magistrate Shall this therefore strengthen the Socinian Tenent That Baptisme is not a perpetual Ordinance in the Church and that we are not obliged by that commission which the Apostles had to baptize God forbid Fourteenthly The German Anabaptists required an expresse warrant or example in the New Testament of a Christian Magistrate or of the sword and wars in a Christian State yet this hath been thought no good Argument against Magistracy and wars among Christians I cannot pretermit a passage of Gualther who may seem to be opposite to me in this present Question Even he in his Homily upon Iohn 9. 22. after he hath spoken of Excommunication in the Jewish Church and in the Apostolick Churches he addeth And this day also there is need of Ecclesiastical discipline which being instituted in the Reformed Churches ought to be diligently kept lest the indulgence of Magistrates which reignes almost every where should render the Doctrine of the Gospel suspected among those that are without and that themselves also may be contained in their office and may not think that any thing they will is lawful to them in the Church But after all this let me put Mr. Hussey and other Erastians in mind that if they do acknowledge that Jesus Christ hath instituted or commanded that there be a Church Government and power of censures distinct from the Civil Government when the Magistrate is Heathenish or Idolatrous let them speak it out and let us agree so far Otherwise if they do not agree in this it is but a blind for them to make use of this distinction that where the Magistrate is Christian there is no necessity of a distinct Church-Government I conclude with a passage of Mr. Prynne in his twelve considerable serious Questions touching Church-Government The ninth of those Questions runs thus Whether the Independents challenge of the Presbyterians to shew them any National Church professing Christ in our Saviours or the Apostles daies before any one Nation totally converted to the Christian Faith or any general open profession made of it by the Princes Magistrates and major part of any Nation Kingdom Republick who were then all generally Pagans and Persecutors of the Gospel not then universally imbraced be not a most irrational unjust demand Sure if this hold against the Independents it will hold as strongly yea more strongly against the Erastians to prove their demand to be most irrational and unjust while they challenge us to shew them in the New-Testament a distinct Church-Government under a Christian Magistrate or where the State was Christian though themselves know Magistrates and States were then generally Pagan and not Christian Yea there was in those daies much more of a national Church then of a Christian Magistrate An Appendix to the second Book containing a Collection of some Testimonies not cited before And first a Testimony of King Iames in a Declaration of his penned with his own hand signed and delivered to the Commissioners of the Church of Scotland at Linlithgow December 7. Anno 1585. I For my part shall never neither my posterity ought ever cite summon or apprehend any Pastor or preacher for matters of Doctrine in Religion Salvation Heresies or true Interpretation of the Scripture but according to my first act which confirmeth the liberty of preaching the Word ministration of the Sacraments I avouch the same to be a matter meer Ecclesiastical and altogether impertinent to my calling Therefore never shall I nor ever ought they I mean my posterity acclaim any power or Iurisdiction in the foresaids His Majesties meaning was that he ought not to do this in prima instantiâ that is before the person be accused convict or judged in any Ecclesiastical Court. which was the Question at that time occasioned by Mr. Andrew Melvill his Case Afterward in the same Declaration it followeth thus Christ saying Dic Ecclesiae and one onely man stealing that dint in a quiet hole the Act of Parliament reduceth the sentence for informality and nullity of processe not as Iudges whether the Excommunication was grounded on good and just causes or not but as witnesses that it was unformally proceeded against the warrant of Gods Word example of all Reformed Kiâ—ks and your owne particular custome in this Countrey A little after I mind not to cut off any liberty granted by God to his Kirk I acclaim not to my self to be judge of Doctrine in Religion salvation heresies or true Interpretation of Scripture And after My Intention is not to meddle with Excommunication neither acclaim I to my self or my Heires power in any thing that is meer Ecclesiastical and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor with any thing that Gods Word hath simply devolved in the hands of his Kirk And to conclude I confesse and acknowledge Christ Iesus to be Head and Law-giver to the same And what soever persons do attribute to themselves as Head of the Kirk and not as Member to suspend or alter any thing that the Word of God hath onely remitted to them that man I say committeth manifest Idolatry and sinneth against the Father in not trusting the Words of his Son against the Son in not obeying him and taking
suffer sinne upon him Where the Marginall paralell in the English Bibles is Mat. 18. 15. Yea Erastus himself lib. 2. cap. 2. pag. 154. confesseth that Christ doth in Matth. 18. interpret that Law Lev. 19. So Prov. 28. 4. Such as keep the Law contend with the wicked We ought to hate and abhorre sinne by which God is dishonoured and consequently to expresse our zeale against it by rebukes when it is committed in our sight hearing presence privity or knowledge as much yea much more then if it were a private and personall injury against our selves Psal. 97. 10. Amos 5. 15. Rom. 12. 9. Psal. 139. 21 22. Hence it is that the Apostle exhorteth Christians to warne them that are unruly or disorderly 1 Thess. 5. 13. Wherefore it is justly and truly maintained by Augustine Regul 3 infine Tomi primi Durandus lib. 4. dist 19. Quaest. 3. Tostatus in Math. 18. Quaest. 29. and divers thers that to admonish and rebuke a Brother committing sinne is a necessary Christian duty commanded by the word of God whereunto Christians are obliged by the love of God and their Neighbour for which see also Aegidius de Coninck de actib supernat disp 28. dub 2. 4. And if the offender be not reduced by more private admonitions and rebukes the same Law of spirituall love bindeth his Brother that knoweth his sinne and impenitency to tell the Church as Ioseph told his Father of his Brethrens faults Gen. 37. 2. and Joseph brought unto their Father their evill report that is their scandalous sinnes which made them to have an evill report It is well noted by Pareus upon the place that the thing which Ioseph did complaine of to his Father was not his Brethrens hatred against himselfe nor any personall injury done to himself because their hatred of Ioseph was the effect not the cause of the information which he gave to his Father of their faults but it was their sinne and scandalous life by which they brought an evill name upon themselves and the family of their Father Wherein he doth upon good reason justifie what Ioseph did because he told not his Brethrens faults to an Enemy but to a Father nor for their evill but for their good It was also declared unto the Apostle by them of the house of Cloe that there were contentions among the Corinthians 1 Cor. 1. 11. So it is collected from 2 Thess. 3. 11. that some in the Church of Thessalonica gave notice to the Apostle of such as walked disorderly And as he that spares the Rod hates the Child so he that neglects to rebuke an offending Brother or when that cannot amend him neglects to tell the Church doth hate his Brothers soule in so farre as he suffers sinne upon him If these things be acknowledged for truths we will be easily induced to believe that the scope of Jesus Christ Math. 18. 15 16 17. is to teach us not what he permits the party injured to doe toward the party injuring but what he commands every one that loves the soule and salvation of his Neighbour to doe for reducing his Neighbour from a sinne wherewith he is overtaken Which fitly agreeth with that which Drusius praeter lib. 1. on Mat. 18. 15. citeth e libro Musar Besides both Fathers Schoole-men Casuists Commentators Popish and Protestant when they handle the Questions de correptione fraterna they make Brotherly rebukes to be a common duty of love which one neighbour oweth to another and ever and anon they cleare what they hold from Mat. 18. I verily believe it is one of the wiles yea depths of Sathan in perverting that Text with the Erastian Glosses to throw out of the Church and to drown in desuetude and oblivion a great and necessary duty which every Christian by the law of love oweth to the soule of his Brother with whom he converseth which were it conscionably practised I dare say it should be a most powerfull and effectuall meanes by the blessing of Christ upon his owne ordinance to purge the Church of scandals to gaine soules and to advance holinesse Now he that can neither be reduced by more private reprehensions nor by publike Ecclesiasticall conviction Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man saith Christ let him be esteemed as one that hath no part in the communion of the Saints in Church-Membership in the holy things in the common-wealth of Israel in the Covenants of promise more then an Heathen man Which is a spirituall not a civill separation according to that Gal. 2. 15. We who are Jewes by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles My second Argument shall be this That which Christ saith generally of any sinne whereby one Brother scandalizeth another Brother the Erastians restrict to private or personall injuries And whereas Christs rule tendeth to the rescuing and saving of a sinner their Glosse runnes upon a mans particular interest in the resarclating of a private injury If thy Brother trespasse against thee that is Cum quis coram aliquo peccaverit saith Munsterus when any brother sinneth in the presence of some other Are we not oblidged to rebuke an offending Brother in Christian love and to endeavour to bring him to repentance and to save his soule whether he hath done to us any particular injury or not May we suffer sinne upon his soule because that sinne is not an injury to us Let it be well observed the thing here aimed at is the salvation of the offending Brother and his turning from sinne as Grotius rightly noteth from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Erastus also confesseth from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for in that sence is the same word used 1 Cor. 9. 19 20 21 22. that I might gain them that are under the Law c. and 1 Pet. 3. 1. they may be wonne by the conversation of the wives This saith Grotius James doth explain Ch. 5. v. 20. he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soule from death and shall hide a multitude of sinnes If this then be the meaning of Christs words thou hast gained thy Brother then it concerneth all sinnes whereby we know our Brothers soule and salvation to be in hazard Wherefore though Grotius understand private injuries to be that case which the Text putteth yet saith he it is the manner of the Law of God by one particular and more remarkable kind of things to intimate what ought to be done in other things according to the rule of just proportion And it holds more true in other sinnes then in the case of private injuries This rebuking is necessary as well in sins which are committed against God as in those which are committed against man and by so much the more its necessary in sinnes which are committed against God by how much they are heavier then sinnes which are committed against man saith Tostatus in Mat. 18. quest 93. And Grotius himself citeth out of Mimus
not to be made use of till all other meanes have been essayed ante tentanda omnia saith Munsterus first a private admonition then before witnesses then the matter is brought to the Church the Church declareth and judgeth the offender neglecteth to heare the Church then after all this commeth the binding which must needs be a binding with censures for that binding which Master Prynne speakes of the denouncing of the wrath of God against the impenitent by the preaching of the Gospell is not neither ought to be suspended or delayed upon such degrees of proceeding Sixthly this binding and loosing is not without two or three witnesses vers 16. But that of two or three witnesses relateth to a forensicall or judiciall proceeding as M r Prynne himselfe tels us These witnesses may be brought before the Ecclesiasticall court either to prove the offenders contumacy being admonished or to prove the scandalous fact it selfe which was from the beginning knowne to two or three witnesses according to the sence of Schoolmen expressed in the precedent Chapter Seventhly this phrase of binding and loosing is taken both from the Hebrews and from the Grecians But both the Hebrews and the Grecians used these words in a juridicall sence as I observed in the beginning Eighthly that the binding and loosing Matth. 18. 18. is juridicall not doctrinall belonging to the power of jurisdiction not of order is the sence of the ancients above cited as likewise of Scotus lib. 4. Sent. Dist. 19. Quaest. 1. art 5. Tostatus in Matth. 18. Quest. 113. yea the current both of Schoolmen and of Interpreters as well Protestant as Popish runneth that way It were too long to cite all Yea further Salmasius in appar ad lib. de primatu pâ—…p 296. understands the binding and loosing Matth. 16. 19. Ioh. 20. 23. of Discipline So Walaeus Tom. 1. pag. 92. So divers others From the same places Aretius Theol. probl loc 133. de excom draws Excommunication as an Ordinance of Christ. From the same two Texts Ioh. 20. 23. and Matth. 16. 19. Dionysius Areop agita de Ecclesiastica Hierarchia cap. 7. sect 7. doth prove that Christ hath committed unto the Ministers of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 His ancient Scholiast Maximus upon that place tels us that he speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of excommunications and separations or as he there further explaineth the judging and separating between the righteous and the wicked Salmeron upon Matth. 16. 19. thinks that the latter part of that verse And whatsoever thou shalt binde on Earth c. doth belong to the power of jurisdiction and censure Hugo de S. Victore de Sacramentis lib. 1. cap. 26. doth also expound Matth. 16. 19. of the forensicall power of Excommunication Now if in these places binding and loosing remitting and retaining sinnes comprehend a juridicall power of laying on or taking off Church censures how much more must this Juridicall power be comprehended Matth. 18. 18. where the context and circumstances will much more enforce this sence then in the other two places this binding and loosing being also in the plurall number Whatsoever ye bind c. not in the singular as the phrase is Matth. 16. 19. Whatsoever thou shalt bind c. One Minister may bind doctrinally but one alone can not bind juridically Ninthly the very doctrinall or concionall binding which is yeelded by M r Prynne is voyded and contradicted by the admission of known scandalous impenitent sinners to the Sacrament for he that is admitted to the Sacrament is loosed not bound remission not condemnation is supposed to be sealed up to him as is manifest by the words of the Institution Matth. 26. 27 28. Drinke ye all of it for this is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes So that without a power of binding by censures and namely by suspension from the Sacrament one and the same scandalous impenitent person shall be bound by the word and loosed by the Sacrament Surely he that is to be bound by the word ought also to be bound by suspension from the Sacrament unlesse we make one publique Ordinance to contradict another Tenthly doth M r Prynne believe that Jesus Christ hath any where given to Church-officers a forensicall or juridicall power of binding by Excommunication and loosing by Absolution or receiving againe into the communion of the Church If he doth believe it then I aske where hath Christ committed that power unto them if not Matth. 18 If he doth not believe that Christ hath given any such power then why doth he hold Excommunication to be lawfull and warrantable by the Word of God Most certaine it is that neither King nor Parliament nor Eldership nor Synod nor any power on earth may or ought to prohibite or keepe backe from the Sacrament such as Christ hath not commanded to be kept backe or to bind sinners by Excommunication if Christ hath given no such commission to bind in that kind Eleventhly it may give us some light in this present Question to compare the phrase of binding and loosing Matth. 18. 19. with Psalm 149. 6 7 8 9. Let the high praises of God be in their mouth and a two-edged Sword in their hand to execute vengeance upon the Heathen and pnnishments upon the people To bind their Kings with chaines and their Nobles with fetters of Iron To execute upon them the judgement written This honour have all his Saints Which both Jewish and Christian Interpreters referre to the Kingdome of Christ out of whose mouth proceedeth a two-edged Sword Revel 1. 16. 2. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the phrase used in the Greeke version of Psalm 149. If it should be understood of temporall or externall victories and conquests of the Nations and their Kings so it was not fulfilled to the Jews in the old Testament and the Jewes doe now but in vaine flatter themselves with the expectation of such a thing to come There are but two expositions which are most received and confirmed The first is that the Saints shall judge the world together with Christ 1 Cor. 6. 2. and then vengeance shall be executed on the wicked and all they who would not have Christ to reigne over them shall be bound hand and foot and cast into utter darknesse This is the sence of Arnobius upon the place and the Jesuits of Doway Emmanuel Sa Jansenius Lorinus Menochius goe that way The other Exposition holds an accomplishment of the thing in this same world and this in a Spirituall sence concerning the Kingdome of Christ in this world is holden by Calvin Bucer VVestmeherus Heshusius Gesuerus Fabritius and others So the Dutch Annotations Augustine and Hierome both of them upon the place take the sword and the chaine and fetters to be meant of the word of God conquering and overcomming aliens and Hereticks and the mightiest enemies which others cleare from Isa. 45. 14. Men of stature shall come over unto thee
and they shall be thine they shall come after thee in chaines they shall come over But because the Psalmist maketh mention of a corrective or punitive judiciary power therefore others adde for making the sence more full the power of excommunication for which Lorinus citeth Bruno and Hugo Victorinus Of the Protestant Interpreters upon the place Gesnerus applieth it to the power of the Keyes to be made use of according to that which is written Math. 18. Fabritius conceiveth the Text to comprehend castigationes spirituales and he citeth Math. 16. 19. Math. 18. 18. Io. 20. 23. Heshusius cleareth it by the Instance of Theodosius excommunicated by Ambrose Master Cotton in his Keyes of the Kingdom of heaven pag. 53. applyeth it to the Ecclesiasticall power of the Keyes Bartholomaeus Coppen understands it of the spirituall rule and Kingdom of Christ and makes it paralell to 2 Cor. 10. 4. the weapons of our warrefare are not carnall but mighty through God to the pulling downe of strong holds vers 6. and having in readinesse to revenge all disobedience This judiciary Ecclesiasticall power is to be executed upon all such of the nations as fall under the Government of the Church according to the rule of Christ. And this honour have all his Saints that their Ministers are armed with a power They that follow this latter exposition will be easily induced to beleive that the binding and loosing Mat. 18. 19. is also judiciall or juridicall They that follow the former exposition will also observe that the phrase of binding in Scripture even where it is ascribed to the Church or Saints is used in a judiciary sence and therefore it is most sutable to the Scripture phrase to understand Mat. 18 19. in that sence As touching that other Exposition of the binding and loosing that the object it is exercised about is not a person but a thing or Doctrine for it is not said Whomsoever but whatsoever ye bind It is sufficiently confuted by much of that which hath been said already proving a forensicall binding and loosing even of persons Onely I shall adde these further considerations First the binding and loosing are Acts of the power of the Keyes and are exercised about the same object about which the power of the Keyes is exercised Math. 16. 19. Now the power of the Keyes is exercised about persons for the Kingdom of heaven is opened or shut to persons not to Doctrines If it be said that the Keyes are for opening and shutting not for binding and loosing to this I answer with Alexr Alensis part 4. Quaest. 20. Membr 5. that these Keyes are as well for binding and loosing as for shutting and opening but the Act of binding and loosing doth agree to the Keyes immediately and in respect of the subject but the act of opening in reference to the last end Ibid. Membr 2. He had given this reason why the power of the Keyes is called the power of binding and loosing because although to open and shut be the more proper Acts of the Keyes themselves yet neverthelesse to loose and bind are the more proper Acts in reference to those who are to enter into the Kingdome or to be excluded from the same for the persons themselves which doe repent are the subject of loosing and they that repent not of binding Which is not so of opening and shutting for although the opening be to those that are loosed and the shutting to those that are bound yet those that are loosed are not the subject of opening as to the manner of speaking nor those that are bound the Subject of shutting So then antecedently binding and loosing are Acts of the power of the Keyes because a man is bound before he be shut up and loosed before the door be opened to him Secondly that Glosse which now I despute against doth suppose one of these two things either that binding and loosing cannot be exercised upon the same object at different times and that the binding is such as can never be loosed againe or otherwise that one and the same doctrine may be condemned at one time and approved at another time Both which are absurd and contrary to the generality of Divines Thirdly seeing the Scripture speaketh of binding and loosing in reference to persons as corporally so spiritually which I have before proved Why then shall persons be excepted from being the object of binding and loosing Matth. 18 Fourthly that of binding and loosing Mat. 18. 18. doth cohere with and is added by occasion of that which went before as is also before proved If this concerning the context be acknowledged it will carry it to persons for it was an offending brother not a false Doctrine which was spoken of in the verses preceding Fifthly binding and loosing here doth at least reach as farre as retaining or remitting of sinnes Io. 20. 23. but there it is Whosoever sinnes ye remit c. They whose sinnes are retained are bound Wherefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whatsoever Mat. 18. 18. is put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whomsoever by an Hypallage generis many examples whereof may be given in Scripture so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Io. 1. 11. is expounded by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and all things that offend Mat. 13. 41. expounded by them that doe iniquity Vnlesse you please to understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whatsoever sinnes ye bind upon men or loose from off them they shall be bound upon them or loosed from off them in heaven CHAP. VII That 1 Cor. 5. proveth Excommunication and by a necessary consequence even from the Erastian Interpretation Suspension from the Sacrament of a person unexcommunicated MAster Prynne in his first Quaere did aske whether that phrase 1 Cor. 5. To deliver such a one to Sathan be properly meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament onely This he saith I did in my Sermon wave with a rhetoricall preterition I answer for the latter part of the Quaere I know not the least ground for who did ever expound it of suspension from the Sacrament onely for the former part of it it s not necessary to be debated therefore for husbanding time and not to multiply Questions unnecessarily I said in my Sermon that the Question ought to be whether that Chapter not whether that phrase prove excommunication and that we have a shorter way to prove excommunication from the last words of that Chapter as Doctor Moulin doth in his Vates lib. 2. cap. 11. And if I should grant that delivering such a one to Sathan signifieth either of those things which Master Prynne conceiveth that is a bodily possession torture or vexation by Sathan inflicted either by the apostolicall power of miracles or by Gods immediate permission yet that will not prove that it signifieth no more Therefore Peter Martyr upon the place thinks that the Apostles delivering of the man to Sathan by a miraculous act and the Churches delivering of him to Sathan by Excommunication doe very
a one terrified and chased away 4. It shall not be in vaine to observe here that Gamachaeus in tertiam partem Thomae Quaest. 64. c. 4. though he hold that Christ gave the Sacrament to Iudas whence he argueth that the Sacraments doe infallibly worke ex opere operato where no barre is put though there be no faith nor devotion exercised in the receiver yet he doth immediately move this objection It is unlawfull to give the Sacraments to the unworthy and to such as live in mortall sinne Whereunto he answereth that it is indeed unlawfull to Ministers to give the Sacrament to the unworthy when they can refuse them without scandall a restriction which I suppose M r Prynne dare not owne for if the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of the thing must be determined by the scandall they goe upon a very slippery ground He addeth that it is unlawfull to us to follow Gods example in giving holy things to the unworthy as it is unlawfull to follow his example in the permitting of sinne when we can hinder it The like I finde in Alexander Alensis Summa Theol. part 4. Quaest. 11. membr 2. art 1. sect 4. where he moves this objection in the question whether Christ gave the Sacrament to Iudas Christ himselfe hath commanded Give not that which is holy to dogs c. and it seems he would not doe the contrary of that which himselfe commandeth Unto this objection his answer is that this prohibition lieth indeed upon the Ministers Dispencers of the Sacraments but bindeth not Christ himselfe the Law-maker As long therefore as we are able to prove from Scripture that scandalous persons ought to be keep back from the Sacrament and that it is unlawfull for Church officers to admit such the Erastians doe but weakly helpe themselves by arguing from Christs giving the Sacrament to Iudas Which I have said by way of concession for my opinion is that Christ did upon the matter excommunicate Iudas and that his practice in this very particular is a patterne to us which I hope I have made evident Finally it is observed by Io. Baptista de Rubeis in his Novum rationale divinorum officiorum lib. 1. cap. 24. that this cause of Iudas doth not concerne publique and known scandalous persons but secret and lurking wicked persons when they publikely desire to receive the Sacrament who yet saith he ought to be admonished and dehorted by the Minister that they come not to the Sacrament and if such a one make his desire to receive the Sacrament secretly known to the Minister the Minister ought to refuse him though his sinne be yet secret and not publiquely known But if the sinne be open or manifest then whether the sinner do secretly or openly desire to receive the Sacrament the Minister ought to refuse him CHAP. XI Whether it he a full discharge of duty to admonish a scandalous person of the danger of unworthy communicating And whether a Minister in giving him the Sacrament after such admonition be no way guilty Mr. Prynne pag. 28. stateth the seventh point in difference thus Whether the Minister hath not fully discharged his duty and conscience if he give warning to unworthy communicants of the danger they incurre by their unworthy approaches to the Lords Table and seriously dehort them from comming to it unlesse they repent reforme and come preparedly But here he much mistakes his marke or hitteth it not as may appeare thus First what if we should affirme it as he doth What hath he gained thereby That the Minister hath not the power of keeping backe scandalous persons which cannot adde one dram weight to his cause The power is seated in the Eldership of which the Minister is a principall member even as Aristotle polit lib. 3. cap. 11. tels us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is not the Senator but the Senat that doth rule But if M r Prynne meant to conclude against the suspension of scandalous persons not excommunicated the thing which all along he opposeth he ought to have stated the point thus Whether the Eldership hath not fully discharged their duty c. For every branch of this controversie concerning Suspension which is an act of jurisdiction and censure must be fixed upon the Eldership not upon the Minister There is a huge difference between the Ministers personall duty and the censure of suspension in so much that if the affirmative of this present question as he stateth it were yeelded to him it derogateth nothing from the power of the Eldership to suspend from the Sacrament a person not excommunicate Secondly in the debating of this point he sometimes argueth against the refusing or withholding of the Sacrament by any Minister or Presbytery as pag. 29 30 31. sometimes he argueth that no Ministers private judgement or conscience ought to be the rule of his admitting any to or suspending them from the Sacrament as pag. 32. Which is a confounding together of two most different points Thirdly and if the question should be stated of the Minister his duty that which M r Prynne affirmeth viz. that the Minister hath fully discharged his duty and conscience if he give warning to unworthy communicants of the danger they incurre by their unworthy approaches to the Lords Table and seriously dehort them from comming to it unlesse they repent reforme and come preparedly is erroneous and false for there are other necessary duties incumbent to the Minister in this businesse as 1. he must be earnest in his prayers to God for the conversion and reformation of such unworthy persons else that God would give his Spirit and assistance to the Eldership and others to whom the case shall be brought that they may faithfully doe their duty in restraining such persons or if not so that God would by his owne providence keepe backe such persons or hedge up their way with thornes and make a wall that they shall not finde their pathes to come and prophane the Lords Table 2. The Minister must deale seriously with the Eldership by informations exhortations and admonitions to move them to doe their duty 3. The Minister must give his owne vote and sentence in the Eldership against the admission of such persons 4. If which God forbid the Eldership be not willing to doe their duty but sinfully neglect it the Minister ought to addresse himselfe with his complaints to the superiour Ecclesiasticall assemblies as they lie in their order that they may interpose by their authority to rectifie the mal-administration of the Congregationall Eldership 5. And if it should fall out that a scandalous unworthy person should finde so much favour in the higher assemblies also as that they shall judge him fit to be admitted to the Sacrament yet if the Minister know him certainly to be a scandalous abominable person and be also cleere in his conscience that the matter of scandall is sufficiently