all that is bound on earth by excommunication is not alwaies ratified and approved of in Heaven for were not as they say a modification put to the words of Christ all the judgements and sentences on earth had need be infallible It is true that parallel places of Scripture may admit various senses as it may be these very words of Christ or that something more may be implyed in one place then in the other But yet whether both places or either of them be meant of the operation of the word or of the miraculous power granted unto the Apostles and particularly as Mr. Lightfoot expoundeth them of a power to dispense with the Christian church in something that was to be retained or quitted of the Mosaicall laws and rites yet it must be acknowledged that both places are alike to be understood absolutely and without condition that whatever should be bound or loosed by them on earth should also infallibly be either bound or loosed in Heaven For to understand one place absolutely and the other conditionally and clave non errante when no errour can intervene I conceive ought not to be admitted in Divinity In short either the words Matth. 16. absolutely spoken must be false and admit some exception which cannot be said without blasphemy or the same words repeated in the 18. chapter must not be understood of excommunication nor of any church-censure 2. Since it is evident that the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and the power of binding and loosing are equivalent expressions and those both equally committed to ministers if by the keyes are not meant the power of excommunicating absolving neither can the power of binding and loosing mean excommunication For sure these keyes cannot be understood of an outward admission or exclusion but only of the conversion of a sinner by the preaching of the word But suppose that these keyes were also to admit into the visible church yet they can not be employed to put out of the church a key being an instrument either to let in or keep out but not to expell those that are in 3. Who can conceive that those words Matth. 18. whatsoever ye shall bind c. being uttered by the Lord Jesus Christ with such a prefatory asseveration verily I say unto you should not be true without a condition and an exception put to them and yet that the same words Matth. 16. without such a preface should be perpetually absolutely true And who would believe that the Lord Jesus Christ had pronounced in such an emphaticall way vertily I say unto you whatsoever ye shall bind c. only to signify an externall admission or exclusion in the doing of which acts ministers may erre out of ignorance either of right or of fact if not out of hatred or too much indulgence and favour 4. Since they say that a man by excommunication is delivered to Satan what an uncharitable act do they commit against any one be he never so wicked by putting him into such a condition as they know is worse then his former when they are not sure whether occasionally it may better him neither is it in their power to drive away Satan again from the man as it was in St. Paul Besides no man would punish a child a servant or a malefactour with a punishment that shall last to his lifes end as to torture him till death or to whip him as long as he liveth or put him in a prison that may prove perpetuall for still the earthly father or judge reserveth to himself the liberty to give over correcting when it pleaseth him But those that deliver a man to Satan by excommunication do inflict a penalty which it is not in their power to take off again being not able when they list to recover a man out of the Devils pawes 5. Most school-men and Divines hold that the sentence of excommunication is of a quite different nature from the lawes and sentences of men which have the force and validity of law be they never so unjust and must be obeyed either actively or passively for if no law were valid but that which is just and righteous then should no law be obeyed by any but those that could see equity and justice in it Which sheweth the nullity of excommunication for whosoever doubts whether such an excommunication was pronounced upon right grounds and good information or whether excommunication in it self is lawfull may well count the excommunication null and of no weight yea if the party excommunicated doth but say that he was wrongfully excommunicated and clave errante or that those that did it had no power so to do he may disannull as to himself and so to all others the excommunication For as long as the knowledge of a valid excommunication is grounded upon matter of fact which is known but to few most men may still question that which they are not concerned to believe and whereof they have no certain knowledge 6. Some to avoid that inconvenience that God should be made to ratify what the pastor acts in excommunicating say and it is the opinion of Beza that excommunication is rather a declaration of what God hath already done in Heaven then an act preceding Gods in approving or disapproving the ministers sentence But one and the same inconvenience followeth thereupon whether excommunication be taken for an act preceding the act of God or subsequent to it For if excommunication be a declaration of what God hath already done or decreed to be done it would follow that all the acts of pastors in excommunicating were infallible for if they were fallible it were not possible to know when excommunication ought to be received for a valid act untill the mind and counsell of God were revealed and it were known to be agreeable with the censure of excommunication And therefore Wicliff thought all excommunications void and null except he that excommunicateth were first informed that the party whom he was to excommunicate was excommunicated by God and this was held one of his errours in the councill of Constance Art 11. 7. Calvin in the 3. book of his Institutions chap. 4. § 14. saith that excommunication is no farther valid then as binding in heaven answereth to that on earth for he hath no stronger argument to make void the Romish excommunication then by retorting that many among them are either bound or loosed on earth unworthily which notwithstanding are not bound or loosed in Heaven If this exception against all Romish excommunication is good in Calvins mouth why should it loose its strength in my mouth for by the same argument I disannull all excommunication because all sentences of God in Heaven do not alwayes correspond to those that are pronounced upon earth 8. The same Calvin upon Matth. 18. pleading for the nullity of Romish excommunication useth this argument that the power of the keyes and of binding loosing belong only to those that have received the holy Ghost
prescribed how far some rites of Moses were dispensable We have then three expositions of the words of Christ whatsoever ye shall bind c. none of which make for a presbyterian excommunication but contrarily they destroy it for all these three expositions are sutable to the literall and mysticall meaning which is absolute and without condition Christ promising to bind and loose in heaven whatsoever shall be bound and loosed on earth whereas those that expound that place of binding and loosing of excommunication are forced to put a condition to the absolute words of Christ telling us that they must be understood clave non errante in case there is no errour in him that excommunicates And therefore Beza against Erastus and some others fearing the many inconveniences and absurdities that follow upon the literall sense that Gods binding and loosing in heaven should steer according to the binding and loosing on earth by excommunication and absolution expounds the words of Christ as if he had said whatsoever shall be bound and loosed in heaven shall also be bound and loosed on earth that is the minister excommunicating on earth doth but declare what God hath already done in heaven which is the opinion of some schoolmen namely of Dominicus à Soto lib. 4. dist 14. qu. 1. art 3. saying that the words ego te ligo I excommunicate thee are equivalent to these I declare that God hath already excommunicated thee But I think this exposition is cumbered with more absurdities then the vulgar 1. Who knoweth the mind of God 2. and whether he hath excommunicated from the inward or from the outward communion surely not from the inward for then excommunication should not be a soul-saving ordinance as the Rever Assembly tell us nor from the outward this being an act of man not of God except one say that the minister outwardly acted what in his secret counsell he hath decreed but still the difficulty will be how the minister is acquainted with Gods secret and not revealed will and if he be acquainted with it how can an outward action in which the pastor may erre be a consequent of an unerring sentence of God But however the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing is to be understood the new Testament speaketh of governments in the church and of ruling and rulers and it enjoyneth the faithfull to obey those that rule over them and St. Paul biddeth Timothy not to receive lightly an accusation against an elder So farre then the word of God alloweth a government distinct from that of the magistrate and endoweth the ministers of the Gospell with a power of ruling and governing But this power is neither of the nature of the magistrates power nor of that they call ecclesiasticall which we have proved to be wholly the same with the magistrates power This power of the ministers ruling and governing is something like that power that Princes and masters of heathen schools had over their disciples scholars and auditors as Plato Zeno Aristotle who had a great power over their minds but no jurisdiction over their bodies estates and outward liberties it is true they kept them in awe respect and obedience but it was a voluntary submission to their precepts like that of Alexander the great to the commands of the Physitians This being the ministeriall power in a shadow it is more expressely set down in the Scripture and no doubt that power is the noblest power and greatest power in the universe next to that of creating and redeeming the world a power that the Son of God had and managed in this world none have such warrant of authority as to be Ambassadours from Christ none have such an errand there is no tye of obedience like that to their commands But still this ministeriall power commands and authority and the obedience due to them are not of the nature of the power and obedience observed in churches or magistrates judicatories For 1. The magistrates and churches judicatories do not only enjoyn the commands of God but also their own but the ministers of the Gospells power is only to deliver what they have received of the Lord 1 Cor. 11. even Moses Deut. 4. v. 5. acknowledgeth that he taught nothing but what God enjoyned him 2. Accordingly a member of a church doth not obey the word of his Pastor but of God Col. 2. v. 22. Marc. 7. v. 7. 1 John 3. v. 24. chap. 5. v. 3. When the pastor hath no command of the Lord as 1 Cor. 7. v. 25. then he delivers his own judgement and counsell and that counsell a church-member hath no command to obey though he ought to have discretion and condescension enough to follow it if he conceiveth it tends to mutuall edification Yet in a church constituted there being need of a power of magistracy either delegated or assumed by a confederate discipline and a magistrate-like jurisdiction being set up in his congregation he ought as every church-member even when he apprehendeth no tye to obey the pastors command as Gods command to obey by an obedience either active or passive the commands of that magistrate which himself hath elected when by a joint consent they all agreed upon a form of discipline 3. Church-judicatories if they make any lawes decrees or resolve upon a censure to be inflicted upon a church-member they require obedience and submission without arguing or disputing the case or having the liberty either to yield to them or to decline them if they list But the true pastorall power commandeth only understanding free and wise men that are able to judge 1 Cor. 10 v. 15. like those of Beroea who so hearkened to the voice of St. Paul that ere they obeyed it they consulted the Scripture to know whether it were so as he taught them 4. The ecclesiasticall presbyteriall power like that of the magistrate requireth obedience to its lawes ordinances and decrees not because they are good just and equitable but because it so pleased the law-givers for a man excommunicated never so unjustly is to submit to the validity of the sentence not to the equity which as our brethren and Mr. Gillespie teach us is not in the breast of the party judged but of the judge But the true ministeriall power requireth no obedience to its commands but of such as are perswaded or convinced of the goodnesse truth and equity of the law and sentence The Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both to believe be perswaded to obey which intimateth that he truly performeth the pastorall commands who believeth in the name of the Lord Jesus for this is the main commandement of Christ as the next is that we should love one another Such commands are not obeyed by the motion of the body but by that of the heart and affections The power of magistracy commandeth the hand to give almes to the poor but the power of the minister commandeth to give them with a ready mind one
7. It is very compauble that in one government there should be many â—anks and sorts of men contributing thâ—ir caâ—e towards it so that all these cares be not coordinate but subordinate and every rank of men take care in its proper place and with subordination to some principall power that must have the chief care of it This the Papists as they hold so they practise for they make the magistrate but subservient to the care that the Pope is to take in governing the church yielding to his judgement and commands and executing his decrees and buls without controul But the presbyterians that are not yet agreed how to levell the duties of the ministers and of the magistrate about taking care of the government of the church have cast us into an endlesse unceâ—tainty which of them is to have the greatest â—hiefest care For whereas Rivetus saith that the magistates chief and first care is the administration of sacred things and the government of the church and his second care the government of the Common-wealth Walaus Apollonius Mr. Gillespie and a hundred more will tell us that that care doth mainly and first belong to ministers and next to them that magistrates have an auxiliary ecclesiasticall power by which they are to ayd the ministers in the government of the church So that if each party conceiveth that the care of the church doth not belong chiefly to the other but that he is to look to it as he thinks fitting and not to trust the main care with any one but himself I fear we shall need a third party to take care that these two may care but for one thing 8. Those words of Jesus Christ I will give thee the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind c. and against that church which they say is the Romish church the gates of Hell shall not prevail seem literally to confer a very great power yea to give an infallibility the power of remitting and retaining sins and of granting indulgences being not repugnant to the non-erring power But the giving this great power of the keyes of Heaven and of binding and loosing expressed in very high and emphaticall terms cannot be applyable to a presbyterian church against which the gares of hell shall not prevail nor can it stand with the little modulus of power of a presbytery which yet hath found no legs to walk on they not resolving us yet whether the pastor or the people or both must excommunicate that the sentence of excommunication may be valid nor how farre it reacheth 9. Particularly that saying of the Papists that there cannot be a greater argument that their judgements are infallible then this that God ratifieth them in Heaven is much according to the literall arguing of the Scripture saying that whatsoever shall be bound c. that is as they interpret it whatsoever shall be decreed by them and passed on earth shall afterwards be ratified and approved in Heaven For were their judgements fallible then God would not have tyed himself by his promise to approve of all the erroneous judgements of men which they say cannot be said without blasphemy But the fallibility of the judgements of presbyterian judicatories is repugnant to the letter of the Scripture which promiseth to ratify all the judgements that are passed by men on earth 10. So for the power of the Pope in absolving and loosing men from their oaths and promises and fidelity due to their soveraign it doth very well agree with the letter of the Scripture whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven for here is a power given without any modification But that of presbyterian jâ—dicatory not challenging such a power and yet grounding their power upon the same Scripture must so much the more recede from the Scripture and therefore they need a place of Scripture as pregnant for their power as the Romanists have for theirs 11. Lastly the jurisdiction held by the Papists is a true valid jurisdiction for it is coercive and extendeth to the body estate liberty and good name the Pope and Bishops have their prisons but the presbyterian is a name without a thing for they are loth to call it coercive it must be then perswasive I wish they would hold there suspend their excommunication of any person till he be perswaded so to be which I think he will never be or till they can inform him that excommunication is an ordinance of Jesus Christ as well as the preaching of the word and the administration of the Sacraments as they tell us in the 63. page of their answer to the reasons of the dissenting brethren which neither do I think they ever will be able to doe 12. But though the ecclesiasticall presbyterian power as it is held to be independent and not subordinate to the magistrate is lesse consonant to Scripture and reason then the papall ecclesiasticall power yet I must say thus much for the brethren of the presbytery that their excommunication as they hold it from a power coordinate and independent from the magistrate is more consistent with reason then that excommunication held by the learned and rever Dr. Hammond agreeth with his subordinating the ecclesiasticall episcopall power to the magistrate as supreme governour of the church under Christ for according to the Doctors opinion one cannot conceive of the power of excommunicating but as the power of the magistrate and of excommunication but as a law of the magistrate which yet I believe he will not grant For were he willing to grant thus much then besides that he and I should not differ he would get reason and Scripture more on his side then 〈…〉 ur brethren of the presbytery or the Papâ—…s have Now that some remaining within the communion of Rome have acknowledged as much as we concerning the nullity of a double jurisdiction the power of the magistrate in sacred things and the nature of the Kingdom of God I could prove by many of them truth breaking forth through the darknesse of popery whereas Mr. Rutherfurd and Gillespie were blind in so clear day of revealed truth I have already alâ—edged Claude Fauchet John du Tiller who tâ—ll us that there was no such thing as a double jurisdiction for many hundred years after Christ and with them agreeth the authour of the Review of the Councill of Trent whâ—… the 6. book chap. 5. saith that the 〈…〉 Fâ—ance hold their jurisdiction not from the Pope but from the King of France We have also alledged Tosâ—atus upon the 16. of Nauhew asserting that among the Jewes there was no distinction of jurisdiction Hotomannus a famous Lawyer and a Papist in his book of the Liberties hath these words It is certain that ecclesiasticks as ecclesiasticks have neither fisck nor territorie nor any jurisdiction but only liberty to declare what is fitting to be observed without receiving or execut on of their opinion But I will insist
magistrate Since then an irreconcilable brother ought to be esteemed as an heathen is it any whit against Christian charity for the party offended to sue him before an heathen magistrate This exposition is very naturall having nothing strained but most like to be the sense of Jesus Christ As for the 18. verse concerning binding and loosing we have examined what strength can be in it for excommunication not discussing whether it may not be as well applyed as Chrysostome Austin Theophy lact thought to every private man as to the operation of the word in the ministry or whether this verse hath any coherence with the precedent discourse of Christ Neither will I enter into the controversy whether Iudas was partaker of the Eucharist for it is not much materiall to know it all agreeing he was not removed by any excommunication or casting out and that he did eat of the passeover which eating was equivalent to that of the Lords Supper Now lest more heads of objection of this Hydra of excommunication should arise if all should not be cut off we must examine what strength the example of the incestuous person 1 Cor. 5. hath for excommunication But this extract being already too much lengthened and the drift of it all along being to prove that the casting out of any member of a church being the same with the putting out of the synagogue is no act of ministry or of church members as such but an act of magistracy I need not to speak of it at all besides that these 3. or 4. observations will take off all hold for excommunication 1. It is granted by Calvin Beza Walaeus Apollonius Mr. Rutherfurd and Mr. Gillespie that St. Paul mentioneth but one censure inflicted upon the incestuous person viz. excommunication and that the delivering of him to Satan was the casting him out of the congregation 2. Now it being evident that this delivering to Satan was no excommunication but a judgement quite of another nature it is likewise equally evident that the putting away of the incestuous person being the same with delivering him to Satan was no excommunication 3. This casting out of the incestuous person makes nothing for that excommunication which is only a putting a man by from partaking of the Eucharist for though examples may be brought out of the Scriptures of men cast out or kept from the temple or synagogues yet there is no one example nor any reason for it that a man admitted to enter either into the temple or the synagogue should not be partaker of the same mystery or ordinances celebrated with the rest 4. Calvin thinks that St. Paul by these words put away the wicked from among you did not point particularly at the incestuous person but rather at the devil or the wicked one indefinitely as the plotter and contriver of all evil which St. Paul saith was put away from them by that delivery of the incestuous person to Satan 5. Wendelinus in his common places of excommunication saith that the putting away of the incestuous person from among the Cormthians was not only an exclusion from godly converse as praying hearing and receiving the â—ucharist with him but also from civil commerce in eating trading and talking with him Which exposition is the most naturall I know and proveth that this putting away was no act of ecclesiasticall power distinct from the civil for alwayes every court punisheth according to its kind a court of Exchequer doth not summon men for causes that are of the cognizance of a court-Martiall so neither should an ecclesiasticall court impose penalties that are to be inflicted by a civil court such as is the depriving of a man of civil liberty 6. Learned Mr. Lightfoot saith that all the power of the church of Corinth in delivering the incestuous person to Satan was by the strength of Paul's spirit that went along with them so that the people of Corinth acting by no power of their own no church ought to do as that church then did except they be sure of the assistance of the same spirit Next in order followeth the necessity of self-examination 1 Cor. 11. made an argument to prove that ministers must examine every communicant and judge of mens worthinesse For Beza Walaeus Mr. Rutherfurd and Mr. Gillespie thus argue If it be the duty of every man to examine himself much more is it the duty of a minister to examine him Never was an argument more inconsequent and lesse concludent by which the Papists may as well prove auricular confession If men must confesse their sins to God much more must ministers require every man to confesse their sins to them For quite on the contrary from this Text these or the like inferences should be drawn If all men must examine themselves much more ought ministers to examine themselves or this If every church-member ought to examine himself then ought the ministers to exhort them to that self-examination or this If every church-member ought to prepare himself for the word and Sacraments then ministers are not to prepare them otherwise then by shewing them and giving them directions for their due preparation leaving every one to do the work himself CHAPTER XXIX That excommunication is contrary to common sexse and reason THere being no Scripture for excommunication in the next place we shall see that there is no reason for it I do not deny but that a private church as well as any other society by vertue of a power of magistracy seated in them may expell a member out of their society but that this is done in obedience to a pâ—sitive command of Christ by a jurisdiction independent from the magistrate and by warrant from those words whatsoever ye shall bind on carth c. I conceive to be absurd impertinent a yoke laid upon Christians necks which is none of Christs as if whomsoever pastors do bind or excommunicate on earth Christ also doth bind or excommunicate in Heaven and whomsoever they absolve or loose on earth Christ also doth absolve and loose in Heaven 1. Since the words Matth. 16. and 18. be the very same words it is absurd to understand them in the 16. chapter absolutely but in the 18. conditionally Now they would have the words Matth. 16. whatsoever ye shall bind c. spoken to Peter to be without condition and absolute that God should approve of and ratify whatever opening loosing and binding should ensue upon Peters preaching and converting of souls for Calvin Pareus and most Divines will not have in that place any thing understood of church-censures but only of the operation of the word by the preaching of Peter But though it were granted that in the 18. chapter Christ spake of church censures by excommunication what reason is there why they should not be understood as absolute and without condition in one chapter as well as in the other For in the 18. chapter they put a condition to the absolute words of Christ saying that
and no superinduction of character power duty gift or licence being conferred by the ordaining ministers so neither is there any thing taken away by any act of theirs of deposition or exauctoration only every one withdraweth his feather protection and countenance the magistrate withdraweth his licence the ministers say they will not hereafter hold him a fellow and partner in the work of the Gospell with them the people declare their dislike of the man and professe they will make use no further of his ministery which act is no more an act of jurisdiction then the refusing to take physick is an act of jurisdiction over the physitian CHAPTER XIII The nature of the ministers power and of that of binding and loosing the power of the keyes Amyraldus and Mr. Lightfoots judicious exposition of the power of binding and loosing The power of governing and ruling is not the ecclesiasticall contended for Mr. Gillespies arguments answered NExt we are to consider the nature and extent of the power of the ministers of the Gospell wholly the same with that the Prophets under the old Testament had a power not forcing the body but enlightening the understanding and convincing the heart ruling the affections and bringing them captive to the obedience of the crosse A power which the new Testament mentions in a hundred places either in the same words or in equivalent terms and yet never so much as once understandeth by it a presbyterian synodicall or ecclesiasticall power of deposing excommunicating and of making lawes and canons authoritatively but alwayes meaneth the vertue and efficacy of the spirit of God in the word and ministery called the power of God Rom. 1. v. 16. 1 Cor. 1. v. 14. and chap. 2. v. 5. and chap. 4. v. 19 20. Ephes 3. v. 20. 1 Pet. 1. v. 5. A power by excellency called POWER 1 Cor. 2. 4. by which we are the sons of God Joh. 1. v. 12 13. which no man can withstand Act. 6. v. 10. by which the eyes are enlightened and men turned from darknesse to light Act. 26. v. 18. pricking burning and affecting the heart with sorrow hope joy Act. 2. v. 7. Luc. 24. v. 32. diving into the secrets of the heart Hebr. 4. v. 16. where we have a description of the powerfull effects of the words except by the word we are to understand the word incarnate before whom all things created are said to be naked It is a power which is called the power of the resurrection Philipp 3. v. 10. also the power and demonstration of the spirit 1 Cor. 2. v. 4. a power of the wisdome and salvation of God and opposed to the power of Sathan and darknesse Act. 26. 18. Col. 1. v. 13. a power described in magnificent terms and mightily emphaticall 2 Corinth 10. v. 6. c. This is the power called otherwise the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing by which the slaves to sin and Satan are loosed and the despisers of the word by resisting the holy Ghost become more hard and bound I know of no other power of binding and loosing no other keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven committed to the church-officers though properly speaking the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and the power of binding and loosing are not committed to ministers as the word is but as the spirit is in the word so that it is not the ministers but the word that bears the keyes the opening of the heart with those keyes as it is only the work of the spirit so is it known only to the spirit of God in the heart of man convinced and converted and not to the minister himself who only apprehendeth his office of being the word-bearer but is not sensible of its efficacy and workings Amyraldus thes 10. de 5. falso dictis sacramentis saith that the power of binding and loosing did only belong to the Apostles and that that power consisted in three particulars 1. that being led by an unerring spirit whatsoever in revealing the mystery of the Gospell they preached and approved for sound doctrine was to be received with like credit as if it had been delivered by Christ himself and whatever they said was amiss or false was likewise to be taken as if it had been pronounced so in Heaven this saith he is according to the Hebrew Idiome to bind and to loose 2. in inflicting corporall punishments and vexation by Satan upon those that dishonoured Christianity 3. in freeing those that were delivered to Satan upon their repentance and forgiving their sins He is yet much more expresse and diffuse upon this subject but I study brevity which makes me I do not here insert his own words in Latin but however he saith enough to undermine the foundation upon which the presbyterians build their excommunication which hitherto being mainly supported by that power of binding and loosing and the two chief stayes namely this place of Matth. 18. of binding and loosing and that of the incestuous person 1 Cor. 5. failing there now remaineth but a poor single crutch to draw along excommunication cut out of these words tell it unto the church Mr. Lightfoot an exceeding learned and reverend Divine giveth a very probable exposition of the power of loosing and binding in his Harmony Matth. 16. which doubtlesse doth carry in it more solidity and weight then the vulgar explication given by the Reverend Assembly and others of the power of censuring excommunicating and absolving He saith that the power of binding and loosing was given only to the Apostles as far as some part of Moses law was to stand in practise and some to be laid aside some things under the law prohibited were now to be permitted and some things permitted to be now prohibited so that in these words whatsoever c. Christ promiseth to the Apostles such an assistance of his spirit and giveth them such a power that what they allowed to stand in practise should stand and what to fall should fall in short what they bound on earth should be bound in heaven And that exposition is the more receivable because the Greek text speaks not of binding or loosing persons but things saying not whomsoever you shall bind but whatsoever things ye shall bind c. that is whatsoever things ye shall dispense with or oblige unto He also on the 1 Cor. 5. parallels this place of binding and loosing to Joh. 20. v. 22. whose sins yea retain they are retained c. and saith that that power was a peculiar gift to the Apostles when Christ breathed on them by which they spoke strange tongues healed diseases killed and made alive delivered up to Satan and bestowed the holy Ghost or the power to work the same miracles Which exposition strengtheneth the precedent which is but a branch and an effect of that miraculous power conferred on the Apostles For by the same power of miracles or of binding and loosing whereby they delivered to Satan and healed diseases they also