key toward another this way but these are not the keyes ecclesiastically and formally that are given to the Church seeing one man is not the Church But only the keyes materially used in a private way as a common servant at command of the Lord of the house may use the keyes and give broad to the barnes but it followeth not hence that the keyes are given to him authoritatively as to the Steward by speciall office because this servant of charitie useth the keyes or rather that which is in place of the keyes which is the word in a private way CHAPTER III. Whether or no the Church of believers in a Congregation be the first Church having the highest power of jurisdiction within it selfe and that independently and power above and over their Eldership to constitute and ordaine them by an intrinsecall power received from Jesus Christ and by that same power to censure and depose them when they become scandalous in life or corrupt in doctrine THe determination of this question so neare of blood and kindred to the former two is of much force to cleare many doubts in this subject Hence I propound these following distinctions as very considerable 1. A Church independent is twofold either a Church of believers in a congregation having originally the power of the keyes within themselves to make or unmake their officers 2. Or an Eldership of one congregation including the congregation that may from an intrinsecall power without subordination to Synods provinciall or nationall exercise all jurisdiction This question is of the former independent Church 2. A Church is considered two wayes 1. As totum essentiale this is a mysticall Church consisting of only bâ—lievers or of persons as professing faith a Church of faithfull of Saints 2. The Church is considered as totum integrale made up of officers and a flock this Ames cals an instituted Church others a Ministeriall Church as we consider John as a believer or John as an Elder or minister of a Church 3. There is a twofold Primacie answerable to this One whereby a number of believers is the first mysticall body of Christ immediately united to Christ as a mysticall body to the head This is a mysticall or Christian primacy or to speak so firstnesse or principality 2. There is an other primacy or principalitie ministeriall wherby such a number of men are the first subject of the keyes having power of binding and loosing first and immediately from Christ as is proved Ch. 1. 4. 3. Christ hath a twofold influence as head upon these two bodies one influence of speciall and saving grace upon the Church of believers An other common influence communicating to the ministeriall body the power of the keyes and gifts which hee gave to men to be Pastours and Teachers and Elders when he ascended on high and leâ— captivitie captive Neither do they looke right on this question who will have the power of the keyes an essentiall propertie of the Church of believers for there is no reciprocation here betwixt the propertie and the subject seeing the power of the keyes is in many that are unbelievers and not of Christs mysticall body Many warrantably preach Christ to others and seale the covenant to others who are unsaved men remember the builders of the Arke and many are Christs mysticall body that have not the power of the keyes All believers are not Eldâ—rs having power of order Hence our 1. Conclusion If wee speake of a Christian primacie and eminency of grace the Church of believers sincerely professing the faith and believing is the only first true visible Church 1. The essence and definition of a called and effectually translated company agreeth to them and they are the called of God 2. Because the promises made to the redeemed saved and washen Church belongeth to them they are properly the Church builded on the rock the loved and redeemed spouse of Christ. 2. This Church is the true body of Christ which shall infallibly bee glorified with the head Christ. The ministeriall Church is his body also on which hee hath an influence bestowing upon them common gifts but not a body which shall infallibly be glorified but in so far as they are true members of the Church of believers And here observe our brethren have no cause to object to us that there is not a place in all the old or new Testament where the word Church signifieth only the presbyterie or Eldership the contrary whereof God willing I shall shew but I desire that they will produce a place in either the old or new Testament where the word Church signifieth a governing multitude or a ministeriall company of onely believers having power and use of the keyes yet this must be shewed in this dispute if their principles stand good 11. Conclusion A multitude of believers sincerely professing the faith is the first visible mysticall Church because the definition of a visible mysticall Church agreeth to them being redeemed professors of the Gospell So the saints at Colosse Corinth Philippi as not including their guides is a true uisible Church Before I come to the third conclusion I must shew what our brethren hold anent this present question The English puritanisme holdeth every Congregation or Assemblie of true believers joyning together according to the order of the Gospell in the true worship of God to be a true visible Church And that this name is unproperly given to Synods or Assemblies of office-bearers so also the Guide to Zion Parker maketh the Church of believers in any particular congregation to be the highest and most supreme Church in majoritie and power of jurisdiction above tâ—eir owne Eldership or Presbyterie having power to ordaine or depose them above all Synods of Pastours and Elders William Best citeth and approveth the mind of the English Church as he calleth it at Frankeford the Ministers and Seniors severally and joyntly shall have no authority to make any manner of decrees or ordinances to bind the congregation or any member thereof but shâ—ll â—â—ecute such ordinances as shall be made by the congregation and to them delivered Hooker against Paget They whicâ— had compleat and perfect Ministers before any Classes had power to call those Ministers they have authoritie above the Ministers But a particulâ—r congregation had perfect and compleat Ministers perfectly and compleatly called before any Classes To this agreeth the confession of faith of the unjustly called Brownists that every Christian congregation yea two or three sequestred from the whole hath â—ower from Christ of election ordination deposition excommunication of the Elders or Office-bearers set over them And expresly M. Parker a man otherwayes of an excellent spirit for holinesse and learning saith That the supremacie of Ecclesiasticall power is in the Church of believers contradistinguished from their guides Paul and Apollo Here we see
hath to Christ is not the ground why the keyes are given to that people as to the originall subject because they may have the Word Sacraments and keyes a long time and yet want faith in Christ and so all title and claime to Christ All which time they have the keyes discipline and Sacraments and I beleeve their acts of discipline censures and Sacraments are valide therefore the Church redeemed and builded on the rocke Christ is not the kindly subject of the keyes 2. The keyes are given to professors cloathed with a ministeriall calling whither they be beleevers or unbeleevers howbeit God giveth them for the salvation and edification of beleevers 3. There is nothing required to make a independant Congregation but an profession of the truth covenant-wayes and outward worshipping of God suppose the members be unbeleevers 4. Conclusion There is a visible governing Church in the new Testament whose members in compleat number of beleevers doth not meet in one place ordinarily for the worship of God neither can they continually so meet 1. The Church of Jerusalem was one Church under one government and called one Church in the singular number which grew from one hundred and twenty Acts 1. to three thousand one hundred and twenty Acts 4. 41. and then added to these Acts 4. 4. five thousand men which is eight thousand one hundred and twenty And Acts 9. 35. all that dwelt at Lydda and Saron turned to the Lord v. 42. many in Joppa beleeved in the Lord Acts 20. 21. many thousands of the Jewes beleeved Acts 5. 14. multitudes of beleevers moe were added to the Lord both of men and women Acts 6. 1. their number were multiplyed Now it was not possible they could all meet in one house especially seeing that prophecye was to take its first accomplishment at Jerusalem where all flesh was to see the salvation of God And that of Joel 2. I will poure my spirit on all flesh It s true Bayne saith this Church was numerous by accident at extraordinary confluences of strangers Yet the multitudes of thousands which I have observed from the story of the Acts granting the confluence Acts 2. of nations to be extraordinary did meet daily Acts 2. 46. from house to house Now so many thousands could not meet daily that is ordinarily 2. From house to house in private houses and so it is not possible all that people did make but one Congregation independent where 1 all had voices in discipline 2. all did breake bread that is receive the Sacrament in a private house so that their meeting together must be taken distributively in diverse Congregations not collectively for that were against edification 2. against the nature of congregationall worship 2. There was a visible Church in Samaria under one government that could not convene in all the members in one place The numerous people in Samaria converted to the faith is knowne to all it being the head City of the ten Tribes So huge that all Israel was named Samaria They received the faith Acts 8. and as ver 10. They all gave heed to Simon Magus from the least to the greatest So ver 6. with one accord they gave heed unto these things which Philip spake hearing and seeing the miracles that he wrought ver 12. they beleeved and were baptized both men and women And that on Philip might have preached to one single Congregation who doubteth but the number of beleevers were so many that ver 14. the Apostles behooved to send Peter and John to help to hold up the harvest 3. That the Church of Ephesus could not be one single Congregation that met together is cleare 1. There was there a Presbytery of Pastors or Bishops Acts 20. 28. and these preaching or feeding Pastors who were to watch and take heed to false teachers rising up amongst themselves 1. teaching perverse things 2. making Disciples to themselves the teacher and scholler are relata every one of them has respect to other 2. That they were teaching Elders that did follow the Apostles doctrine is cleare Rev. 2. 2. Thou hast tryed them that say they are Apostles and are not and hast found them to be lyars and Christ termeth them one Church for their common government The answer of Tylen saith Christ saith not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Churches and therefore all the Congregation were one Presbyteriall Church at Ephesus But it is without example in the word that one single Congregation with one Pastor onely and some ruling Elders doth try Ministers gifts and finding them false teachers authoritatively to cast them out so that the harvest has been so great that false teachers calling themselves Apostles resorted to Ephesus to help the good number of Pastors who were there already Acts 20. 28. By this it is cleare that Ephesus had many Congregations in it and many preachers also who in a common society fed the flocke and exercised discipline Rev. 2. 2. neither can we say there was but one Angell there except we make that one a Prelate contrary to the word of God Acts 20. 28. 2. The multitude of converts there required a Presbytery or a multitude of consociated Pastors Acts 19. 20. Paul continued there by the space of two yeares so that all they who dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord 1 Cor. 16. 8. there was a great doore and effectuall open to him at Ephesus 2. They were once madly devoted to their great Idoll Diana and had a Temple for her that all Asia wondred at therefore Ephesus was no small Towne This Temple Herostratus saith was built by all Asia and was two hundred and twenty yeares in building and had in it as he saith one hundred and twenty seven pillars every one of them made by severall Kings and every one of them sixty foot high Now ver 19. Pauls miracles were knowne to all the Jewes and Greeks at Ephesus and feare fell on them all and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified and many of them that beleeved came and confessed and shewed their deeds v. 19. And many that used curious arts brought their books and burnt them before all men And what wonder it is said ver 20. so mightily grew the word of God Paul fought with beasts at Ephesus millions here were mad upon the Idoll Diana If the beleevers had not been the manyest they durst not professe the burning of their bookes nor durst Paul stay there two yeers Hence if there was a setled Church here above two yeares a constituted Presbytery in this City Acts 20. 17 28. that had power of jurisdiction to ordaine teaching Elders and reject hirelings Rev. 2. 2. and so many thousands of Greekes and Jewes such an effectuall doore opened to the Gospell against so many thousands opposing there was not here one onely single independent Church that met in one house only but a Presbyteriall Church Now they could not all preach at one time to them
may joyn in Gods worship IT is maintained by these of the Separation that the rightly constituted Church must consist of the Lords planting as saith M. Barrow all taught of God all plants of righteousnesse sons of Zion precious stones a redeemed people a royall generation so the Guide to Zion The true visible Church say the Separatists is a company of people called and separated from the world by the word of God and ioyned together in a voluntary profession of the faith So Separatists in their petit Mr. Ainsworth M. Canne the discovery of N. Light For the clearing of the Question we remit to the consideration of the Reader these distinctions 1. Distinct. There be some Saints by externall calling but not chosen some Saints by internall and effectuall calling called and chosen of God 2. Distinct. There be some members of a visible Church who de jure by right and obligation should be such there be other members of a visible Church de facto and in practise who are such and such members 3. Distinct. There is a morall obligation and so all the members of a visible Church are obliged to bee Saints by effectuall calling there is a physicall obligation and so that persons may be members of a visible Church as visible it is not essentially required that they be effectually called 4. Dist. If a true Church and a visible Church as visible may not for a time be opposed by way of contradiction as a believing Church and a non-believing Church I remit to be considered and shall God willing bee cleared 5. Dist. It is one thing to be wicked and scandalous indeed and really and another thing to be scandalous juridicè and in the Court of the Church and notarily 6. Dist. A knowne and openly scandalous person and a well lustred and dyed Hypocrite are to be differenced in the Church 7. Dist. Let it be considered if the preaching of the word be not in divers considerations 1. A mean of constituting and making a visible Church 2. A true note of a visible Church 3. A meane of saving the believing Church now visibly professing the Faith 8. Dist. Let it be considered if the Magistrate and King may not compell men to the confessing and professing of the faith actu imperato by an externall forcing power and yet neither Magistrate nor Pastour can compell to heart-believing actu elicito by an inward moving of the heart 9. Let it be considered if a visible Church may not be a true Church by reason of some few sound believers and sincere seekers of God and that same whole body an infected lump and whoorish in respect of some visible professours who are hypocrites and proud despisers of the Lord. 10. Let it be considered if a Church may not be tearmed by Gods Spirit an whoore no Church no Spouse jure merito quod vocationem passivam in respect of bad deserving and their not answering on their parts to the call of God and yet that same Church remaine de facto formaliter quoad vocationem Dei activam formally and in regard of Gods part and his active vocation and calling the Spouse and bride of Christ. Hence our first Conclusion The Saints by externall calling are the true matter of a visible Church 1. The word Ecclesia the called of God proveth this For those are a true visible Church where God hath set up a Candlestick and whom God calleth to Repentance Remission of sinnes and life eternall in Christ because there bee a setled Ministery calling 2. Because all to whom the Word is preached are called the visible Church as all within the house are vessels of the house visibly howbeeit there bee in the house Vessels of Honour and vessels of dishonour 3. So saith Ainsworth this we hold That Saints by calling are the only matter of a visible Church yet withall we hold that many are called but few chosen So also the kingdome of Heaven or visible Church is a draw net wherin are good and bad fishes a barne-floore wherin are chaffe and good wheat See 1 Corinthians 1. 23. Collossians 1. 1 2. Romans 1. 7. Philip. 1. 1. Math. 20. 16. 2. Conclusion All the members of the visible Church de jure and by right or by morall obligation ought to be Saints effectually called 1. Because the commandement of making to themselves a new heart Ezech. 18. 31. and to be renewed in the spirit of their mind Eph. 4. 23. Rom 12. 2. and to be holy as he who hath called them is holy 1 Pet. 1. 15 16. It doth lay an obligation morall upon all within the visible Church 2. Because the preached Gospell is the grace of God appearing to all men teaching them to deny ungodlinesse c. Tit. 2. v. 11 12. 3. Conclusion But de facto as the visible Church is in the field of the world all the members of the visible Church are not effectually called justified sanctified neither is it needfull by a phisicall obligation for the true nature and essence of a visible Church that all the members of it be inwardly called and sanctified every professor is obliged to beleeve else the wrath of God abideth on him and he is condemned already But to make a man a visible professor and a member of the true visible Church as visible saving faith is not essentially required so as he should be no member of the Church visible if he beleeve not That this may be right taken observe that the visible Church falleth under a two-fold consideration 1. In concreto as a Church 2. In abstracto as visible The visible Church considered in concreto is a part of the universall Catholike and unvisible Church which partaketh of the nature and essence of a true Church and Christs misticall body in which consideration we deny reprobates and unbelevers to be members of the visible Church 1. Because there is no reall communion whatever Bellarmine and Papists say on the contrary betwixt righteousnesse and unrighteousnesse light and darkenesse the seed of the woman and the seede of the Serpent so as they can make up one true Church 2. Because these who are not Christs are not members of Christ and so no part of his misticall body 3. Because they are not bought with a price nor his purchased flock in the blood of God as Acts 20. the true Church is nor builded upon a rock as Mat. 16. 18. 4. Christ is not their Redeemer head High-priest King and Saviour and so neither are they his redeemed his members his people subjects and saved ones 5. Because the promises made to the chosâ—n and beleevers to give them a new heart regeneration sanctification remission of sinnes are made to them only and in Gods gratious intention and not to reprobates Whence I inferre these conclusions 1. Seperaâ—ists arguments must be weake for they all conclude that which we deny not and no other thing to
not absolutely but upon condition it agrees to Gods Word They fifthly urge But I am necessitated in a false Church to communicate with those whom I know to be no members of the true Church but limbs of Satan because in Gods court they are excommunicated and no members of the Church but through the corruption of these that have the power of the keyes these are permitted to be members of the Church who in Gods court are no members at all and if I remaine in the Church I must communicate with them yea if I remaine in the Church I must communicate at that table where the holy things of God are prophaned by dogges and swine therefore in that case I must separate Answ. In your holiest independant Church where discipline is mâ—st in vigour you meet with this doubt and must separate also if this reason be good For suppose you know one to be guilty of adultery and murther and had seen it with your eyes the party guilty to you is not guilty to the Church For 1. you are but one none is guilty Ecclesiastically and to be debarâ—ed penally and judicially from the holy things of God except by confession to the Church or by two or three witnesses 2. You know what is holden by all our Divines yea even the Canon Law and Papists teach that the Church cannot judge of hid things and acts of the mind So saith Thom. Aquin. Cajetan Soto Durandus Almain Gerson Navar. Driedo Joan. Maior Paludan Antonin their ground is good The Church cannot judge of that they cannot see And the Churches power of the keyes is all for the externall policy of the Church and therefore such a sinne cannot be the object of Church-censure or cause of Separation Excommunication is ever used against externall scandals Mat. 18. 15. 1 Cor. 5. 1. 1 Tim. 1. 19 20. 2 Thes. 3 14. shew one place where the Church excommunicateth for non-regeneration 6. They object It is not lawfull to call God Father ioyntly with these who are not brethren but sonnes of Satan Ergo we are to separate from such So Smith reasoneth Answ. Except they be all and every one the sonnes of God that are in our visible Church and not one hypocrite or childe of Satan amongst them by this argument we must separate from them and so Separatists are to separate from their owne Congregation wherein they acknowledge there be hypocrites This is Anabaptisticall holinesse Isa. 65. 7. They object It is not lawfull to make Christ a Mediator to all the prophane in the land and to make all the prophane members of his body Ergo we are to separate from a confused Church Answ. So was Corinth Galatin Ephesus confused Churches wherein there were hypocrites We make Christ Mediator and Head to the visible Church according to the best part as Christ speaketh Joh. 17. Thine they were when Judas was never Gods And Paul calleth Corinth Saints Colosse Saints and faithfull brethren and Peter the elected according to the fore-knowledge of God begotten againe to a lively hope where yet there was some at Corinth 2. Cor. 2. 16. To whom the Gospell was the savour of death unto death some to whom it was hidden whom Satan had blinded 2 Cor. 4. 3. And some in Colosse carried away with Angel-worship not holding the head Christ some of those to whom Peter writeth were such who stumbled at the stone laid on Zion and there was amongst them false teachers privily bringing in damnable Heresies 2. and many followed their pernicious wayes spots feasting amongst the Saints having eyes full of Adultery that cannot cease from sinne c. 8 They object These that are mixed with unbeleevers consent to all the sinnes of the unbeleevers and to all their prophanation of the holy things of God seeing God hath given them the power of the keyes to hold out and excommunicate all wicked persons therefore beleevers are to separate from all prophaners of the Covenant except they would forfeit their Covenant Answ. A simple worshipping with hypocrites whom we know not is not a consent to their prophanation of the holy things of God Christs eating the Passeover with Judas the Disciples eating the Passeover when Christ said One of you hath a Devill one of you shall betray me did not import consent nor partaking with Judas his prophaning of the Sacraments 2. Neither hath God given to all beleevers the power of the keyes that way as is alleadged 3. Suppose the Eldership in whose hands onely are the keyes should permit a knowne adulterer who never professed his repentance therefore to the Lords Table yet this were not in the Eldership the sinne against the Holy-Ghost and to forfeit the Covenant though it were a great sinne 9. They object God commandeth the godly to plead with their mother because saith he she is not my wife nor I her husband Ergo if the Church turne a harlot the children are to protest and plead against her as reputing her no mother and so they are to forsake her Answ. If this place prove lawfulnesse of separation from the Jewish Church as from a harlot cast off of God it shall crosse a maine principle of Separatists that the Jewish Church was the onely visible Church from which it was not lawfull to separate seeing the Messiah behooved to be borne there and the Temple sacrifices were onely there Also this pleading was for harlotry and Idolatry But M. Smith and others say that wickednesse and Idolatry did not marre the constitution of the Jewish Church so being they had ceremoniall and typicall holinesse according to the letter of the outward legall service and so from this separation from the true Church is vainly collected 2. Plead with your mother for her harlotries Hence it followeth first 1. They were to esteem her as a mother and of duty as sonnes to plead with her 2. If they were to plead with her and rebuke her they were to keep communion with her because non-rebuking for a time is a signe of separation and suspending communion for a time Ezech. 3. 26. Thou shalt be dumbe and shalt not be to them a reprover for they are a rebellious house Ergo reproving is a signe of communion But they say they were to plead with their mother by power of the keyes and if their mother would not return to the Lord her first husband then they were to goe on to a full separation from her I answer Then two or three faithfull ones in the Church of the Jewes no lesse then in the Christian Church were a true visible Church having the power of the keyes This is contrary to their owne doctrine who make a typicall and ceremoniall cleannesse sufficient to constitute the Jewish Church but require a reall true and spirituall holinesse to the constitution of the Church of the New Testament For if the children may plead with the mother for
actibus elicitis in acts performed by an intrinsecall power in the agent he hath no power for the King as King cannot preach himselfe nor baptize c. as the will may command the eye to see the feet to walke but the will doth not see nor walk Here two errours are to be rebuked 1. Whitgift saith the King is not the head of the Church as it is a society of elect and believers for so the government is spirituall but he is the head of the Church as it is a visible society in externall government comprehending good and evill For 1. The government visible and externall is meerly ecclesiasticall by Christs spirituall lawes and censures of rebuking binding loosing and excommunicating but the King is not an ecclesiasticall person and so not the head who hath any intrinsecall influence as King in these acts 2. He is the head of the persons who make the Church and so is a politick head but he is not the head of the Church visible as it is such The head visible and memberâ— are of one nature the King as King is a politicke and civill head the visible Church is not a politick and civill but an ecclesiastick body so Camero erreth who will have all Church-men synodically constituting and decreeing Canons and in all acts of externall government subordinate to the King as King as the instruments and servants are subordinate to the principall cause and first commander 1. Because then the King should be the principall ecclesiastick matter and prime Canon maker the King the first excommunicater when the Church excommunicateth but the members of a Church-Synod are immediately subordinate to Christ whose servants and instruments they are and not the servants of the King Nathan as a man was Davids servant but as a Prophet he was Gods servant and not Davids servant Hence a third errour of court sycophantes must be rejected that the King hath a negative voice in discipline and in Church-Assemblies which is most false 1. Because Christ hath promised to lead his Church in all truth to be with her to the end to be in the midst of his owne assemâ—led in his name and this promise Christ maketh and keepeth under Heathen Kings who have no voice at all in Church-Assemblies 1 Cor. 4 5. Math. 18. 23. Act. 15. 28. 2. If the acts of Church-Assemblies have no ecclesiasticall power without the consent of a Christian â—rince by that same reason the acts of publick preaching baptizing and administring the Lords Supper should lay no ecclesiasticall bond upon mens consciences except the King should consent unto these acts but the latter is against the Word of God Jer. 1. 10. Jer. 1. 18 19. 2 Cor. 10. 4 5. and most absurd Ergo so is the former I prove the connexion because that same power of Christ which is given to the Church conveened for acts of discipline is given for preaching and the conferring of the seales of the covenant for the Church hath the keyes to bind and loose from Christ equally independent upon any mortall man in discipline as in doctrine so in discipline the Kings power cannot be to impede all acts of discipline or to make them null except he consent to them 3. Because these words are absolutely made good without the interveening of any other authority Whatsoever ye binde on earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever ye loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven els Christ would have said whatsoever the King or civill Magistrate shall binde on earth shall be bound in Heaven otherwise nothing is ratified on earth or Heaven either which the Church bindeth or looseth because the King saith not Amen to it 4. If a contumacious brother shall refuse to heare the Church hee is not for that to bee excommunicated and to be reputed an Heathen and a Publican because the civill Magistrate doth not repute him such an one 5. Of that free grace wherby God heareth the prayers of two or three agreeing to pray for one thing on earth the Lord bindeth and looseth in heaven that which his Church bindeth and looseth on Earth Mat. 18. 19. but the Lord heareth the prayers of two or three agreeing to pray for one thing on Earth though the civill Magistrate doe not give his consent that these prayers be heard and granted of God because the Magistrate is no intercessour without whose consent God heareth not prayers The proposition is cleare from Matthew 18. ver 18 19. 6. If the Magistrate have such a joynt power of binding and loosing and of forgiving and reteining sins with the Church then also with the Apostles and their successours but Christ gave this power to his Apostles without any such condition Matth. 28. 18 19. John â—0 22 23. and they practised this power without consent of the Magistrate and preached and excommunicated against his will 1 Tim. 1. 19 20. 1 Cor. 5. 4. yea as the Father sent Christ so should the Father have sent the civill Magistrate for so are they sent who have power to forgive and retaine sinnes John 20. 21 22 23. 7. That power which upon just reasons we deny to the Pope that we cannot give to the King but upon just reasons we deny to the Pope a negative voyce in Councels to anull lawfull Councels conveened in the name of Christ except he who is the virtuall Church say Amen thereunto neither is the King the virtuall Church 8. If a woe be due to a Pastor if he preach not suppose the Magistrate should forbid him to preach then also is a woe due to the Church which useth not the keyes though the Magistrate forbid then hath the Magistrate no such voyce and if the Church of Pergamos be rebuked for not using the power of the keyes against these who held the Doctrine of Balaam and the Nicolaitanes even when the Magistrate was a killer of the witnesses of Jesus then the Magistratâ— hath no such negative voyce for it should not be possible to censure the followers of such Doctrine seeing hee was against both Doctrine and Discipline but the Lord reproveth Pâ—rgamos in this case Revelation 2. ver 13 14 15. 9. There is no Word of God to prove that the Lord hath given the power of thâ— keyes to the King as the King and therfore we are not to believe that he hath any such power Also if the fore-said power of the keyes be given to the Church without any such power of the King the Church by all the former arguments may conveene to exercise that power in preaching binding loosing excommunicating suppose the civill Magistrate should discharge and inhibit these meetings for if the power of the keyes be given immediately by Christ to the Church then the power of meeting for the exercise of that power must also be given though the Magistrate say not Amen as is cleare Mat. 18. 18 19 20 21. 1 Cor. 5. 4 5. 1 Cor. 11.
profession else we are not to labour to gain by this text unbelieving brethren and to complaine to the Church of their obstinacie or to forgive them private offences done against us to seventie times seven times which is against the course of the Text. 3. By this glosse little Bairnes which are not to be offended are brethren which have power to binde and loose and preach and baptize which is absurd 4. It is cleare by the Church here is meant a Societie different from the faithfull and brethren that hee speaketh of for he will have the offended brother to rebuke before two or three brethren in private and if the offender heare not tell the Church Now three believers to whom the matter is already told is a Church to Master Smith for so he saith in that same place Then Christ biddeth tell the matter to the Church before the Church heare of it 5. Neither doth the hearing of prayers prove a ministeriall Church seeing God heareth the prayers of one believer in the Prison or the Whales belly but it is the doctrine of these with whom we now reason that six professing Christ being visible Saints who may be unseene Divels in heart and so neither Brethren Disciples nor little ones are an independent visible Church having power to binde and loose and therefore suppose Christ spake here to his Disciples and believers of the Churches power in excommunication it is a weake collection that therefore all Disciples have power to binde and loose And these words verse 18. Whatsoever ye bind on earth c. must be meant only of the Apostles and of the Church verse 18. yea and it must exclude Peter and his offending brother suppose they were both believers because parties by the Law of nature and Nations cannot be Judges But some say that these words What ye shall binde on earth shall be bound in heaven have reference to a private forgiving anâ— gaining of a convinced brother before witnesses vers 15. And a brother in private should forgive another to seventie times seven times 21. 22. Therefore private brethren may binde and loose Answer No private brother can binde on earth for then one brother might excommunicate for these words Whatsoever ye bind on earth c is a ratifying in heaven of the sentence of excommunication verse 17. 2. Binding in private must be a not forgiving of private wrongs which is a sinfull binding and forbidden verse 22. and Matthew 6. 14 And rather cannot be ratified in heaven as Ecclesiastick binding and loosing is verse 18. expresly made good and valid in heaven 11. Smith reasoneth thus The Covenant is made with the Church and so the promises of the covenant but cursing them that curse the Church and blessing them that blesse the Church Gen. 12. 3. and remission of sinnes which is a part of the blessing are given to believers as a part of the covenant Rom. 4. 7. 8. Therefore a power of binding and loosing from sin must be given to the Church as the covenant is given to her Answer The covenant is given to one believing woman ergo by this reason also power to baptize for Smith saith page 51. By one and the same power doth the Church preach pray baptize excommunicate absolve But this is absurd 2. Cursing and blessing Genes 12. and remission of sins Rom. 4. is not the private believers cursing and remission but Gods or the ministers publikely and authoritatively as sent of God And so it is a vaine collection 12. Smith reasoneth To whom Christ is given directly and immediately as King Priest and Prophet Vnto them all other things with Christ are given Rom. 8. 32. And so the Saints are made Kings Priests and Prophets to God to forgive bind and loose But Christ is given to all believers and so the power of binding and loosing to all believers Answer To whom Christ is given subjectively and formally as their gifted Redeemer to dwell into them by faith To them all things are given either subjectively as the personall blessings of the covenant a new heart remission of sinnes perseverance in grace or objectively and finaliter for their good other wayes if one manner of giving be understood in both it should follow that all the believers were temporall Kings and Princes which is most false for temporall princedomes are given for their good but not personally to themselves So the power of the keyes is given for their salvation but not to all believers personally It is in vaine to reason from the priviledges of believers as believers to inferre that all Ecclesiastick priviledges are personally given also to believers for then should all be Apostles all Teachers all the whole body should be an eye and where then should bee the hearing And this man taketh away all necessitie of a calling by the Church to the ministerie as doe the Arminians and Socinians Neither can hee maintaine that there is a twofold power of the keyes one remote belonging to men as Christians another nearer that is ecclesiasticall and given orderly by the Church for he and his followers will have all believers because they are believers in a visible Church actually to censure bind loose absolve excommunicate 13. Thus reasoneth Smith and so Parker The Spouse hath power immediately from the husband the body from the head without any intermediating power Ergo The believers have power of binding without the mediation of Elders Answer All comparisons halt either in one legge or other Every like halteth and the argument presupposeth a falshood that the power of binding and loosing is in the Church of believers mediately or immediately which we deny it is only in the ministeriall Church and conveyed from Christ to the Spouse as to the object and end in the fruits and effects 14 They lastly alledge Fathers Chrysostome saith The power of baptizing is given to the Church So Hierome The whole Church hath judiciarie power over the guides So Gratian Hugo a Sancto Victo Aquinas Gerson Councell of Constance Almaine for this coteth Augustine Answer Wee are not subject to Almaine or Gerson in this question they be otherwise expounded What is given for the Church is said to be given to the Church in the stile of Fathers So doe Ambrose Origen Beda Chrysostome say What was given to Peter was given to all faithfull Pastors And wee know that Chrysostome denyeth the power of baptizing to any but to Pastours 15. They also adde this He that may promise eternall life to a private believer and denounce wrath on an unbeliever hath power to open and shut heaven But a private believer who should exhort his brother Heb. 3. 13. teach and admonish Col. 3 16. Comfort him 1 Thes. 5. 11. may promise life to a believer denounce wrath to an unbeliever Ergo He may open and shut heaven for the word is the Key Answer One private Christian may use the
rebuke him from this Text. 14. Christ immediately and without the mediation of the Church saith Parker communicateth himselfe to beleevers ergo he communicateth his power also immediately to his Church Ans. It followeth not because he communicateth not his power of the keyes to the Church of believers either mediately or immediately because he giveth it not to them at all CHAP. V. Q. Whether or no some doe warrantably teach that the power of the Keyes is essentially and originally in the Church of Beleevers and in the Church-guides only at the second hand and in the by quoad exerâ—itium so as the Church of Believers should be the mistresse delegating the keyes by an imbred and kindly authority and the Church-guides as her proper servants and delegats do borrow the use and exercise of the keyes from the foresaid Church of Believers THe tenent of these with whom we now dispute is that all the power of the keyes is given by Christ to the multitude of Believers as to the first fountaine and that this power is derived and gested by the mulmultitude of believers to such and such persons to be used and exercised by them as the servants both of Christ and the Church For the clearing of the question and trying if this distinction be law-biding These distinctions are to be observed 1. The power of the keyes may be thought to come to the Ministers of the Church three waies as shall be cleared 1. By mediate derivation the Church receiving this power from Christ and deriving it over to the friends of the Bridegroome 2. By immediate donation God immediately giveth the honour of the keyes to these whom he maketh his Courtyers in this kinde 3. By application the Church only naming the men to the office 2. The power of the keyes and all sacred offices in Gods House are from the immediate wisdome of Christ The designation of such men to such offices is by the ministery of the Church 3. The power of the keyes is one thing the lawfull exercise of the keyes is another thing 4. The Ministers may be thought the servants either of the Church or servants of Christ for the Church 5. Designation of men by the Church to sacred offices may be thought either in the Churches free-will or tyed to the lawes designed by Christ. 6. The Church of believers may be thought either the virtuall or the formall subiect of the keyes 7. The power of the keyes may be thought to be given to the community or multitude of Believers or professours of faith in Christ in the generall not designing one man rather then another but leaving that to the disposition of meanes and disposition of second causes who shalâ— be the man as to be a Musitian to be an Astronomer is given to mankinde as some way proper to man as Porphyre saith howbeit all and every one of mankinde be not alwayes Musitians and Astronomers It is thought by our Brethren that the Church of believers is the first seat the prime subject and head fountaine under Jesus Christ to whom the keyes are given and that howbeit all offices and officers be only of Christs institution yet the Church of believers doe as the Spouse and Mistresse and bride of Christ communicate the lawfull exercise of some acts of the keyes as to preach administer the Sacraments oversee the conversation of the flock care for the poore to some certain men as her deputies and servants with borrowed authority from her selfe as the Well-head and prime fountain under Christ of all the authority and use of the keyes that is in the officers of the House as Pastors Doctors and Elders the Church still keeping in her own hands authority and power of the keyes in most materiall acts of the power of the keyes as by these keyes to ordain and elect all the officers and in case of aberration or failing to censure depose excommunicate them and all members of the visible Church and that independently and without any subordination to Presbyteries Classes and Synods even as the kingly power of actuall government is in the Kings hand and he appointeth deputies and servants under himself and in his name and authority to do and execute his will according to the Laws of the Kingdom so doth the Church of believers under Christ by an imbred authority and power received from Christ send out Pastors Doctors and Elders in her name and authority to exercise certain ministeriall acts yet so as the Church of believers in all the acts performed by the officers remaineth the principall and prime agent cause and actor under Christ and the officers only her servants deputies and instruments performing all by authority borrowed from her the bride Queen and Spouse of Christ This they believe to be contained in the Scriptures and taught by Fathers and Doctors of the Church I deny not but by the faculty of Paris this question was agitated in the Councell of Basil and Constance to bring the Pope as a sonne and servant under the power of a Generall Councell The Sorbonists and Doctors of Paris that are not near the smoake of the Popes glory for this contend with the Jesuites men that are sworne bellies to the world and the Pope The Parisians cite the Councell of Carthage where Augustine was present And Augustine and Tertullian and Chrysostome seeme to favour this So Maldonate Ferus Jansenius Sutluvius Whittaker Morton Spalato Gerson Almain Petr. de Alliac Also Edmundus Richerius and Sim. Vegorius set out a booke of Church policy depressing the Pope and extolling the Church power as full and compleat without a ministeriall head as their owne Parisian Doctors acknowledging the command of having a Pope to be affirmative and not to bind alwayes and that the Churches power remaineth full when the Pope is dead as the Parisians say p. 8. The booke came out without the name of an Authour and was condemned by Cardinall Peronius Archbishop of Senona and Primate of France and Germany and is refuted by Andreas Duvallius a Sorbonist What our Divines say in this I have exponed to be far otherwise then is the mind of Parker M. Jacob M. Best and the Authours of presbyteriall government examined Ann. 1641. Hence our first conclusion is All offices and office-bearers in Gods house have their warrant immediately from Christ Jesus as we all agree against the bastard prelacy 1. because of the perfection and plenitude of Scripture 2 because of our Law-giver Christs wisedome and his seven Spirits that are before the Throne seeing he seeth better then men 3. because of the Scriptures Eph. 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7 8 9. w 1 Cor. 12. 26 27 28 29. 1 Tim. 3. Act. 20. â—8 And therefore Presbyters and Deacons have their offices immediately from Christ and not from the Prelates 11. Conclusion The first subject of the keyes is either made quate or narrower as one Pastor and some ruling Elders of
supernaturall ends and effects and then forbidden multitudes who have this power as men women and children to touch the Arke or to preach or meddle with the holy things of God So Francis White Andrea Duvall Soto Victoria Baynes 8. Christ would have set down rules how all Beleevers should use this power as he setteth downe Canons how all Church-men should use their power in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus If any such power as is pretended were originally and fundamentally in all Beleevers But we reade of no rules or no Canons in Gods word obliging all Beleevers to bring in act to actuate or exercise this power thus and thus and not according to their owne liking Therefore there is in them originally no such power CHAP. VI. Q. 6. Whether Christ hath left the actuall government of his Church to the multitude of Beleevers PLato said well of Government by the hands of the people That amongst lawfull governments it is worst amongst uniust governments the best Aristotle saith of of its nature it is corrupt and faulty Plutarch calleth it the Serpents taile leading the head Xenophon speaketh not well of it Our Divines as Calvin Beza Chemnitius Mâ—lancthon Luther Junius Pareus make the government of the Church to partake of all the three governments In respect of Christ the only supreame King it is an absolute Monarchy but this is the invisible government for the most part in respect of the rulers as Pastors and Elders it is an Aristocracie the visible government being in the hands of the Elders and in respect of some things that concerneth the whole members of the visible Church it is a Democracie or hath some popular government in it We are now to enquire if the government of the visible Church be in the collective body of the Congregation as indeed by consequent they teach with whom we now dispute or in the Eldership in Classes and Synods provinciall and nationall as it is now in Scotland We hold that the government popular as it is properly taken when the collective body judgeth and governeth to be expresly against the word of God Eph. 4. 11. He gave some not all to be Apostles c. 1 Cor. 12. 28. And God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly teachers after that miracles c. 1 Thess. 5. 12. Now we beseech you brethren to know them that labour amongst you and are over you in the Lord Heb. 13. 17. Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves c. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour Hence it is cleare as the noone-sunne if there be some over the people of God some that are Elders that rule well some to whom the people should submit and give obedience then the whole people are not rulers all have not the rod nor a definitive voice in that highest censure of excommunication All are not overseers guides governours fathers stewards shepheards but some are governed subject sons the flocke ruled and fed then doth not the people governe 2. The keyes were only given to the Elders as is proved 3. God set downe in his word rules canons and directions for all lawfull governours how Timothy and Titus should behave themselves in Gods house in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus but no where doth God give directions how all beleevers should rule command and governe neither hath he promised that Spirit to all in that charge 4. Guides are eyes eares fathers gifted-teachers Eph. 4. 11. But the whole body is not an eye for then where were the hearing 1 Cor. 12. 17. All are not fathers nor all governours gifted therfore 1 Cor. 12. 28 29. actuall government is not in the hands of all the community of believers 5. The faults of evill government is laid upon some not upon all 1 Tim. 3. 4 5 6. Mat. 24. 28. Tit. 1. 7. 1 Pet. 5. 3. Revel 2. 14 20. 3. Ep. John v. 10. And the praise of good government is given to some not to all 1 Thes. 5. 12. Heb. 12. 17. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Rev. 2. 2. 2 Tim. 4. 4 5. 1 Pet. 5. 4 5. 6. It is against the dignity of such as are Embassadours in Christs roome 2 Cor. 5. 20. representing his person who are to be heard as himselfe Mat. 10. 41 42. His Angels Revel 2. 1. intrusted with his secrets 2 Cor. 5. 18. His stewards and builders 1 Cor. 4. 1 2 3. Cor. 3. 10. the friends of the Bridegroom Joh. 3. 29. Therefore they must have some honour of government that is not given to all and every one of the people 7. That government which necessarily includeth a confusion is not to be thought to come from the God of order popular government is such for in some Apostolike Congregations that were independent there were six thousand and above Act. 4. 9. Two answers are given here 1. Smith saith one may speake for all the Church or two Answ. These two are then a representative Church and doe speak in the name of the rest which he denyeth 2. M. Best saith none should be a congregation but so many as may orderly meet without confusion Answ. Then the Apostles government was confused els there was an Eldership that represented the rest and the Church of believers was no independent Church A third answer is Let heads of Families and fathers onely speake Answ. Yet you fall upon a selected and representative Church which otherwaies you deny 2. If sonnes and servants have a like interest in Christ and a like power of the keyes who dare for eschewing confusion take from them what Christ hath given them We may not do evill or rob any that good may come of it Ainsworth against Bernard The Authours deny they maintain popular government Therfore say they the state is popular the government on Christs part is a Monarchy and in the hands of Elders an Aristocracy The people is freely to voice in Elections and judgment of the Churches let the Elders publickly propone and order all things let them reproove convince exhort c. So they say they hold no Democracy or popular government Ans. I acknowledge that the Doctors of Paris doe make distinction betwixt the state and government who yet doe acknowledge a visible Monarchy in the Church and so did the Fathers of the Councell of Constance For the state of the Church is indeed popular in respect nothing that concerneth the state and body of the Church so concerneth theÌ„ should be done without the privity or consent of the people of God no excommunication untill the man and his scandalous sinnes be delated to them 1 Cor. 5. Nothing should be concluded in a Synod untill the people heare and know yea they have all place to speake object reason and dispute
Basilius saith The governours of the Church are set down 1 Cor. 12. 28. And Ambrose on that place saith the Church policy is set downe 1 Cor. 12. So Chrysostome Cyprian Tertullian so Origen Ireneus August Theophylact Theodoret Hyerom which for time I cannot cite at length CHAP. VII Q. 7. If there be no true visible Church in the New Testament but onely a congregation meeting in one place and no Presbyteriall or representative Church as they call it at all OVr Brethren hold that the only true publick visible Church in the New Testament is a Congregation of Believers joyned together by a voluntary profession of Faith and meeting in one place to worship God They deny 1. That the word Church doth ever signifie a Presbytery or Eldership 2. They deny that there is any representative Church properly so called or that it hath the title of a Church in the New Testament 3. They deny that there is any Provinciall or Nationall Church that can be called a visible politique body of Christ. 4. They deny any Church to have power of jurisdiction over a particular Congregation For the decision of the present questions these distinctions are to be observed 1. There be odds betwixt a Church visible and a Church ministeriall 2. There be odds betwixt a Cathedrall or mother Church and this we deny and a Church Nationall and provinciall which cannot meet to the worship of God in all the particular members therof 3. The Church is termed representative three wayes as we shall heare 1. properly 2. commonly 3. most properly 4. Suppose the name of Presbyteriall Church be not in the New Testament yet if the thing it selfe be in it it is sufficient The word Church is not taken here 1. For the Temple or House where God is worshipped 2. Neither for foure or five that worship God ordinarily within the walls of a Family Rom. 16. 5. Salute the Church at their House 1 Cor. 16. 19. Philem. v. 2. It is termed Kahal that is in the old Testament rendred Synagogue and Kahal rendred Ecclesia And Kahal Deut. 5. 22. or Hehillah Deut. 33. 4. signifieth a Congregation of people and Gnedah a Congregation Exod. 16. 1. Psal. 111. 1. is turned Ecclesia Mat. 16. 18. Act. 7. 38. Kahal is either a multitude of Nations or People Gen. 35. 11. so Jer. 50. 9. An Assembly of Nations not a Church of Nations came against Babylon Somtimes the Tribes and Governours are called Kahal the Church or Assembly 1 Chron. 13. 2 3. 1 Chron. 29. 6. 2 Chron. 1. 2 3. See Piscator Junius Guide to Zion The word Gnedah that signifieth the Assembly of the Judges Psalm 82. 1. is turned in the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 5. 27. and Act. 6. 12. M. Ball hath observed that the Arabick Interpreter useth four words Gamhon Act. 19. 31 39. 2. Gamahaton Acts 7. 38. both signifieth an Assembly or an Assembly of Princes 3. Kainsaton Rom. 16. 1. Acts 11. 26. 4. Bihaton Matth. 16. 18. and 18. 17. the Church that hath power to determine controversies 1. Conclusion A number of believers professing the truth is not presently a visible politick Church 1 Because then every Christian Family should be a visible politick Church 2 Peter offended Mat. 18. and rebuking his offending brother before three witnesses and gaining his brother to repentance v. 16. is a number of believers in that same act professing the truth and convincing an offender and so professing Gods worship and yet they are not the judging governing Church because if the offender will not heare Peter then he is to tell the Church Hence visibility of Profession agreeth both to a number of believers if for example ten out of ten particular Congregations confesse Christ before a persecuting Judge and also to a constitute Church of Believers and Elders Then true Faith and the visible professing of true Faith is not enough to constitute a Church that ordinarily hath power and exercise of the keyes neither find we any warrant in Gods Word that the swearing of an oath or making a covenant by four or five or 10. or 40. believers to worship God together as he hath commanded in his word doth essentially constitute a visible ministeriall Church 1. Because a ministeriall Church is a body of Pastor and People of eyes eares hands feet wherof Christ is head Rom. 12. 4. 1 Cor. 12. v. 14 15 c. but a number of sole and only believers are not such a body 2. More is there required an oath and covenant but this is and may be where there is no ministery 2. Conclusion We deny that Christ hath given power of jurisdiction to one particular Church over another particular Church or to one Church to be a mother Church to give laws and orders to little daughter-churches under it for that jurisdiction is not to be found in the Word of God and so is not lawfull See Paul Baynes and Parker and Cartwright 3. Conclusion A Church may be a visible incorporation of guides and people meeting for the worship of God and exercise of discipline and yet not necessarily a Church of believers for if there be twenty or thirty visible Saints who are Saints in profession they may meet for the worship of God and consequently by our Brethrers grounds independently and without any subordination to Synods or classes exercise discipline I proove that they are not necessarily believers 1. Because to make one or two formall members of a visible Church is not required that they be indeed believers it sufficeth that they professe Faith and be apparantly Saints and our Brethren teach they may be Hypocrites and often are as Iudas was amongst the Apostles now by that same reason all the thretty may be heart-hypocrites and face-professors for who seeth the heart And our Brethren say the preaching of the word and the administration of the Sacraments are not essentiall notes and markes of the Church because the word is often preached to reprobates and unbeleevers and by that same reason the power of the keyes and discipline is exercised by hypocrites and unbeleevers 2. Amesius saith it is probable he saith not it is necessary where the Word and Sacraments are that there are some beleevers And I say it is probable but that at all times there should be beleevers especially when it is first founded it is not necessary I say when it is first founded because we cannot say it is possible that there should be never any beleevers there at all for the Lord sendeth not a ministery to these where there are none chosen at all it doth crosse the wisedome of God who doth nothing in vaine that he should light a candle where he had no lossed money and the Shepheard should be sent through the fields where there were no lossed sheep at all Hence I inferre these consectaries 1. that the claime and title that a people
said There shall be no ravenous beast in the Mountaine of the Lord the Mountaine of the Lord is not taken litterally for Mount Sion as if in every little Mountaine of a visible congregation made up of so many Saints there were not a Iudas amongst them But by the Mountaine of the Lord is meaned the Catholike Church alluding to the visible Mount Sion a type of the Church of Christ through all the earth 2. They dispute thus God in all ages hath appointed and made a separation of his people from the world before the Law under the Law and now in the time of the Gospell Gen. 4. 6. Exod. 6. 3. Levit. 20. 24. Ezech. 6. 11. Psal. 84. 10. Answ. God hath made a separation of the Church from the wicked but not such a separation as there remaineth no mixture of hypocrites and unbeleevers in the Church The Church was separated from Caines seede yet was there Idolatry defection and wickednesse in the Church till God charged Abraham to leave his country and his fathers house God separated his Israel from Egypt but so that there was much Idolatry and wickednesse in Israel thus separated God may and doth separate his owne from Egypt 〈◊〉 in Marriage and mixture with the Canaanites 〈…〉 that are born in the visible Church and professe 〈…〉 us should not be received in the Church 〈…〉 be all taught of God all precious stones all plants of righteousnesse it followeth no way but the contrary therefore because they are unbeleevers under the power and chaines of Sathan and ignorance they are to be received in a communion with the Church to be hearers of the word that they may be all taught of God and all made righteous plants 3. They reason thus The wicked have not Christ for their head So the guide to Zion A true visible Church say the Separatists is the Temple of the Lord the body of Christ a kingdome of Priests a Church of Saints the houshold and Kingdome of God Yea saith Barrow a people chosen redeemed Saints by calling partakers of the most precious faith and glorious hope the humble obedient loving Sheepe of Christ a sheepe-fold watched by discipline a garden well inclosed here entreth no Cananite every vessell is holy Answ. 1. The body of Christ a Kingdome of Priests and Saints and these that are partakers of the holy faith are the chosen of God ordained for glory in his decree of election and effectually called and justified but the adversaries say that the visible Church is a company of Saints by calling where saith Ainsworth there be many called but few chosen hence this argument will prove that none no hypocrites can be in the visible Church as a Church is indeed Christs body Now the Church visible as a Church is indeed Christs body a reyall Priest-hood a chosen generation but as visible it is sufficient that the Church be a royall Priest-hood only in profession and so possibly for a while no royall Priesthood no chosen generation as I have observed before But say they hypocrites are not indeed and really members of the true visible Church but only in reputation as an eye of glasse is not indeed a true part of the body I answer then our adversaries give us no right description of the true naturall and lively members of the true visible Church he that would give such a definition of a man as agreeth both to a living man and to a pictured or painted man were but a painted Logician For they acknowledge the true parts of a visible Church to be a chosen people a royall generation partakers of the holy faith either they are really and in Gods esteem a chosen people c. And so we are at a point there be none members of a visible Church none ought to heare the word as members of the Church none ought to preach baptize bind and loose with the rest of the Congregation but these that are really chosen and effectually called which cannot be said Ainsworth then and M. Canne and Smith doe but mocke us when they say The true matter of a true visible Church are Saints in profession and in the judgement of charity for that is not enough they must be according to the Texts of Scripture alledged by Barrow not onely in the judgement of charity but in Gods estimation and in the judgement of verity a chosen people a royall generation If the true matter of the true visible Church be a chosen generation and a royall Priest-hood only in profession the places cited will not help them for Peter 1 Pet. 2. writeth not to an independent Congregation who are in profession only a chosen people But he writeth to the Catholick Church even to all the dispersed and sanctified and regenerated in Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia and Bythinia who were not only a chosen generation in profession but also really and in Gods decree of election Neither Peter nor Isaiah are of purpose to teach that in the independent Congregation of the New Testament there are none but all righteous men no stones to speake with Isaiah but Saphires and Carbuncles no thornes and briers but only the firre and the myrtle trees no iron and brasse but all gold and silver no Cananite no Lyon no uncleane vessell this they shall not find in the independent Congregations of Separatists nor can it be in the visible Church on earth except they seeke the Anabaptists Church a man in the Moone 4. They reason thus The wicked are expresly forbidden in the word of God for medling with his Covenant and ordinances Psal. 50. So the guide to Zion Answ. The wicked are forbidden to speake of Gods Law and his Covenant in some case so long as they hate to be reformed but they are not simply forbidden but hence it followeth not that they should not be ordinary hearers of the word but rather they are to be hearers and so members of the visible Church seing faith commeth by hearing 2. From this argument is nothing concluded against us for such adulterers theeves and slanderers as are forbidden to take Gods Law in their mouth Psal. 50. are to be cast out of the Church and the question is if they be not cast out if the Church for that be no true Church that we should remaine in they say it leaveth off to be a true visible Church we deny 5. There is saith Ainsworth proclaimed by God himselfe enmity and warre betwixt the seede of the woman and the seede of the Serpent and there is no communion nor fellowship betwixt Christ and Beliall light and darknesse Therefore the prophane and the godly cannot be mixed together in one visible society as two contraries are not capeable of one and the same forme Answ. This will prove that which is not denyed that the godly and ungodly cannot agree well together suppose the ungodly be latent hypocrites for they have two contrary natures as fire and water and
seducing his people CHAP. X. Quest. 10. Whither or no it be lawfull to seperate from a true Church visible for the corruption of teachers and the wickednesse of Pastours and professours where Faith is begotten by the preaching of professed truth THat we may the more orderly proceed these distinctions are to be considered as making way to cleare the question 1. There is a separation in the visible Church and a Separation out of and from the visible Church 2. There is a Separation totall and whole from any visible communion with the Church or partiall and in part from a point of Doctrine or practise of the Church in a particular only 3. There is a Separation negative when we deny the practise of an errour with silence or refuse publike communion with the Church but doe not erect a new Church within the Church There is a separation positive when we doe not only refuse practise of errours and protest and pleade against them but also erect a new visible Church 4. As there is a three-fold communion 1. in Baptisme 2. in hearing of the Word 3. in communicating with the Church at the Lords Supper so there is a three-fold separation answerable therunto 5. The influence of a worship corrupt may either be thought to come from the persons with whom we worship or 2. from the matter of the worship if corrupt and that either 1. by practise or 2. by not practising somthing that an affirmative commandement of God impaseth on us 6. A communion in worship either implyeth a consent and approbation of the worship or no consent at all 7. A communion of worship when the worship in the matter is lawfull yet for the profession may be most unlawfull as to heare a Jesuite preach sound Doctrine 8. There is a separation from a friendly familiarity and from a communion in worship 1. Conclusion We are to separate in the true visible Church from all communion wherin need-force we cannot choose but sinne suppose we separate not from the Church Eph. 5. 11. Have no fellowship with the unfruitfull workes of darkenesse but rather reproove them Col. 2. â—1 Touch not taste not handle not 2 Epist. John Bid him not God speed that bringeth another doctrine 2. Conclusion from the first conclusion it will follow that a separation in part I meane in some acts of publike worship when we cannot chuse but fall in sin from a true Church is lawfull as we must separate from an idolatrous communion where the bread is adored for then the Lords Table is made an Idols Table and yet we are not totally and wholly to separate from the Church and hearing of the word and praiers and praises of that Church as we shall heare 3. Conclusion Anent separation from Rome and spirituall Babel We have two parties to satisfie if they would in reason be informed 1. Papists 2. Separatists opposers of government Presbyteriall who thinke we have all as good reason to separate from our selves and Presbyteriall Churches as from Babel But I shall speake a little of the first in some few Theses considerable for our purpose 1. Consideration It is most false that Bellarmine saith Churches all withered as branches separated from trees when they separated from Rome Joseph grew as a fruitfull Branch and blessings was on the top of his head when he was separated from his Brethren Deut. 33. 16. For 1. The contrary is seene in the reformed Churches who never flourished as since our separation from Rome 2. The Churches in Asia and Africa and especially the Greeke Church flourished ever since and they separated from Rome and had famous learned men in them after the separation as Theophylact Damascen Occumenius Zonaras Cedrenus Elias Cretensis Basil Nilus and many others and especially the Aethiopian and Armenian Churches had both their Bishops and Assemblies howbeit generall they could not have seeing they were apart not the whole Church 2. Consideration The faithfull before Luther the Albigenses Waldenses and others yea the Romane Doctors themselves holding the fundamentall points with some hay and stubble builded upon the foundation made a negative Separation from Babylon and did neither hold nor professe their grosse Idolatries and other fundamentall errours howbeit they did not hold them positively by erecting a new Church because the separation was then in the blade and not ripe for the Harvest 3. Consideration We hold that Rome made the Separation from the Reformed Churches and not we from them as the rotten wall maketh the schisme in the house when the house standeth still and the rotten wall falleth 1. Because we left not Christianity in Rome but the leprosie of Popery growing upon Christianity seeing we kept the Apostolike faith and did positively separate from the pookes blybes and ulcers of Christian Rome 2. We did not separate from the Westerne Churches either collective or representatively gathered in a generall Councell 3. We departed not from a Nationall Provinciall or Parishonall Church or Pastors that we had before nor from the materiall Temples and Churches except that some not very considerable hyrelings and idoll-pastours would not goe before us 4. And because the succession of fundamentall truths from generations to generations is as necessary as the perpetuall existence of the true Catholick Church while the covenant with night and day and the ordinances of Heaven shall continue Jer 31. 37. therfore there were a succession of professours and members of the Catholick Church that did ever hold these fundamentals which we to this day hold against Rome suppose Histories cannot cleare the particular persons by name 5. We have not separated from Romes baptisme and ordination of Pastors according to the substance of the act nor from the letter of the twelve Articles of the Creed and contents of the old and new Testament as they stand with relation to the mind and intent of the Holy Ghost howbeit we have left the false interpretations of the Lords of poore peoples Faith and Consciences 4. Consideration We separate not from acts of love to have the reliques of Babel saved howbeit we have separated from communion in faith and worship 5. Consideration The essentiall ingredients and reasons of a lawfull divorce are here 1. we could not lye in one bed with that sometime sister Church of Rome but our skin behoved to rub upon her botch-boyle and therfore we did separate from nothing but corruption 2. There was there persecutions and in that we are patients and ejected rather then departers on foot and horse 3. A professed dominion over our consciences 4. Necessity of receiving the marke of the beast and so the plagues of the beast to worship Images and the worke of mens hands a necessity of professing fundamentall errours that subvert the foundation of faith did all necessitate our seperation 6. Consideration The Church of believers might lawfully use justâ tutelâ aetâ—rnae salutis a necessary defence for salvation and forsake her corrupt guides and choose others
thanks for the turning away of Gods wrath when the Land is defiled with bloud and other Nationall transgressions for the bringing backe the Arke of God for the renewing a Nationall Covenant and Oath with God in case of universall Apostasie from God and true Religion Then hath Christ ordained to Churches in the New Testament Nationall Assemblies which authoritatively onely can reach these ends and effects But Christ hath left the Churches of a whole Nation in no worse case then the Nationall Church of the Jewes was in for reaching the foresaid ends and effects Ergo c. I have to prove 1. That the Jewes had their solemne Assemblies for these ends 2. That these Assemblies were morall and so concerne us 3. That these ends cannot be attained without Nationall Assemblies which being done I trust the Argument shall stand strong For the first I may prove both in the Iewish and after their example in the Christian Church Deut. 29. 20. All Israel were convened to enter in Covenant with the Lord. So Joshuah for the same end assembled all the Tribes of Israel Iosh. 24 1. their Heads Iudges and Officers And Samuel 1 Sam. 12. gathered all Israel to renew their repentance for their sinne in asking a King So did Hezekiah 2 Chron. 29. 4. in an universall Apostasie And Iosiah 2 Chron 34. 29. And Asa 2 Chron. 15. 9. gathered all Iudah and Beniamin and they sware a Covenant to the Lord. And Ahab 1 King 22. gathered foure hundred Prophets to aske counsell about going to warre against Ramoth Gilead And Herod Mat. 2. 3. when Christ was borne So Salomon did when the Temple was consecrated and David assembled them to bring the Arke to it's place The examples of these Kings did godly Emperours follow and convened generall Councels what ever Iulius 3. usurpe in his Bull ann 1551. Decemb. 15. Constantine convened the Councell of Nice as saith Theodoret Ruffin Socrates and Eusebius Theodosius called the 2. generall Councell at Constantinople as Theodoret saith And Theodosius gathered the third generall Councell at Ephesus as Socrates and Euagrius saith Valentine and Martian called the Councell of Chalcedoâ— and the Councell of Sardis in Illyrium as Sozomen saith And Iustinian called the fifth generall Councell at Constantinople as Nicephorus saith Constantine the 4. gathered the sixth generall Councell at Constantinople as saith Martinus Polonus I might adde many others but these may suffice I prove the second particular that convening of generall Councels in the Iewish Church was morall For 1. an oath and vow to keep Gods Commandements is a part of the third Commandement according to that Psalme 119. v. 106. I have sworne and I will performe that I will keep thy righteous iudgements and the maintenance of the true Religion in a Land is obligatory for ever For Iud. v. 3. we are willed earnestly to contend for the faith once delivered to the Saints and it is obedience to the third Commandement to avow God and his Sonne Christ before men Mat. 10. 32. And so doth Moses commend it in Israel Deut. 26. 17. Thou hast avouched the Lord this day to be thy God and to walke in his wayes and to keep his statutes and his Commandements c. Now what ever doth lay a bond morally binding on man doth also morally bind a whole Nation 2. It is most certaine that bloud defiled the land of Israel morally as it was a Land and not as the holy Land only Num. 35. 33. Hos. 4 1 2 3. 1. Because it is a sinne against the Law of Nature for man is made according to Gods Image Gen. 9. 6. 2. Because bloud defileth the Land under the New Testament as in the Iewish Church for if this were not the Magistrate had no warrant from Num. 33. to use the sword against the murtherer which is that very same that is taught by Socinians Arminians and Anabaptists So teacheth Episcopius Joan Geisteran and Henry Slatius so also Socinus the Chatechise of Raccovia deny that the Magistrate now under the Messiah his kingdome should shed the bloud of any murtherer or malefactor Yea if it be knowne saith Ostorodius that a man cannot be a Magistrate without shedding of bloud and war It is not lawfull for him to be a Magistrate quia praecepta Christi non permittunt ulli homini adimere vitam So also saith Smalcius therefore need-force these precepts anent shedding of bloud are not judiciall but morall seeing the Magistrate carrieth the sword as the Minister of God to execute judgement upon the evill doer Rom. 13. 4 which being undenyably true a Nationall Church must have meanes allowed of Christ to purge the land of bloud Sodomy and other Nationall sinnes for the which Canaan spewed out seven great Nations Also Because of swearing the land shall mourne Ier. 23. 10. And if the Arke be taken away as it was out of his place 1 Chron. 13. The Land is in a hard case we see no meanes but an Assembly of the Nationall Church that by authority of the Assembly all may be moved to renew their Covenant with God to repent and to bring â—acke againe the Gospell as David conveened all Israel 1 Chron. 13. 1 2 3 4. fromâ—ireath-jearim â—ireath-jearim For the Gospels departure and universall Apostasie when we are as Israel without the true God and a teaching Priest as 2 Chron. 15. and withall in great trouble is a case that concerneth not a particular Congregation onely but the whole Land and therefore the whole Church of the Nation must be assembled in their heads and leaders to turne away Gods wrath and bring backe the glory that is departed from the Laâ—d by renewing our Covenant with God Lastly the whole hoast and armies of writers antient and moderne may be alleadged for the lawfulnesse of Synods as witnesseth the Tomes of the Councels generall and Provinciall CHAP. XVI Whether or no it can be demonstrated from Gods Word that all particular Congregations have of and within themselves full power of Church-discipline without any subiection to Presbyteries Synods or higher Assemblies VEry reverend and holy men hold the affirmative part of this question and deny all subjâ—ction of Congregations to Presbyteries and Assemblies Their first Argument is If Churches planted by the Apostles such as Corinth have power within themselves to exercise Church-discipline as to rebuke excommunicate loose and relaxe from excommunication Then ought not particular Congregations now to stand under any other Ecclesiastical authority out of themselves But the former is true 1 Cor. 5. 2 3. So M. Best Parker the Separatists Robinson Authors of Presb. govern examined prove that all beleevers in Corinth had voice in excommunication 1. They amongst whom the fornicator was they who were puffed up and sorrowed not that he was not cut off they were to be gathered together in one and to iudge and excommunicate v. 12. but the fornicator
Christ or beleeve not in him joyne hands with Papists and make way for Anabaptisticall Anaâ—chy that a persecuting or an unbeleeving King is no King not to be obeyed but to be turned out of his Throne And to this meaning Calvin Viretus and Cartwright teach that the kingly power floweth immediately from God the Creator not from God in the Mediator Christ. But 2. thâ— kingly power is considered in a speciall manner as it is in a Christian whether professing onely the Gospell or truly beleeving in Christ and so in relation to Christs Church and to the soule of a beleeving Prince the kingly power floweth from God in and through the Mediator Jesus Christ as all common favours which in generalâ— flow from God the Creator are sanctified and blessed to the beleevers in the Mediator Christ as meat drinke sleep riches kingly honour And in this meaning Sauls kingly honour in respect of Saul himselfe is but a common favour flowing from the Creator howbeit to Gods Church for whose good he did fight the battels of the Lord it was a speciall favour flowing from God in Christ as our Divines say that creation which in it selfe is a common favour to all is a meane in the execution of the Decree of Elâ—ction to the children of God 3. Conclusion Hence our Divines say that kingly authority is the same ordinance of God essentially considered in the heathen Princes as in Christian Kings as Cartwright and others say Neither doth it follow as our unlawfull Canons teach That the Christian Kings now have that same power in Causes Ecclesiasticall which the godly Kings amongst the Jewes as David and Salomon had â—or David and Salomon were Prophets as well as Kings and had power to pen Canonâ—cke Scripture and to prophesie which power in Ecclesiasticke causes no King now can have Neither doth it follow which Whytgift saith that we give no more authority to the Christian Magistrate in the Church of Christ then to the great Turke Our Divines say and that with good warrant that the kingly power as kingly is one and the same in kind in heathen Nero and in Christian Constantine As a heathen man is as essentially a father to his owne children and a husband to his owne wife and a King to his owne subjects as a Christian man is a father husband and king to his owne children wife and subjects Neither doth Christianity superadde and give of new any kingly power to a King because he is now become by Gods grace of a Heathen King a Christian King Christianity addeth indeed a new obligation to imploy his kingly power which he had full and entire before now in its exercise and use to more regall and kingly acts as to take care that the Gospell be soundly preached the Sacraments and discipline of the Church kept pure and heretickes punished according to that he to whom much is given from him much shall be required But the same King while he was a heathen King had the same kingly power and authority to performe these regall acts but being yet a heathen he wanted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 supernaturalis a supernaturall or reall and physicall power to performe these acts now this power which he wanted before he heard of the Gospell and beleeved in Christ was not a kingly authority for then he should not have been a compleat Heathen King before which is against Gods word commanding obedience to heathen Kings Rom. 13. 1 2. 1 Tim. 2. 1 2. 1 Pet. 2. 17. but this power that he wanted is a Christian power to exercise regall and kingly acts Neither is this an inconvenience that power to exercise the acts of a calling in a Christian manner be Christian and supernaturall and yet the authority kingly and not formally Christian but such as is and may be in a heathen King therefore kingly power and Christian power are here carefully to be distinguished and a Christian Kings power as a Christian is more then the Turks power in Church-matters Hence our Adversaries here dethrone and degrade the King for they give the King a head-ship and dominion over the Church as he is a Christian man and take that headship from him as a King because if the Turke by sword should conquer Britaine and become our King by their grounds he should be Head of the Church no lesse then our Christian Prince who now reâ—gneth over us and certaine it is a poore Headship that they give to the King even such a Head-ship as a Heathen King and the Turke hath over subdued Christian kingdomes and thus by their way Nero and Julian were heads of Christs Church 2. If unbeleeving Kings cease to be Kings then when they commit any fault that maketh them in Gods Court no members of the Church they are to be dethroned which is most seditious doctrine and so Formalists herein joyne with Papists 4. Conclusion There be these distinctions here considerâ—ble 1. The Kings power ordinary and extraordinary 2. His power as a King 2. and as a singularly graced Christian. 3. His power hortatorie as a Christian and coactive as a King 4. His power accumulative not privative in Church-matters 5. His power in actibus imperatis in acts commanding to another and his power in actibus elicitis which he is to performe himselfe If a King were a Prophet as a David he might doe many things in an extraordinary way in Church-matters which he cannot now ordinarily doe 2. As a singularly graced Christian he may write Sermons and Commentaries on holy Scripture for edifying the Church but this should be done by him by no kingly faculty 3. As a Christian he may exhort others to doe their duty but as King he may command that which Paul commanded Timothy and Titus to commit the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others to preach in season and out of season to lay hands suddenly on no man and reforme Religion purge the Church of idolatry and superstition as Joshuah and Hâ—zekiah did all which Church-men and Synods might doe also but Synods doe this in an Ecclesiasticke way upon the paine of Ecclesiasticke censures The King doth it by a regall kingly and coactive power of the sword 4. the Kings power is accumulative in giving to the Church and ayding and helping God hath given to the King the ten Commandements and the Gospâ—ll as a pupill is given to a Tutor The King holds his sword above the Law of God to ward off the stroakes of wicked men who doe hurt the Law but the Kings power is not privative to take any priviledge from the Law and the Church so his power is as a tutor to keep not as a father who may both give and take away from his son the inheritance his power is defensive not offensive 5. He hath power in actibus imperatis to command that all preach sound Doctrine decree just Canons exercise discipline aright but in
19 20. where the Church had her owne Synods without the consent of a civill Magistrate but we are to repute it a speciall favour of God when the King as a nursing-â—ather will countenance Synods with his royall presence God blesse our King 5. Conclusion The Kings royall power in adding his sanction to the ecclesiasticall constitutions and in punishing such as are decreed to be hereticks by the Church is regall and not ministeriall and servile See for this the Con c. Chalced. Aâ—t 16. the Imperiall lawes Cod. l. 1 tit 8. leg 2. Heretic Vocab decret p. 2. caus 23. q. 8. c. 30. crossing Bellar. de pont l. 1. c. 7. So do their owne men goe against Bellarmine in this as Sanderus de clavib David l 2. c. 13. Carerius de potest sum pont l. 2. c. 23 Leo epist. 38. to Martian and Pulcheria and Leo epist. 7. to Theodosius Becanus erreth here with Bellarmine making the King as a servant obliged to adde his sanction civill to ecclesiasticall Canons Becan in opusc exam conc Anglic c. 7. 1. Because the use of the sword at Gods commandement is a kingly act commanded by God and is service done to God not to the Church 2. Neither is the King so to execute the Churches will as he should judge only of the fact and of the assumption yea he is to judge of the law and of the major proposition I or we see not in the Word of God where a Judge is a Judge to punish a fault and is not to know judicially that it is a fault a Judge as a Judge should know such a thing to be heresie and not takâ— it upon the word of an Assembly of Church-men Deu. 17. 18 19. he is expresly to reade and know the law and to know and remember the Decree Prov. 31. 5. And the cause which he knoweth not he is to search out Job 29. 16. all which is meant of a knowledge not of private discretion which is required in all private Christians but as I take these places of a knowledge judiciall and authoritative which agreeth to a Judge as a Judge 3. If a Synod erre and decree that man to be an heretick who is sound in the faith the King is not obliged to erre with the Synod and to punish the innocent he is to decree righteous judgement and so the King is to judge of heresie but after a regall and civill way and with a coactive powâ—r as the Synod or Church-Assembly is to judge of heresie after an ecclesiastick way and with a spirituall power 2. The King punisheth heresie as it troubleth the Common-wâ—alth and the Synod as it is scandalous and infectious in the Church Yea and the Christian King ruleth over men as men and also as Christian-mâ—n he ruleth over them as men with a dominion over their bodies lives and goods by his civill lawes he hath also dominion as King over men as Christians and members of Christs kingdome and Church not over their conscâ—ences for that is proper only to the father of spirits but he hath a coactive power over all men even Pastors as to cause them do their Christian duties he hath power to compell Church-men in Assemblies to determine truth and to use the keyes right and to preach and use the Sacraments according as Christ hath commanded in his Word and to punish them when they do otherwise What then if the King discerne that to be truth and absolve the man whom the Church-Assembly doth condemne as an heretick who shall judge betwixt them I answer the infallible rule of judging for both is the Word of God which speaketh home unpartially to both if they will heare but certainly the Kings civill kingly coactive power to compell men to doe their duty remaineth the highest and most supream power on Earth in genere potestatis politicae in the kind of politick power and pastors and all men may by this power be compelled to do right as for the abuse of the power it is no part of the power and in this kind the King hath a negative politick and kingly suffrage and voyce in all Church Assemblies no ecclesiasticall constitution hath the force of a law without the politick suffrage of the civill Judge And againe the ecclesiastick power that Christ hath given to his Church remaineth also the most supreme power under Christ in genere potestatis ecclesiasticae and the King is subject to this power The King is not excepted in this He that despiseth you despiseth me and in this whatsoever ye shall binde on earth shall be bound in Heaven and in this whose sinnes ye remit they are remitted and whose sinnes ye retaine they are retained and this ecclesiasticall power being the highest on Earth Pastors may command Kings in the Lord Jer. 1. 10 18 17. to doe their duty by an ecclesiastick power Arminians and Formalists both aske which of the two powers are highest and nearest unto the head Christ whither the kingly power or the ecclesiastick power for two paralell highest powers on earth cannot be I answer by asking which of the two shoulders in a mans body are highest and nearest to the mans head Certainly one of them in a well proportioned body is not higher then another and both are alike neare the head as none of two pole-starrs are nearer to their Zenith and Nadir none of two wheels in a right Chariot are higher then another The Church power saith the Prelate Davenant is highest in teaching and directing the kingly power in commanding and compelling Barclai compareth them to two shoulders under one head Meisner saith one of them is not above another There is no absurdity saith Spalato that in two bodies formally different there should be two heads yea it is necessary The Roman Glosse saith Patricius is the Popes father in things temporall and the Pope is his father in things spirituall as Cusan saith Papists saith Spalat have deleted that out of the Glosse So Berengarius Gelasius Papa Nicolaius the I agree to these words Sciendum quod nec Catholicae fidei nec Christianae contrarium est legi si ad honorem regni sacerdotij Rex pontifici pontifix obediat regi Spalato seemeth against Bellarmine to make up the losses made by Papists in Kings honour while he holdeth that the King his person and as he is a Christian man is subject to Church-power but as King he is subject to none but to Christ from whom immediately he hath his kingly dignity even as saith he when an Emperours servant being a Physitian the Emperour as Emperour is not subject to the Physitian but only the Emperour as he is a wounded man is subject to the art of his owne servant who cureth him and that of the Emperour free-will not by coaction so the Image-maker or he who maketh pourtracts in his art is not subject to the King neither is the King as King