and certaine others of them should goe up to Hierusalem unto the Apostles and Elders about that question Act. 15.2 2. Because the judgment of the Church of Hierusalem is called a Sentence v. 19. A burden To lay no greater burden upon you v. 28. Item Decrees and Ordinances They delivered them the Decrees to keep that were ordained for the Apostles and Elders which were at Hierusalem cap. 16. v 4. 3. Because not only the Church or Churches in Antioch but also all those of Syria and Cilicia were bound to obey them since they were delivered them by the Apostles Evangelists and Disciples to keep cap. 16.4 4. Because the stile of the Epistle and of the Iudgement argueth authority over the Churches As that Act. 15.24 To whom we gave no such commandement Ergo They had power to command them to preach And the Pharises appearingly pretended to have had some such commandement from that Church at Hierusalem as some inferre from this Text. Item It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us to lay upon you no greater burden then these necessary things Act. 15.25 5. Because they commanded the Churches some things indifferent in themselves as to abstaine from meats offered to Idols and from blood and from things strangled v. 29. What may be answered to this Reason we shall God willing see hereafter Arg. 6. The Church of Antioch is one and yet it is probable that there were many Congregationall Churches there for many of the Jewes and Religious Proselytes at Antioch followed Paul and Barnabas Act. 13. v. 43. And the next Sabbath day came almost the whole City together to heare the Word of God v. 44. And the Word of the Lord was published throughout all the Region v. 49. so that there were many that professed Christ So there were certaine Prophets and Teachers as Barnabas Simeon Lucius Manahem Act. 13. v. 1. and sundry others which had come down from Iudea Act. 15. v. 1. Now it is not credible that where there were so many Beleevers and so many Preachers but there must have been many Congregations and yet they are all called one Church Act. 14. v. 27. CHAP. V. The same Doctrine proved by the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 1. 2 Cor. 1. Act. 18. and of Ephesus Act. 19. Arg. 7. SO 1 Cor. 1.2 2 Cor. 1.1 the Church of Corinth is called a Church There Paul reasoned in the Synagogue every Sabbath day and perswaded the Jewes and the Greeks Act. 18.4 And Crispus the chiefe Ruler of the Synagogue beleeved on the Lord with all his house and many of the Corinthians hearing beleeved and were baptized v. 8. And the Lord spake by vision to Paul saying I have much people in this City v. 10. Paul continued there a yeere and six moneths v. 11. God promised him that no man should set on him to hurt him v. 10. The Iewes that had made an insurrection against him v. 12. were drawn from the Iudgement seat by Gallio the Pro-Consul or Deputy of Achaia v. 18. Sosthenes the chiefe Ruler of the Synagogue beaten away by the Greeks v. 17. This Gallio was not Pauls or the Christians enemy as appeareth by all his proceedings v. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18. where it is to be observed that Corinth was the Metropolis of Achaia so potent and opulent that it might have disputed the Empire of the World with any other which the Romans reckoned only three in the World fit to do viz. Carthage Corinth and Capua Now since the City was so great so rich so populous and S. Paul by so speciall a manner of Divine providence and promise assisted there so as that Crispus the chiefe Ruler of the Synagogue was converted Gallio the Proconsul became Pauls friend and peradventure not far from the Kingdome of Heaven S. Pauls credit so great that the Iewes were drawn from the Tribunall seat and Sosthenes beaten away so many Corinthians converted and that he abode there so long What a number in all probability must have been converted Out of all doubt more then could conveniently meet together in one house to participate of all Christs Ordinances And it was not Pauls custome to stay long in any place where the Gospel was much contradicted or prospered not as we may collect from the 6. verse of this chapter and from chap. 19. v. 9. Arg. 8. We may prove as much from the 19. chapter concerning the City of Ephesus where I pray the Reader to consider how Ephesus was a very potent rich and populous City of Asia minor of great Trading in regard of its situation betwixt the South and West it being the way to saile from Syria and Egypt into Greece and Macedonia For all these reasons it was very famous as also for the Temple of Diana its Idolatry and many curious Arts there professed as Naturall and Diabolicall Magick the profession whereof some Independents as it is related by M. S. use it should seeme now and then to consult about men of Letters and their Books in these calamitous times of Reformation About that time that S. Paul taught there there was one Apollonius Thyanaeus who as it is related of him erected a Schoole of Magick there who by the voice of Birds knew their very imaginations and desires c. This man was Christs and S. Pauls enemy as it is related of him We have also an Adage in Erasmus Ephesiae literae which were some Magick characters and words which made such as caried them victorious in all they undertook See more about them in that Adage in the Title Imposturae Without doubt Paul converted here more then could meet in one Congregation and yet it is called a Church 1. At his first entry by the imposition of his hands he gave the Holy Ghost unto 12 Disciples or rather it was given them by Jesus Christ upon the imposition of his hands so that they spake with Tongues and prophesied v. 6. and so there was now a good number of good Instruments 2. He disputed boldly in the Synagogue for the space of three moneths perswading the things concerning the Kingdome of God v. 8. which he could not have done unlesse he had had many good friends there 3. Afterwards daily in the Schoole of one Tyrannus for the space of two yeeres v. 9.10 which without doubt he had not continued to doe so long if the Gospel had not had great fruits there for so soon as some spake evill of it in the Synagogue the Text sayes He separated his Disciples from it I know that there is some dispute about these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Schola Tyranni cujusdam v. 9. some thinking that Tyrannus is a proper name others that it is a common name signifying some great-man of great credit and authority as some great Lord perchance and Schola may signifie a Schoole is a Hall or place of recreation such as Noblemen use to have But however it be taken this Text proveth plainly that
Hereticall and go to the Devill But I answer 1. The Assumption is false for the Externall Coactive Power that A. S. grants unto the Civill Magistrate is onely to represse Hereticks and Schismaticks after that they are sufficiently convicted by the Church in an ordinary way or by others in an extraordinary way when the Church is negligent in her duty 2. Neither doth M. S. his Confirmation or Case of Conscience conclude any thing against that which A. S. sayes And as for his Supposition either that Conscience whereof he speaketh is right or erroneous If it be right the Civill Magistrate should not presse it against its light or if he happen to do so it is not by Power but by abuse of Power And in such a case he who hath his Conscience well informed must resolve himself to be quiet in case the Civill Magistrate oblige him not to be Actor in any thing against it But if such a man any other or others with him will rise up within the Kingdom or come from Forraign Countries and urge their Religion upon the State and establish it without permission of the Magistrate or against his Laws then their Consciences cannot be right for wherefore should the King Parliament and State be rather bound to admit such mens Religion without sufficient conviction then they to admit his Religion And in such a Case the Civill Magistrate so long as such persons as urge their Religion upon him convict not sufficiently his Conscience may with a good Conscience punish them severely yea with good Conscience cut off their Heads If such a mans Conscience be erroneous the Civill Magistrate doth him no wrong to endeavour that he who hath it be sufficiently convicted and if after sufficient conviction he will not be quiet especially when he is not obliged to be Actor in any thing against his pretended Conscience but will still trouble both Church and State wherefore on Gods Name should he not be punished 2. Is it not better that such a man should perish then that he should make thousands to perish 3. Ravalliack in France and the Monks and Fryers that kill Kings pretend evermore Conscience as the Independents do and yet the Civill Magistrate puts them to death 4. If any mans Conscience which God forbid should dictate him to kill the King and blow up the Parliament should such a man be tolerated under pretext of his tender Conscience 5. Is it not a sin to have an erroneous Conscience And is not he that hath it bound to reform it and to suffer for it in case he reform it not when he hath sufficient means to do it 6. But must every man that doth ill be presently believed when he saith that he hath such a Conscience 7. All this long Sermon of M. S. proveth not that the Magistrate directly and per se but rather that the man himself hardeneth his own Conscience for there is no created Power that directly per se and Physically can work upon a mans Conscience it can onely move it morally in propounding of Objects to it or in Reasoning and yet every true Christian hath a sufficient power to resist such motions which is sufficient to make him in-excusable 8. Neither can his erroneous Conscience excuse him unlesse that its Errour be Invincible Antecedent and he no wayes the cause of it but if it be Vincible Concomitant or Subsequent and he himself the cause of it then it excuseth him not but is a sin and aggravates the sin that proceedeth of it at least extensivè if not intensivè For in such a case it is not his erroneous Conscience that is the cause of the sinfull action of his Will but his sinfull Will that is the cause of his erroneous Conscience 9. The Civill Magistrates threatning per se and directly maketh not his Conscience erroneous but found it such 10. Neither is it the cause that he goes against it For whether ye consider the Civill Magistrates Intention his Iudgement or the Execution of it in such a case they cause no ill but good for his Intention is onely that they be gained to Christ and that they seduce not others His Iudgement condemneth onely their Opinion and commands a punishment answerable to their Sin whereby onely they are hindered to continue in their Heresies or Schisms or to seduce others No more doth the Execution of his Iudgement Ergo. 11. And I pray this new Casuist to tell me whether in some Cases it were not a lesser Sin for a man to go against his erroneous Conscience then to follow its Dictates Whether it were not better for him to sit at home against the Dictate of his Conscience then to go to a Pagan Church and there to adore a Crocodile or a Toad according to the Dictates of it So we see how licentious and detestable this Conscience is that Independents plead so much for that thinketh that it cannot sufficiently enjoy its liberty unlesse that all Schismaticks Hereticks Jews Mahumetans and Idolaters have a free liberty of their erroneous Consciences to adore a thousand Gods yea a thousand Devils a Jupiter a Bacchus a Venus a blinde Fortuna and to Preach such Abominations and that the Civill Magistrates power be ever curtaled or rather altogether taken away in matters in Religion I will not call this a madnesse but I am well assured that many are recommended to the Churches Prayers that are not half so sick either in Soul or Body as these men are in their Consciences Wherefore all that I have more to say unto them shall be onely this The Lord have mercy upon them Christian Reader HAving been desired by some Friends to give a short Discourse of the Independent Government I am resolved to present thee with this following Epitome which sundry have oftentimes required of me The Independent Church is so called because that no particular Congregation amongst them how small how Hereticall and vicious soever it be will depend upon or submit to the Judgement of any other Church yea not to that of all the Churches of the World how Orthodox and holy and how true and just soever their Judgement be They define it Coetus Fidelium a Company of Beleevers meeting in one place every Lords Day for the Administration of the Holy Ordinances of God to publike Edification So according to this Definition neither the Catholike Church which we beleeve in the Creed nor any Nationall Church can be a true Church since they cannot meet together every Lords Day in one place In the Efficient Cause of the Church I see no great Difference betwixt us and them save onely this That they hold it necessary to the Constitution of a Church and of every Member thereof that they all joyn in a particular Church-Covenant as they call it different from that of Grace revealed in Scripture wherein they all swear to live in the Faith and in subjection to all the Ordinances of God cleaving one to another as Members
Deut. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10.13 14 20.23.33 34.37 Deut. 7.6 7 8 9 10. Deut. 10.12.15.21 Deut. 26.17 18 19. Deut. 28.9 10. Deut. 29.13 14 15. And Deut. 32. vers 8 9. c. When the most High divided to the Nations their Inheritance when he seperated the sons of Adam Iacob was the Lot of his Inheritance c. Amos 3.2 You onely have I known of all the Families of the Earth Deut. 39.29 Happy art thou O Israel who is like unto thee O People saved by the Lord the shield of thy help and who is the sword of thy Encellency 2. Because Independents define a Congregationall Church a number of men Covenanted together to participate of Gods Ordinances viz. the hearing of the Word the receiving of the Sacraments c. in some one place every Sabbath day But all the Church of the Jewes could not meet in one place in such a fashion as every man will easily grant Ergo 3. Because the great Sanedrim at Jerusalem judged of all Ecclesiasticall Causes throughout all the Kingdome 4. Because the People of God besides their Assemblyes in the Temple which was an holy place common to all their Nationall Church had their particular Conventions in particular Synagogues And however men may doubt of these Synagogues whether they were exinstituto divino or not and of the time when first they began yet can it not be denied but if they were not divinae institutionis they were at least divinae approbationis 1. For they are no where condemned in Scripture 2. But Christ and his Apostles approved them in that they went ordinarily to them disputed and expounded Scripture in them 3. And submitted themselves unto the order and Discipline established therein Answ But the Independents will say that the Nationall Church is abrogated in the New Testament Iust 1. Then it is their part to point us to the place in the New Testament where it is abrogated 2. It cannot be abrogated in the New Testament for those Ordinances only of the Old Testament are abrogated in the New that belonged unto the Ceremoniall Law But to have a Church or a Church Government more then Congregationall per se or considered in it selfe belong not to the Ceremoniall Law Ergo The Major is certaine I prove the Minor 1. For it might have been even in the State of Integrity without the Ceremoniall Law 2. And so indeed it was after the Fall before ever Moses his Ceremoniall Law was made 3. And that is not meerely Ceremoniall whereof we may evidently give naturall reason or that which is evidently grounded in naturall reason or at least in so far as evidently grounded in naturall reason since it is meerely Positive But supposing that there is a Church of God to have a Church or a Church Government more then Congregationall and Independent is evidently grounded in naturall reason or a thing where evidently we may give Naturall reason c. as wee shall see hereafter Ergo 3. Only those things of the Old Testament are abrogated by the New which were shadows of things to come viz. of Christ Reall or Mistycall But such a Church i. e. more then a Congregationall Independent Church was not a shadow of things to come in Christ c. Ergo The Major is certaine for the things commanded or approved in the Old Testament belonged either to the Morall or to the Ceremoniall or to the Judiciall Law As for the things of the first sort they are juris naturalis and consequently perpetuall which are not abrogated and of themselves were not shadows of things to come As for those of the Judiciall Law of themselves they are not shadows but belong unto Civill Government which Christ abrogated not since his Kingdom was not of this world and if the Jews had submitted themselves to Christ and had been freed from externall oppression it is probable that they should have enjoyed their own Government according to the Judiciall Law so far forth as Judiciall neither was it his aym to overthrow any worldly States Policies or Politicall Laws Christs Kingdom was and is compatible with all the Kingdoms and States of the world if they will not destroy it and he will let them reign over mens bodies and purses if they can let him reign over their Souls These that were commanded in the Ceremoniall Law were indeed shadows but such was not a Church more then Congregationall To all these Reasons some have answered That they would have it proved by Scriptures of the New Testament just 1. But wherefore prove they their opinion by the Old Testament if they will not permit us the same liberty 2. Our former Reasons have sufficiently proved That proofs taken from the Old Testament should hold in all that which is not abrogated in the New 3. If in this Subject they reject the Scriptures of the Old Testament as the Jews in all things that of the New there will be two Errors Diametrically opposite the one to the other theirs and the Jews But to give them more contentment we will prove it likewise by Texts of the New Testament and first from that of the Acts Chapters 1 2 4 and 5. 2. A Church compounded of 8120. is more then a Parishionall or Congregationall Independent Church But the Church of Jerusalem Acts 1.15 Acts 2.41 Acts 4.4 was a Church compounded of 8120. yea of more as appeareth by Acts 5.14 26. Ergo The Church of Jerusalem was more sure then a Parishionall or Congregationall Independent Church The Major Proposition is certain for the Independents define their Church which Christ in his Gospel hath instituted and to which he hath committed the Keyes of his Kingdom the Power of binding and loosing the Tables and Seales of the Covenant the Officers and Censures of his Church the Administration of his publike Worship and Ordinances Caetus a company of Beleevers meeting in one place every Lords day for the Administration of the Holy Ordinances of God to publike Edification The Way of the Church of Christ in New England The due Right of Presbyteries Chap. 1. Prop. 1. From hence I argue thus The Church whereunto cannot be applyed this Definition because of its multitude is more then an Independent Congregationall Church But a Church compounded of 8120 is a Church whereunto cannot be applyed this Definition c. Ergo. The Major is certain The Minor I prove it for 8120. could not meet together every Lords day in one House c. For in those times Christians had not yet any Temples but gathered together in particular Houses which could not receive them all 1. Because they were not ordinarily spacious as great and rich mens Houses for as the Apostle sayeth There are not many wise men after the flesh nor many mighty nor many noble called but the foolish weak base and despised things of the world 1 Cor. 1.26 27 28. 2. Howbeit they had been spacious as rich mens houses yet could they not have received such
further confirmed by sundry other Texts of Scripture and 9. by Act. 20.7 8 9. There was such a throng at St. Pauls Sermon which he made in an upper Chamber in the night upon occasion of his departure from Troas that Eutychus and doubtlesse also some others were forced to sit in the windows note that this was in the night what a throng might there have been had it been on the Day time out of all doubt the Chamber would not have held them all but certainly they could not meet every Lords-day in any one Roome such as were their places of meeting in those times and consequently there must have been there more then one of the Independent Congregationall Churches 10. We have also cleer Texts of Scripture to prove that the Church is taken for a greater then for any Independent Congregation as Act. 8.1 And at that time there was a great persecution against the Church that was at Hierusalem This Persecution was not against one onely Independent Congregationall Church but against the whole Churches of Iudea 11. So in the same Chap. vers 3. Saul made havocke of the Church And chap. 9.1 breathing out threatnings and slaughter against the Disciples of the Lord now of this Church some members were in Damascus v. 2. so he sayes of himselfe I persecuted the Church 1. Cor. 15.9 Phil. 3.6 from whence I argue thus The Church that Saul persecuted was greater then a particular Congregation or an Independent Church But the Church here meant is that which Saul persecuted Ergo The Church here meant is greater then a particular Congregation The Minor is certain the Major I prove it for he persecuted not one onely particular Congregation but that wherever there were Disciples of the Lord chap. 9.1 in Hierusalem chap. 8. vers 1.3 and in Damascus chap. 9. v. 1.2 12. And Act 12.1 Herod the King stretched out his hand to vex certaine of the Church Here the word Church must signifie more then a particular Congregation for Herod did it to pleasure the Iewes which he could not have done in vexing the members of one particular Church alone 2. Because here must be meant the Church whereof Peter was a Member v. 3. which was not one particular Church alone but that of all Judea since Peter and John had a particular Vocation Mission or Commission to teach there as Paul to the Gentiles Gal. 2.7 or rather of the whole Militant Church of their time since they were Apostles or Vniversall Ministers of the Gospel 3. Because if the Church here signifie a particular Church whereof Peter and Iames were Members then that Church might have deposed them of their Ministery For the Independents grant this Authority to their Churches over their Pastors And if it be said that they have it over particular but not over universall Pastors as the Apostles Ergo. If they acknowledge them to be universall Pastors they must have universall Flocks or Churches so there was an universall Militant Church upon Earth whereof they were Pastors in their time which is more then a particular Congregation 4. Put the case they had been but Ministers of particular Churches or Congregations yet must the word Church there signifie a Church whereof they were both Members for such a Church is meant here v. 7.2 3. But such a Church must be more then a particular one for it must containe both their Churches and Persons since they are called some of the Church i. e. of one Church 13. So vers 5. But Prayer was made without ceasing of the Church unto God for him i. e. for Peter who was in Prison And out of all doubt this was not one onely Independent Church but all the Churches that knew of Peters imprisonment and depended upon him as upon their Pastor 14. Give no offence neither to the Jewes nor to the Gentiles nor to the Church of God 1 Cor. 10.32 which cannot be a simple Independent Church but all the Churches we converse with 1. for Charity bindeth us to give no offence to all or any of them 2. Because this Church is called the Church of God which cannot be restrained to one particular Church if they be all the Church of God 3. Because it is opposed to the Iewes and the Gentiles 15. Because the Church wherein God did place Apostles and Evangelists 1. Cor. 12.28 was not an Independent Congregation but more for they were universall Ministers of the Militant Church of their time now if there be an universall Militant Church through all the world how much rather may we admit a Provinciall or Nationall Church 16. I had rather speak five words saith St. Paul with my understanding in the Church then c. 1. Cor. 14.19 This Church wherein the Apostle desires to speake is more then an Independent Congregation for he was not tyed to any particular Congregation 17. The Apostle willeth women to keepe silence in the Churches 1. Cor. 14.38 and these Churches are called the Church It is a shame for a Woman to speake in the Church vers 35. which cannot be a particular Congregation for he willeth them not to speake in any Church We may bring many other Passages of Scripture and Reasons but because they serve both for this and the next Conclusion therefore to decline repetitions we remit them unto that Conclusion CHAP. VII The Second Conclusion concerning the Subordination of Authority in the Church SEcondly I say Conclus that betwixt the Churches of God there should be some Subordination in authority i. e. such as wherein the judgements of inferior Churches and their proceedings may be subject unto the judgement of the Superiour Church whereunto they are Subordinate And this may be proved sufficiently from all the Testimonies of Scripture aleadged for the former Conclusion For if there be a Church more then a particular Congregationall viz. Provinciall or Nationall out of all doubt the particular Congregations must be subject to them 1. because a part is subject unto the whole as the hand unto the whole body nam pars magis sui totius quam sui item because the part is for the whole as a medium for its end now the Mediums must be subject unto their Ends and not the Ends unto their Mediums and Media commensurantur finibus non fines Mediis neither shape we the horse back for the saddle but the saddle for the horse his back so the government of particular Churches must not be shaped or framed according to their particular exigencies and conveniencies alone but according to that of the whole Provinciall Nationall and Universall Militant Church here upon Earth in such a manner that it hinder it not 2. Particularly it may be proved from the Custome of the Old Testament which is not abrogated in the New for therein the Iudgements of Synagogicall Assemblies were subject unto that of the middle Sanedrim and that of the middle to that of the Supreme or if there were onely two that of the
the contrary appeareth by our Reasons 6. Yet is it something that I have reason for me and he none yea nothing but his Independent will M. S. will not make good the Reasons brought for this Opinion by the Apologists which I have abundantly resuted but proveth as followeth That a withdrawing of Christian Communion from persons walking inordinately is an Ordinance or meanes appointed by God for the reducing and reclaiming of them 2. Thes 3.6.14 We warn you Brethren in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that ye withdraw your selves from every Brother that walketh inordinately A. S. I adde the rest Vers 7. For we behaved not our selves inordinately among you Vers 8. Neither did we eate any mans bread for nought but wrought with labour and travell night and day that we might not be chargeable to any of you Vers 10. This we commanded you that if any would not worke neither should he eate Vers 11. For we heare that there are some which walke among you inordinately working not at all but are busie-bodies Vers 14. If any man obey not our word by this Epistle note that man and have no company with him that he may be ashamed Vers 15. Yet count him not as an Enemy but admonish him as a Brother A. S. But this proofe is no better then that of the Apologists and to Answer it I will not serve my selfe with the Answer that some men bring here viz. That this Testimony of Scripture is not to be taken of the great Excommunication which onely you seeme to acknowledge for Excommunication nor of the lesser which you seeme to call non-Communion or with the Apostle here withdrawing of Christian Communion 2. Or that it is a Commandement onely given to particular persons to forbear such persons who were idle and yet busie-bodies running from house to house living upon other mens charges under pretext peradventure of Piety But not to the Church to excommunicate them and that because the Apostle addeth v. 15. Yet count him not as an Enemy but as a Brother for this Reason is weak and an Excommunicate person if he be Excommunicated Excommunicatione minori yea and sometimes majori may be accounted as a Brother so long as there is any hope of his Repentance I had rather say 1. That here the Apostle speaketh of Excommunication 1. Because he sayes Note him i. e. that he may be discerned from others 2. He sayes Have no company or meddle not with him Now what is Excommunication but to have no Communion or company with a man 2. I say that he speaketh not of the greater but of the lesser Excommunication 1. Because that it is not for any great crime but for an ordinary sinne viz. Idlenesse 2. Because this note of Excommunication is only that he may be ashamed 3. Because he is not to be reputed for an enemy of the Church but as a Brother 4. Because the Apostle biddeth onely Note him and admonish him which is lesse then to be given over to Sathan yea it is credible that it was only a private Suspension from the Lords Table not in publique in face of the whole Church but before the particular Presbytery 3. He seemeth not to speake directly of whole Churches but of particular persons 1. Since he sayes From every Brother vers 6. 2. Because he sayes that there are some among you that walke inordinately Now the whole Church cannot be said to be among the Church or some of the Church but particular persons only 3. Because he sayeth If any man obey not let that man be noted but if the whole Church were such there should be none there to note him 4. That man cannot signifie that Church 5. Because the Apostle vers 15. commandeth to admonish him as a Brother but a Brother is not a Church 4. And neverthelesse howsoever the Apostle speakes principally directly and formally of the Excommunication of Persons yet must he consequently and directly meane also the Excommunication of Churches and that for the Reasons that I brought else where viz. in the Observations and Annotations upon the Apologeticall Narration page 43. § 2. 1. For Churches Offences may deserve it 2. The Scripture hath nothing to the contrary of Excommunication of Churches 3 Because there is the same reason for the Excommunication of whole Churches as of particular Persons viz. The taking away of Scandall and the conversion of sinners 1 Cor. 5.5 2 Cor. 2.7 2. Thes 3.14 1 Tim. 1.20 and that such a contagion infect not others 1 Cor. 5.6 7. And this reason M. S. very wisely borrowed from me in this place saying There is the same reason of Churches in this behalf which there is of persons M. S. to A. S. page 76. Onely this I note here that if there be the same reason of Churches Ergo As a Particular person may be Excommunicated Excommunicatione minori by a publike or a particular sentence of non Communion for a lesser fault so may a whole Church And consequently as a particular person may be Excommunicated Excommunicatione majori for a very great sin and wickednesse so may a whole particular Church which the Independent Sect will no wayes grant And this I pray the Reader to observe and to presse it against them for I am assured they cannot here escape unlesse M. S. escape them 4. Because 7000. Churches may as well Excommunicate one compounded of seventeen Persons as that one may Excommunicate seven of its Members 5. Because an Hereticall Church is Excommunicated in Heaven Wherefore then shall she not be Excommunicated by Christs Ministers here upon Earth when they learn it by Scripture Must not the Churches here upon Earth concur as well with Gods Sentence in Heaven as God with theirs here upon Earth Matth. 18 6. Because the Church of Jerusalem Excommunicated that of the ten Tribes M. S. his second Answer to this Argument Suppose there were no such sufficient or satisfactory remedy for the inconveniency mentioned in the way of the Apologists yet Lawyers have a saying That a mischief is better then an inconveniency c. and afterwards Now then much better is it to want a remedy against such an evill which possibly may not fall out within an age though it be greater when it doth fall then it is to expose our selves to continuall droppings I mean to those daily inconveniencies which we lately shewed to be incident to the Classique Government A. S. 1. I accept of your Supposition viz. That there is no sufficient or satisfactory remedy c. as it appeareth cleerly by my Reasons 2. To your Maxime of Law I grant you willingly That ye have no remedy against mischiefs but your Churches must necessarily suffer them and are exposed to them Praised be God that Presbyterians serve themselves with no mischievous but with very holy Remedies 3. I deny that it is better to want a Remedy against such a mischief viz. If a Church Apostatize become Hereticall c. then to accept
2. But in case he be there oppressed it is unjust that he should not have liberty to desend himselfe before another viz. a Classe which happily may be holden in his own Town or within one two or three miles of it which is more tolerable to him then to be oppressed by Factions as sundry times men are amongst the Independents as appeareth by Mr. Edwards Relation of the businesse touched in the Apologeticall Narration 3. What if there fall out sixe or seven such differences among your Churches and that particular persons desire some redresse of their Grievances before a Synod amongst you can ye not hold one Synod for five or sixe such Complaints Then in such a case they must all goe to the Synod out of their own Churches and then even amongst your selves ye find the same inconvenience that ye object to us If ye cannot but for every such Grievance there must be a particular Synod and your Messengers of other Churches must goe to the place then many in stead of one lose their time and labour 4. This Reason beats down as well the Government of the State And 5. the Government of the Church of the Iewes which was established by God himselfe And 6. the Proceedings of the Church of Antioch as of Ours Secondly saith M.S. the Proceedings against him in his own sociaty shall be regulated managed and ordered by his own Pastor who is a Father unto him in the Lord and who in all reason and according to the course of almost all constant experience is more tender affectionate and compassionate towards him then the Pastors of other Fhocks and those that are strangers to him Ergo every man should be judged in his owne particular Congregation A.S. This Argument destroyeth no lesse the Civill then the Church-Government for so it may be said that a man being judged by the Iudge of his own sown shall be more tenderly dealt with then before the Kings Councell 2. The Government of the Church of the Old Testament as I have already declared 3. The proceedings of the Church of Antioch that sent its Controversie to be judged at Hierusalem 4. That of the Independents themselves who in their Synods pretend to determine matters of Doctrine 5. I deny the Antecedent for when either the whole Church or any member thereof hath any debate with their own Pastor or two Pastors of one Church amongst themselves or two persons or two Pastors of different Congregations or two Churches are at odds one with another that will not hold 6. The Paster of the Congregation may affect more one of his own Congregation then another and so out of too much affection he may miscary 7. Things must not be carried by tender affection but by equity 8. If his own Pastor be more tender-hearted towards him he of another Congregation may be more indifferent which of the two is more necessary in a Iudge that judgeth between two parties 9. Pastors of other Flocks in a Synod are not altogether strangers to him since they are his Brethren and his Fathers in so far forth as they represent all the Churches of that Province or Nationall Synod The Example of Pharaoh that knew not Joseph is very impertinent for he was not a Pastor and know there is to acknowledge and affectionate a man but all the Pastors of the Church as I declared in my Observations have power to preach in all the militant Church and therefore are Fathers in the whole Church according to their generall Vocation so was none of those Pharaohs 10. In first Instance a man hath all that you desire before his Pastor Thirdly M.S. in substance saith that he shall be tryed and sentenced by those who may be tryed and sentenced by him againe which will teach them more moderation then a Consistory of standing Iudges Ergo he must be onely judged in his owne Congregation A. S. This Argument concludeth 1. against the Subordination of Iudicatories in the State 2. Against all sorts of Courts wherein he that is sentenced cannot sentence his Iudges againe 3. Against the Ecclesiasticall proceedings in the Old Testament wherein he that was sentenced had not evermore power to sentence his Iudge again 4. Against the proceedings of the Church of Antioch 5. Against that of the Independents 6. Such a proceeding of mutuall judgement out of feare to be judged againe will make the Iudgements partiall whereas they should be neutrall and it is no better then if one should say Sir looke you favour me this day otherwise expect no favour from me another day 7. We have no Consistory of standing Iudges but the simple Presbytery as you have 8. In our way we are judged by those who if they doe us wrong may be judged not by us who are parties but by higher and more impartiall Iudges viz. a simple Presbytery by a Classe a Classe by a Provinciall Synod and a Provinciall by a Nationall Synod And as for that Maxime Nunquam satis fida potentia ubi nimia it is very true if it be applyed to your Independent Authority in particular Congregations 4. M. S. fourth Reason is because it is a great encouragement to a man that is accused if he be tender fore-headed before those with whose person he is well acquainted and the contrary is a kind of oppression of such a man Ergo he must only be judged in his owne Congregation and Independently A. S. 1. In first instance he may be judged as you say 2. But if he will not stand to the sentence of his owne particular Presbytery and afterward be changed as you say into a stone he getteth no wrong but what he hath procured unto himselfe 3. But if his party acquiesce not but appeale yet may he have his owne Pastor at the Classe or Provinciall Synod to lay open his businesse and it is the duty of the particular Presbytery Session or Consistory to make good their Iudgement so as he needs not to feare 4. And it is the custome of our Presbyteries Classes and Synods in such a ease to have a care of such persons that they receive no wrong 5. This Reason as the rest striketh at the Kings the Parliaments and all Civill Magistrates Authority as well since they are not familiar with every Cobler 6. At the Ecclesiasticall proceedings in the Old Testament 7. And that of Antioch 8. I deny the consequence for these Reasons alleadged M. S. his 5. Reason is because in this Congregationall Government private Christians may see the judiciall proceedings in the Churth which will be a Schoole of wisdome and Experience But it is not so in remote Consistories A. S. What conclude you Ergo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Such an opportunity may be found in the Presbyteriall way in their Parochiall Iudicatories in such matters as require not silence 2. Neither is it fit that all sorts of Persons as women especially young Damosells and young men should heare all sort of businesses that may
That not long since I heard one of the Ringleaders of the Independent Sect deliver this Doctrine in a Sermon at the Abby of Westminster viz. That to a saving knowledge of God it sufficeth not to know him in the Book of Nature or 2. as revealed in the holy Scriptures but that we must also know him as abstract from his Mercy and all his Attributes Now if this be a common Tenet of your Religion I must confesse I am none of yours My Reasons are 1. Because that if it be so rude people that know nothing of so refined Abstractions must be damned 2. Because to be saved it is most necessary to know God as concrete with his Mercy or as mercifull towards us in Christ 3. If I know God evermore under this refined abstraction from Mercy I must be damned 4. Because if I know God abstracted from his Mercy I know him out of Christ and out of the Gospel for God in Christ and in the Gospel is not abstract but concrete with Mercy 5. Because the knowledge of God as revealed in Scripture is sufficient to salvation Ergo it is not needfull to know him any otherwayes in this life 6. Because if I know God out of Scripture and abstract from Mercy it is a Knowledge without Faith for Faiths formall Object is God in Christ as revealed in Scripture and therefore it is a knowledge of God in Christ as revealed in Scripture and therefore there must be some saving knowledge of God without Faith 7. If a saving knowledge of God be of God as abstract from all his Attributes it must be a knowledge of God without any Simplicity and so of God as abstract from a pure Act. 8. As abstract from all his Perfections i.e. without all his Perfections 9. E. of God as abstract from his Goodnes and so as without his Goodnes 10. Of God as without Insinitie 11. Without Omnipresence 12. Without Immutability 13. Without Eternity 14. Without Life without Knowledge Science or Wisdome 15. Without any Will 16. Without any Love towards Mankind 17. Without Hatred of Sin or Sinners 18. Without Power or Omnipotencie 19. Without any Decree of Predestination or Reprobation 20. Without any Providence or care of his Creatures 21. Without Creation and so not as Creator For to know God as abstract from these Attributes is to know God as without them Now who dare say that to know God as abstract from all those Attributes or without them is a saving knowledge This is indeed an Independent saving knowledge independent on Gods Word on Christ on Faith and all Grace and consequently most gracelesse 23. To know God as abstract from all his Attributes is to know God as abstract from his Essence and so to know God as without himself or his own Essence or Being for Gods Attributes are not only eadem cum Essentid ut personae sed de Essentia de quidditativo ejus conceptu praedicatae ejus essentialiae and some of them quasi de specifico ejus conceptu from which God can no wayes be abstracted 24. If God be considered as abstract from all his Attributes it is no more a knowledge of God but some Idol of the Independents brains sicque habes meum candorem vestrum pariteratrorem Now let the Reader judge which of our two expressions is most Malignant M. S. his third Answer comes to this Grant them their desires i. e. A full liberty and they will bray no more then the wilde Asse doth when he hath Grasse A. S. 1. All Hereticks say as much yea the Devill would be glad to agree with God upon such terms 2. But God hath forbid the Church to tolerate you 3. In New England they of your Party will tolerate no Sects 4. And such a Toleration here cannot but breed all sorts of Divisions Whereas if there be one onely Discipline or Church Government established we shall have no Distractions at all 5. But how can I pray unriddle it me a Liberty granted to contest and quarrell one with another ever take away contestations and quarrells 6. If the Presbyterians be the cause of Divisions because they tolerate not you as you say so was Moses and Aaron for not tolerating Core Dathan and Abiron Your Simile of him who murthered the Duke of Burgundie will hold if it be applyed to your Sect otherwayes it is altogether impertinent and beside the present purpose M. S. his fourth Answer cometh to this That in case one Government were established it would breed as great or more Factions and Divisions then if a Toleration were granted A. S. This Argument concludeth as well against Moses in favour of Core Dathan and Abiron as against us for if Moses had granted such a Toleration to them and their Sect as the Independents are now Suitors for it would not have bred such Divisions And if the non-Toleration of it breed as great Divisions as the Toleration of it would have done what is the cause that this Toleration of your Sect breedeth so many injurious and calumnious Expressions against the Presbyterians What would ye not say and do had ye once gotten a Toleration To M. S. his fifth Answer That sundry persons of one Family in the City hear divers Ministers without any Division A.S. I answer That those Ministers are not of divers Sects or if they be without doubt it breedeth many Divisions and alienates their mindes one from another Neither can any Godly good man who is bound by duty to have a care of his Family but be grieved when he seeth his Children his Wife and Servants separated in affection from him and the Church wherein he serveth God and to eat at his Table in his House when they will not eat at the Lords Table with him in the House of God What ye say of a House of bondage if we were all under one Government it is most false For by the same Reason the People of God should have been in an House of bondage when they came out of Egypt and were brought into the Land of Canaan because that there they had but one Government So with you it must be an House of bondage in every State that hath but one sort of Civil Government I will not answer his vain vaunting in extolling his own Sect Onely I wonder that he is offended at us that we desire but one good Government what ever it be Is it ill to have but one good Government Wherefore does he plead for many ill Governments Wherefore will not those of New England admit many if it be so good If it be want of Mercy not to tolerate others how mercilesse were the Mercies of New England that would not tolerate Presbyterians no not in a corner of their Countrey when their Necks were put in the Pillories their Noses slitted their Ears cut and their persons imprisoned What M. S. sayeth of distractions of mindes under Episcopall Government it was not for want of a Toleration of all
M. S. In his second Answ denieth the Antecedent of my Argument or doubteth of it and asketh by what Authority I undertake to secure them A. S. 1. It is an untruth that I undertake to secure them I undertake nothing but tell a truth 2. And if I lye I pray M. S. to shew me where ever the Parliament or Assembly hath pressed them to be Actors against their Conscience 3. And yet however I have no Authority to secure them yet have I Reason sufficient enough to prove it For if their Consciences be weake or tender the Parliament declareth and hath declared their care and resolution not to suffer weake or tender Consciences to be wronged or pressed to be Actors against the Dictats thereof And if yee cannot beleeve or trust them how can they or shall they trust you 4. Because it is an ordinary Maxime amongst Presbyterians Not to persecute men for their Consciences nor to accuse them to the Civill Magistrate unlesse they be turbulent and trouble the peace of the Church or State As for your jeeres and injurious speeches here against Presbyterians we pardon Mr. Goodwins temperament for it is not Reason nor the Man but the Humour of the Man that speaketh M. S. p. 93. bringeth his 3. Answer to the Antecedent That this Promise is broken by A. S. seven times in his Discourse and by sundry others of his Party A. S. 1. The Antecedent of my Argument conteined no Promise but a simple Enunciation and therefore I could not break any Promise therein conteined for Non Entis nulla sunt Accidentia and what never was could never be broken 2. Put the case it were a Promise made by me How or wherein have I ever or could I presse any of you to be Actors against your Consciences 3. As much may I say of others 4. But to say it is against your Consciences is an old shift an hundred times made use of and as oft answered 5. We have never heard of any that threatned you and therefore we cannot answer this accusation We know of sundry extraordinary favours put upon you by this Parliament but nothing of so many threatnings of miseries against you unlesse you account it your misery to receive good fat Benefices and to be well paid for many Lectures up and down by very many whom it is well known you scarce own for members of your Church and so doe clip the wooll off the sheeps backs that are not of your flocks A.S. Arg. 8. It is against the Nature of the Communion of Saints to live in Sects apart without communicating at the Lords Table which very hardly will be avoyded if a Toleration be granted M. S. reduceth this my Argument unto this Hypotheticall Proposition viz. If it be against the nature of the Communion of Saints to live in Sects apart without communicating at the Lords Table then ought not the Apologists to be tolerated But c. A.S. But M.S. is not so good an Analyser of Arguments as I took him to be he faileth here 1. in reducing it unto an Hypotheticall Proposition which poseth nothing absolutely as this my Argument doth 2. He maketh the Antecedent the Consequent and the Consequent the Antecedent for who seeth not that in reducing of it to an Hypotheticall Proposition that must be the Antecedent which is joyned with the Hypotheticall Conjunction if viz. If Toleration be granted and that the Consequent that is inferred upon it viz. It will be against the nature of the Communion of Saints 3. But to help him and to make him to see its face I will reduce it into a Syllogisme which is such What is against the Communion of Saints is not to be granted But Toleration viz. of Independencie is against the Communion of Saints Ergo Toleration is not to be granted The Major is certaine neither will M.S. deny it The Minor is proved thus To live in Sects apart without Communicating at the Lords Table is against the Communion of Saints Toleration is to live in Sects apart without Communicating at the Lords Table Ergo Toleration is against the Communion of Saints M.S. answereth denying the Minor of the second Argument But A. S. saith he doe you conceive that men would under Toleration live without communicating at the Lords Table A.S. But good Mr. M.S. 1. Howbeit they live not without communicating at the Lords Table absolutely in so far forth as those of one Congregation communicate or may communicate together yet live they without communicating at the Lords Table secundum quid in some respect viz. in so far as according to the Maximes of Independency those of one Congregation amongst you can have no right to communicate in another Congregation much lesse will ye admit the members of our Churches to communicate in yours or ye your selves comunicate in ours whom ye take up on you to reckon in the number of your Sister-Churches Now we conceive that according to Scripture it is a part of the Communion of Saints that all the members of the visible Church here upon Earth have right in vertue of their spirituall fraternitie in Christ to communicate one with another at the Lords Table when occasion is offered It is not true that the Communion at the Lords Table is all the breach of the Communion of Saints that Toleration breedeth for it is also against the Communion in Discipline and in Christian Conversation at least per se or of it selfe His 2. Answer is If living in Sects apart be so offensive saith he to your zeale over the Communion of Saints why doe you not rather mediate a Toleration for them then oppose it A.S. 1. My credit is but small as you confesse your self 2. Howbeit were it as great as it is small yet hope I I should never so far abuse it as to turne a Mediator for the setting up of Sects 3. To your Quaere I answer It should be wickedly done to mediate for the setting up of Sects because to mediate for it were to mediate for the overthrow of the Communion of Saints M. S. If you shall suffer them to work with you they will be so much the more free to eat and drink with you A.S. We are not so carefull for your eating and drinking for ye may eat and drink with Epicures Pagans as well as with us but for your spirituall Communion which cannot be maintained if ye have a Toleration to be separated from us and one of you from another into particular Conventicles A. S. Arg. 9. Because the Scripture exhorts us evermore unto Vnity which cannot be easily procured by a Toleration of Sects and cannot but beget new Schismes and Divisions M. S. denieth the Consequence and supposeth that the force of my Reason consisteth in this viz. That if the Unitie whereunto the Scripture exhorts us cannot be procured by Toleration Toleration is not to be granted A. S. But he is deceived or rather treacherously deceiveth others for he should have added
will have some force otherwayes it hath none at all M. S. 3. Reason If they do not think their Presbyteriall Churches more holy then the Congregationall they are far more guilty of Schism then their Brethren i. e. then Independents For then they are at liberty in point of Conscience to come over and joyn with them whereas the other are in bands and fetters of Conscience and can passe unto them Their Brethren would come to them but cannot they can come over unto these but will not It is the Will and not the Act that maketh Schism and Separation A. S. 1. But if they think not their Presbyteriall Churches more holy all your Argument is ridiculous 2. And I must confesse that M. S. with his Faction are very slight who can make very few Arguments that have any appearance of reason unlesse they be grounded upon their pretended holinesse and that this be supposed as a Principle of Independent Divinity What Seneca saith of Presumptuous Scholars Multi ad sapientiam pervenissent nisi se jam jam pervenisse putassent may be more justly said of your ridiculous Sect changing onely sapientiam in veram pietatem aut vitae sanâ—â—â—iatem 3. Howbeit ye were holier then we yet could we not come unto you and that not so much because ye are not holy as because we finde in your Opinions a great folly yea by consequence more Impiety and Heresie then in sundry Hereticall Churches as we and many others also have elsewhere shewed 4. But can you think that to pleasure every Melancholious brain that differs not from us in Doctrine if he be lesse vicious then others howbeit no wayes more vertuous but onely in opinion concerning Discipline in case that under pretext of Conscience he will not submit unto our Churches that presently all our Churches must submit unto him Or were it not better that he and all his should be sent into America a while till their brains may be brought to better temper We cannot be so foolish as to come unto so inconsiderable a Party whose opinions too are yet unknown And of those that are known some more dangerous then many Heresies 5. What should we have to do with men who plead on this manner for impunity for all sin and Heresie should we admit into our Churches an Anarchy and give power to ignorant Fellows to Preach and make Ministers shall we grant unto women the shingling or gingling of the Keyes of the Church to serve my self with the trim and fine termes of Independent Divinity 6. It is a silly affected distinction of M. S. to say that it is the Will and not the Act that maketh a Schism It is both for Schism is an Act of the Will or a voluntary Act It must be Actus Voluntatis elicitus aut imperatus M.S. 4. Answer That he seeth not wherein the Apologists symbolize with Convents c. A. S. I have shewn it 1. In their Separation from others under pretext of greater Holinesse then other men have 2. And because every Order is Independent one of another just as your Congregationall Churches the Members whereof have no more Communion with Churches amongst us or amongst themselves then the Monks of one Convent with those of another Convent M. S. 5. You couple your self with these Popish Convents implying that your Presbyterians have their Soveraign Judicatory as they A. S. We have no supreme Iudicatory but that of the living God If we have Superiour and Inferiour Iudicatories and the Papists also neither we nor they precisely are to be blamed in that but so far forth as they have the Pope one man for supreme Iudge and Head of the Church which is proper to Christ In that they prove that he is the Antichrist And as it is great pride in them to make him with his Consistory supreme Iudge over the Universall Church So is it a peece of extraordinary pride and self-wit in your Churches that ye constitute sometimes seven or eight simple Fellows how Hereticall soever be their Doctrine and how abominable soever their life supreme Iudges Gods immediate Lievtenants and Independent of all the Iudgements of all the Churches of the World how Orthodox soever be their Opinions and how pious and holy soever be their Practises But against such a Subordination of Ecclesiasticall Iudicatories as we have according to Gods Word no man can take just Exception M. S. saith That he hath answered my twelfth Reason and I have shewed how Absurdly he hath answered A. S. 13. Argument M. S. with his Logico Divinity by a Doctorall priviledge under pretext to reform my Argument deformeth and disfigureth it altogether by his Additions and Confusions in making it Hypotheticall whereas it is meerly Categoricall If he had desired to put it in Form he needed not but to have added or expressed the Proposition which was onely suppressed in this manner They who have but one God one Christ one Lord and one Spirit who are one Body who have one Faith and one Baptism whereby they enter into the Church should have one Communion whereby to be Spiritually fed and one Discipline to be ruled by But we all i. e. Presbyterians as ye call us and Independents we have but one God one Christ one Lord and one Spirit c. Ergo We all i. e. Presbyterians and Independents should have but one Spirituall Communion whereby to be Spiritually fed and one Discipline to be ruled by And from this he inferreth very well Ergo The Independents are not to be tolerated viz. In their Schism Separation or non-Communion M. S. grants all the Argument and afterward distinguishes the Conclusion which is an odde manner of answering of Arguments and proper to his Sect But we must take of ill pay-masters what we may He saith then 1. My Conclusions do not follow from my Premises A. S. But the Argument is in Form If it follow not shew me what fault there is in the Form of it M. S. 2. jeereth the termes of my Argument in calling them one one and one and my multiplied unity and so jeereth the Holy Ghost himself from whom I have borrowed them Eph. 4. Rom. 12. 1 Cor. 12. and 8. 1 Tim. 2.5 I might have added more unities as that we should with one mouth glorifie God Rom. 5.6 we are one Bread 1 Cor. 10.17 we drink in one Spirit vers 13. we are all one in Christ Gal. 3.28 one Law-giver and Iudge Jam. 4.12 Christ prayeth that we may be all one anomgst our selves and one in the Father and the Son John 17.22 23. M. S. his first Solution then is That we ought all to have one Communion and Discipline but not that that is of Classique Inspiration no more then that of Papall or Episcopall Recommendation A. S. 1. At least of this viz. We should have one Communion and Discipline it follows That there should be no Schism or Toleration granted that may make a Schism in the body and dissolve our
Communion 2. If you cannot shew any materiall difference in Doctrine and other things yea ye confesse your selves that it is not great ye cannot separate your selves from us in Sacramentall Communion and Discipline 3. Neither hitherto have ye shewn any practise in Sacramentall Communion wherein ye differ from us for we have no Idolatry among us and men openly vicious are not admitted to the Lords Table among us Neither can any particular man abstain from Sacramentall Communion in a Church upon pretext that this or that man is vicious for it belongeth not to him but to the Rulers of the Church to judge of particular mens lives whether they be in a State to Communicate or not No more appertains it to one particular Church to judge of the Members of another particular Church Wherefore that not being their Act it cannot be imputed to them and consequently they have no Reason in such a Case to be so scrupulous M. S. his second Answer is Howbeit they be bound to one Communion and Discipline yet would they be led to it by light and not by fear A. S. 1. There is light enough shewn you if ye wil open your eyes to see it And we desire you not to joyn in this Unity out of any fear of men but of God 2. Howbeit you cannot see the Light yet no Approbation Consent or Positive Permission or Toleration should be granted you to live in Darknesse much lesse to erect Schools and Synagogues of Darknesse 3. The Parliament and all good men I am confident will tolerate you in your Darknesse till Jesus Christ enlighten you if ye can be content to live in quality of private men and not erect Churches and Schools to blinde others Neither can they grant you any thing more for howsoever they cannot compell your Consciences yet mast they hinder you to undo other mens Consciences in sowing of your Tares and wilde Oats M. S. 3. Answer That duty which lieth upon all Christians to have but one Communion and Discipline among them is no Dispensation unto any Party or number of them to smite their Brethren with the fist of uncharitablenesse or to dismount them from their Ministeriall standings in the Church because they will not or rather cannot knit and joyn in the same Communion and Discipline with them A. S. 1. You are very ingrate unthankfull unto the Parliament and your Brethren of the Assembly Ye have experimented no uncharitablenesse from any of them Hitherto they have dealt with you in all meeknesse and brotherly affection 2. None of you have been put out of your Ministery for your Opinions howbeit many of you have merited it for your insolency and malepertnesse in erecting of new Churches and Sects against your own Tenets for ye maintain that a Church cannot be erected without the Magistrates Consent and the Right hand of Association of Neighbour Churches which ye have not had in your Churches here in Old England 3. But wherefore may not Sectaries be dismounted who mount so high at their own hand 4. If ye will not joyn with the rest the Churches of this Kingdom and submit to the Parliament and the Church of God here but be Eus per se Ens independens and have particular Priviledges beyond the rest of the Subjects ye may be gone and stay there from whence ye came ye may goe to New-England and mount as high as pleaseth you there Only trouble not the Church and Kingdome here and the Church and Kingdome will not trouble you there 4. The Church here doth you no wrong only she mainteineth that your Tenets are contrary to Gods Word and confesseth That if the Parliament will tolerate you it may but that in so doing their Iudgement is since they are commanded to give it that it is flatly against Gods Word And I may say such a thing might breed ill blood of Friends make Enemies and peradventure undoe the State and who knoweth if it should please God in his mercy to end this War but it might make a Sacrifice of all such as should have hand in it All Christians are bound in Conscience to oppose such Licentiousnesse and Libertinisme in Religion M. S. his 4. Answer is that those of his Sect are kept under Hatches and oppressed A. S. Unto this we have answered and in this they do as Children that weepe before they be whipt A. S. 14. If visible Churches have Disciplines or Government different in their Species then the Churches must be different in their Species also But the consequent is false Ergo So is the Antecedent So Churches have not different Disciplines and Governments The Connexion in my Argument is proved because all collective Bodies that are governed are differenced in their Species by their specificall Governments as we see in Civill Government in the Constitution of States Kingdoms and Republicks The Assumption is proved because the visible Church is but one Church in its Species M.S. jeeres jeasts and flouts this Argument he makes as though he helpt it but it is strong enough without his help the matter being sound enough and the Syllogisme in forme M. S. His first Answer is that from hence cannot be gathered that the Apologisme is not tolerable A. S. This is not the Conclusion that I have to prove for I never reade in Scripture or else where of any Ecclesiasticall Discipline or Government named Apologisme Away then with your new coyned tearmes of Apologisme and Quinque Ecclesian Ministers c. The Conclusion that I have to prove is this Presbyterians and your Independent Churches have not according to Gods word or should not have different Disciplines which any Neophyt in Logick can easily deduce by the power of Syllogismes For it is known in Logick that a Syllogisme that can inferre an universall Conclusion may inferre all the particulars of that universall Conclusion as when I conclude that all men have reasonable soules I conclude that Peter Paul and John have reasonable soules so then when I conclude here universally that no Church hath or should have different Disciplines Ergo Presbyterians Independents and other Churches should not have different Disciplines or Government I conclude there must be but one Church and one Government what ever it be If the Lord be God then follow him But if Baal then follow him So if Presbyterian Discipline or Government be Gods follow it if Independents Discipline be Gods follow it and no other Let not the Child be devided in two as the false Mother that had stolen the Child would have had it but let it live as the true Mother desired No more Pluralities I pray of Disciplines then of Benefices Let no man bargain about Government Let Gods Ordinance hold what ever it be and whereever Independent Government be whether in Aries Taurus Cancer or Capricorne ye may goe there and enjoy it peaceably We only speak of the Discipline of Christs Church in England what it should be M. S. It followeth not from hence
he sayes in the next § of my feare it is a just feare grounded upon experience But M. S. Replyeth 1. That some Independents hold that all Sects and Opinions are to be Tolerated as A. S. relateth Ergo In that case his Sect may be secured also A. S. I Answer to the Antecedent And that We feare also viz. That ye would Tolerate all Sects which we will not Tolerate 2. VVe cannot be secure among all Sects for there be some that will not Tolerate us 3. Ye speak so but for the present but if ye had power we know not what ye would do It were better not to Tolerate Sects when we can hinder them then to bring them in amongst us to tolerate us and to give us so just a cause of feare 4. I said onely that there be some of you who would Tolerate all Sects who peradventure are the far lesser part and should not prevaile in their Voices 5. And we know not upon what tearmes they would tolerate us if they were the strongest 6. Neither can your pretended probity secure us we see the Examples and have the experience of your mercilesse Pitty in New England ye are all ejusdem farinae and Caelum non animum mutat qui trans mare currit And what I said of your Piety it can serve you little 1. For I spake but of a few of you viz. of the 5. Apologists 2. Because it was but a judgement of Charity wherein I may be deceived yea wherein I have been deceived 3. Good men sometimes may for want of light be dogged enough to use your own tearmes as ye grant your selfe of your New England Independents Unto his 3. Reply That a poore Toleration is far from Superiority it is true But from a Toleration it is to be feared ye goe further And if ye can get the Civill Magistrate drawn into your Faction as in New-England ye may be as dogged in a short time as they are To the 4. Reply That he thinketh not that I know any such Island It is a wonder that he knoweth it not as well as I but it is little to purpose No more is his Answer for it is but a currish jeere and toucheth not the Argument at all He puts in 5. a Jeere for a Reason God have mercy on the silly Argumenter A. S. My 17. Argument was That the Scripture forbiddeth all Toleration of Sects Revel 2.20 1 Cor. 1.12 3.3 11.16 18 19 20. Heb. 10.25 Gal. 5.12 M. S. his 1. Answer The Scripture doth not forbid all nor any such Toleration as the Apologists desire And remitteth us to his Answer unto my 15. Reason And I remit the Reader to my Reply To the Text of the Revelation 2.20 he saith That by the Toleration of Jezabel is not meant ◠Civill or State-toleration but an Ecclesiastique or Church toleration A. S. Howbeit formally there only be meant an Ecclesiastique Toleration yet by Consequence it reaches to a State Toleration 1. For whatsoever the Ecclesiasticall Senate or Presbytery is bound not to tolerate but must suppresse in the Church that the Civill Magistrate or Senate is bound not to tolerate but must suppresse in the State since he is a Nurse of the Church and a Keeper of the two Tables 2. And so did the Judges and the Kings of Gods people 3. And so doe the Christian Independent Magistrates in New-England 4. Neither is the Christian Magistrate lesse bound to put it out of the State then the Presbytery to put it out of the Church 5. And I would willingly know of the five Apologists their judgement upon this Point neither beleeve I that they dare say or at least doe beleeve that he is not bound to suppresse all sort of Sects that creep in into the Church when the whole Kingdome professeth the true Religion and Discipline 6 However M. S. say that they desire only a toleration for themselves and their Churches in the State yet he pleadeth for a toleration for all Schismaticks Hereticks and Idolaters that may spring up either in their own or any other Church 7. Neither can the Civill Magistrate if he follow Gods Word grant a Toleration without the consent of the Church if he judge it is not corrupted 8. And a Magistrate should be worse then mad that should permit a Sect to come into the Kingdome to preach down the Gospel which he beleeveth 9. Neither can he be Orthodox and tolerate a new Sect unlesse he tolerate us to believe that he is either corrupted by monies or some other way so to doe M.S. his 2. Answer p. 105. is That since only the Church of Thyatira is here charged with this Toleration evident it is that the power of redressing emerging enormities in a Church in every kind is committed by Christ to every particular Church respectively within it selfe and so that they must be cut off only by the particular Church which is troubled by them if there be no remedy otherwise A.S. 1. At least then thus much I gaine by this Argument as you confesse That a particular Church must cut off such as trouble her and consequently is bound not to tolerate them 2. For the same reason other Churches must not tolerate them since they are all sister-Churches Ergo no Church must tolerate them Ergo no member of the Church must tolerate them If no member Ergo the Civill Magistrate in quality of a member of the Church must not tolerate them or he must tolerate them against his Conscience And what he cannot tolerate in the Church as a member of the Christian Church that can he not tolerate in quality of a Christian Magistrate in a Christian State if he can hinder it And if he hath power to punish such as trouble one particular Church how much more hath he power to punish such as trouble all the Churches in the Kingdome as Schismaticks and Hereticks The Civill Magistrate then by consequence may cut them off from the State As for that Question which M. S. moveth here about the Independent power of particular Congregations it is not to the purpose and we discusse it more at large in its own place A.S. There must be no such speeches among us as I am of Paul I of Apollos c. M.S. We joyn heart and hand with you A. S. And I with you so they must not be tolerated when they can be hindred M. S. addeth here a But 1. Every man that saith I am of Paul or I am of Apollos is not to be taught to speak better by fining imprisoning un-Churching or the like but by soundnesse of Conviction A. S. I answer as I have sundry times done Sinners according to the Doctrine of our Churches are 1. To be heard 2. To be sufficiently convicted 3. After sufficient conviction if they be pertinacious to be punished condignely by Ecclesiasticall Censures viz. suspension from the Lords Table or Excommunication And afterward the Civill Magistrate is to doe his duty
as a Nurse of the Church in compelling them by the Civill power to obey the Church But in both these punishments viz. Spirituall and Temporall it is not for the Sinner to judge whether or no he be sufficiently convicted since he being a Party cannot be Iudge in his own cause but it is the part of the Ecclesiasticall Senate to judge whether he be sufficiently convicted in foro Ecclesiastico and of the Civill Magistrate to judge whether he be sufficiently convicted in foro Civili in that whereof he is to judge To your 2. Answer I reply That by Brownists Independents Anabaptists c. I meane not the names but the things signified by such names A.S. Neither hath the Church of Goda custome to be contentious 1 Cor. 11.16 This I brought to prove that Schismes are not to be tolerated for they breed Contentions in Churches M.S. 3. But he doth not say that these Churches of God had any custome to erect a Presbyterian throne or a combined Eldership amongst them to keep them from Contentions A. S. I answer you M. S. that I must endure your impertinencie 1. For if you had frequented our Presbyteries you should have seen that they have no Throne 2. You might have seen that by this Argument I intended not to prove a combined Presbytery as you call it but the intolerablenesse of a toleration of Sects I prove sufficiently elsewhere what you can desire about the subordination of Ecclesiasticall Judicatories A. S. Neither permitteth the Apostle Schismes M. S. saith that he hath already answered this A. S. saith that he hath replied to M. S. his Answer A.S. We must not quit our mutuall meetings as others doe and as must be done in a publike Toleration Heb. 10.25 M. S. We understand not your words A. S. But they are the Apostles words 2. And my Argument may easily be formed by any Logician against Toleration It will be thus What maketh us to quit our mutuall meetings as others doe is not to be tolerated But Schismes and Heresies make us to quit our mutuall meetings Ergo They are not to be tolerated M.S. We doe not know what quitting of meetings there is like to be more under a publique Toleration then is for the present A.S. So he seemeth to deny the Minor but I prove it for in tolerating of Schismes we see that men being deceived by the Schismaticks doe quit the meetings of the Church to which before they were joyned And we see how the Independents frequent not willingly our Churches and will not all joyne with us in our meetings at the Lords Table Neither beleeve I that any of the five Apologetick Ministers have ever communicated in our Assemblies since this Parliament A. S. 18. Because that M.S. chargeth my 18. Reason with Atheisme I will put it in forme That which per se giveth offence unto Papists and others or that exposeth the Protestant Churches unto the calumnies of Papists should not be granted by us But the Toleration of many Sects doth so Ergo it is not to be granted The Major is certaine for it is scandalum datum which all Divines doe condemne The Minor I prove it for it giveth and the Papists thereupon take too just a cause of Scandall or Offence and indeed it cannot but be a just subject of Offence by to open to be reproached with such an innumerable number of Sects to the renting of Christs Churches in peeces M. S. to this answereth not but propoundeth some Questions 1. Will you saith he redeem your self out of the hands of the Papists calumnies by symbolizing with them A. S. I Answer 1. That it is no symbolizing with Papists if we tolerate not Hereticks and Schismaticks for you have already confessed that in your particular Churches you tolerate them not and yet you beleeve that your Churches symbolize no more with them then ours 2. It is a strange thing if my Argument be Atheologicall if it prove that Atheists and such as deny the Trinity and the Incarnation of the Son of God are not to be tolerated If such an Argument be Atheologicall in your judgement I am assured that all Theologues will conceive better of it then of this your Theologicall Answer Neither have I forgot my 11. Reason for you symbolize with them in their Popery and I in true Theologie viz. in maintaining the Unity of the Church with Saint Paul as you symbolize with Sectaries in maintaining the renting of the Church by Schismes If you had shewen any Contradiction in my words I had either answered it or if I could not I should have rendered my self to the truth But M. S. will not prove it but terrifies me as a Child with his great words It seemeth saith he Contradictions Inconsistencyes Impertinencyes Vn-intelligibilities sence non-sence any thing nothing c. A. S. All this is no sence nothing but words and wind of Goodwin As for the 19th Reason he remitteth us to the former Question to seeke an Answer A. S. 20. If it i. e. Toleration be granted it cannot but be thought that it hath been granted or rather extorted by force of reason and that all the Assembly were not able to answer our Brethren whereas indeed their Opinions and Demands are against all Reason as sundry of themselves could not deny and had nothing to say save onely that it was Gods Ordinance which yet they could never shew out of Gods Word On the contrary if it be refused it will help to confirme the Churches and the people in the truth M. S. In substance 1. denieth that a Toleration will seeme to be extorted if it be granted A. S. But if a thing so absurd and against all Piety be granted by so venerable an Assembly wherein things are carried by Reason it cannot seeme but extorted by Reason M. S. saith that I tell the Assembly that howsoever their Consciences might savour the Independents in point of Toleration yet their credits and reputations would suffer by it A. S. It is false there is no such expression in my Booke it is not my expression but M. S. his fiction and imposture Neither should the Assembly in my poore Opinion so easily suffer themselves to be intreated for ill neither is there any mercy in tolerating and not suppressing of Schismes and Heresies as M. S. beleeveth M. S. denieth that their Opinion and Demand is against all Reason but I have sundry times proved it viz. Because by such a Toleration of Independency all sorts of Heresies will creepe into the Church and it is most absurd that there should be no Ecclesiasticall power to represse the Heresies and abominable sins of seven or eight wicked Fellowes whereof a particular Independent Church may be compoed in case they fall into Heresie or such abominable sins Whereas M. S. saies that it is not like that so very learned men c. such as are the 5. Apologists should rise up to defend an opinion so contrary to all reason A.
of one Body and not to depart from the said particular Church whereof they become Members without the consent thereof The Antecedents of this Covenant are 1. Sundry Meetings together of such as are to joyn in it till such time as they may all have a sufficient proof and tryall of the spirituall estate one of another 2. The Civill Magistrates Consent to set up their Church 3. The Consent of Neighbour Churches 4. They ordain a solemn Fast and after Prayers and Sermons one in the name of all the rest propounds the Covenant 5. And they all take it The Consequents of it are 1. The Right hand of Fellowship which is given them by the Neighbour Churches 2. Those who joyn in Covenant are exhorted to stand fast in the Lord. 3. Followeth a Prayer made to God for pardon of their Sins and acceptance of the People We condemn not all Church-Covenants but we cannot approve this of the Independents 1. Because it is not commanded in Scripture 2. We finde no example of it in Scripture 3. And therefore it is nothing else but an humane Tradition 4. Because all or almost all the Covenants concerning Religion that we read of in Scripture are of those that are already and not of those that are to be Members of the Church 5. Because we are in Covenant with God before ever we come to be of Age I shall be thy God and of thy Seed Gen. 17.7 Item Be baptized for to you and your Children the Promise is made Acts 2.38 And from hence all Protestants prove the Baptism of Infants against Anabaptists 6. Because those that were Circumcised in the Old and that are Baptized in the New Testament are Members of the Vniversall Church without any vocall Covenant as double C who is one of these M. S. ses as I hear confesseth freely Ergo They must be Members of some Particular Church for how can they be in the Vniversall Church and out of all Particular Churches So a man might be in the World and in no part of it or out of all the parts of it 7. Because if Children Circumcised or Baptized were not in the Church their condition should be no better then that of Jews and Pagans which can be no great Consolation to any Christian Parents 8. If a man of one Church should take to Wife one of another a hundred miles distant from him she must adhere to her Husband live with him and so quit her own Church and be out of all Churches like a Pagan for she cannot be admitted to the Church whereunto she goeth but after a long tryall So to be married she becometh as a Pagan 9. Such an Oath or Promise is not lawfull for a man may have just Causes which are not evermore to be declared to a whole Church that may oblige him to go and live elsewhere in an other Church 10. Because the Apostles Evangelists and their Followers could not lawfully enter into any such Covenant since they were Vniversall Ministers consequently Members of all the Churches of the World 11. Neither could they make such a tryall of three thousand persons that in seven or eight houres time were added unto the Church Acts 2.12 Such a Covenant includeth a tacite Schism and Separation from all the Churches of the World 13. Neither did the Apostles and other Ministers of the Church for the first three hundred yeers require the Civill Magistrates Consent to set up their Churches 14. Neither is it necessary to the Internall Constitution or Conservation of it since it is Extrinsecall to the Church 15. And some times it is impossible to be had as when he is a Pagan or an Antichristian Christian The Finall Cause of their Church they pretend to be 1. Gods glory 2. The Salvation of the Church and every Member thereof 3. The Internall and Externall Acts of mutuall Communion in Faith and Charity The Matter of their Church they hold to be such Persons as can give some particular Evidences of saving Grace and of their Election and who enter into Church-Covenant together such as may be Arminians as Master Goodwin alias M. S. And as for the Members of other Churches whether they be Dependents or Independents they will not admit them to the Lords Table nor Baptize their Children upon any Letters of Recommendation that they can bring from other Churches yea howbeit they give a sufficient account of their Faith and live without giving any offence at all to any man and so they hold them little better then Pagans The Integrant p rts of this Church are the Flock or People and the Rulers viz. Preachers Teachers Ruling Elders and Deacons They admit none to be Ruling Elders but such as Preach yea to the People they give liberty to Preach also and so quite confound the Offices of Preachers and Ruling Elders which the Apostle distinguishes Rom. 12. 1 Cor. 12. Eph. 4. 1 Tim. 5. Matth. 18. So they confound the charge of the Pastor with the duty of the Sheep and a Ruler with him that is ruled The Form of their Church seemeth to consist in their Church-Covenant The Accidents of it are 1. The number viz. the smallest seven Persons and the greatest as many as can conveniently meet in one place for the Administration of the Holy Ordinances of God 2. Their Doctrine which may be Arminian as appeareth by M. S. alias Master Goodwin who holds very many Arminian Tenets as Justification by Faith as it is an Act or Quality c. Item As some testifie of him A sleeping of the Soul 3. They have no common Confession of Faith or Platform of Discipline in their Churches neither will they have any yea they will not have any constant Confession of Faith or Platform of Discipline in any Particular such is the Liberty or rather the Licenciousnesse of their Faith and Discipline 4. The power to Teach which they gram as I have already said not onely to Preachers but also to Ruling Elders and some of the People 5. The power of the Keyes which they put in the hands of the People yea of the most ignorant impertinent and insufficient of them who have power to create their own Ministers to examine their Doctrine and sufficiency and afterward to admit them to the Charge But whether they have 1. Abilities 2. And prudence enough to do it 3. Whether Christ have committed the Keyes unto them 4. Whether they can do it without confusion 5. Whether they had it in the Old Testament I leave it to any judicious Readers consideration 6. Yea some of them in the Synod grant unto Women some sprinkling I beleeve as some corrected them there they would have said the gingling of the Keyes but of this spinking sprinkling or gingling of the Keyes we read nothing in the Word of God 7. They hold the Object of Excommunication onely to be errours of the Minde against the common and uncontroverted Principles and of the Will against the common and universall practises of Christianity and both against the Parties known light So hardly can any man be Excommunicated 1. For we cannot well know when a man goeth against the common Principles of Christianity since no man can well define them 2. Muchlesse when he goeth against the light of his Conscience or 3. against the common practises of Christianity which are not well known 4. According to this Tenet we cannot Excommunicate Socinians Arminians and other Hereticks and therefore M. S. is admitted to be a Minister in one of their Churches 5. Howbeit they acknowledge no man in their Parish to be a Member of their Church yet can they very well and in good Conscience take a Benefice were it never so great yea of 300 400 or 500 l. a yeer 6. They beleeve that the Civill Magistrate should not and consequently hath no power to punish Idolaters or Hereticks were their Heresie never so great And first so be it said without Blasphemy God should have been in the wrong in commanding it in the Old Testament Secondly And it were very strange that a man should be punished for offending a man and not for blaspheming the good Name of God Thirdly So he should be punished for calling some Independents Knaves but not for calling Jesus Christ the Sun of God and the Redeemer of our Souls a Knave FINIS
the Magistrates authority can be no more intrinsecall unto the Church then the Magistrate himselfe is And if it be said that the Civill Magistrates authority is intrinsecall unto the Church but not the Civill Magistrate I answer That then the Church hath the civill Magistrates authority and not his person so the Church hath the Magistracy and not the Magistrate and so the Church has civill viz. Imperiall Royall or Despoticall authority over the subjects But that cannot be said for it is Treason Christs Kingdom is not of this world and the Church beareth no materiall sword 39. The Intrinsecall way to governe Christs Church is convenient unto Gods wisdome since it is an act of wisdome and divine providence But an Intrinsecall power granted to Heathen and Antichristian Christians and Magistrates to govern Christs Church is not convenient unto his wisdome but repugnant unto it for it is as if he should choose a Wolfe to keepe the Lambs and a Kite to shelter the Chickens which are not meanes convenient unto such ends 40. Such a sort of Government is repugnant unto Gods mercy towards his Church for how is it credible that he who has given Christ his onely Sonne for his Church to redeeme her should give her Antichrists and Pagans to leade her away from Christ to Antichrist yea to the Devill and Hell it selfe from which he hath redeemed her 41. I might here aske what Magistrate has this Intrinsecall power whether the Supreame or the Subalterne If the Supreame then he has such an authority in the Church as in the State viz. Monarchicall Despoticall Imperiall Royall c. Aristocraticall or Democraticall so the Government of the Church is not one but manifold and may change and be diversified as the governments of this world If the Subalterne has it also then it must be derived unto him from the Prince or Soveraigne Nulla enim potestas nisi in Principe aut a Principe there is no power but in the Prince or from the Prince so Ecclesiasticall charges shall be venall or saleable as Subalterne Magistracies in some Kingdomes are where the only way to be preferred unto them is that notable Maxime of old Judas Quantum mihi dabitis CHAP. III. The second Conclusion about the Extrinsecall power of the Civill Magistrate in Ecclesiasticall matters proved by Scripture Conclus II. THe Civill Magistrate hath an extrinsecall both Directive and Executive power about the Church whereby not onely he may rule it by Politicall Lawes as Pagan but also as Christian because he is or should be a Nursing Father of the Church Esay 49.23 who 1. is bound to admit in his Kingdome the true Church and true Religion 2. He has power not to admit it to reject it yea when it is not received or approved and confirmed by his secular and civill authority to reject it and exile it however he do it not as a Nurse of the Church 3. If the Church be corrupt and Church Officers negligent in their charge and will not reforme it he may command yea compell them to do it Or if they will not he may extraordinarily do it himselfe 5. When the Church is Reformed he may command them when they are negligent to be diligent in their charge 6. If they oppresse any man in their Ecclesiasticall judgements and censures against the Lawes of the Kingdome he may desire them yea command them to revise their judgements and in case they reforme them not command them yea compell them by his civill power to give him satisfaction according to the Lawes of the Kingdome if they derogate not from the Law of God 7. He may yea he is bound to provide sufficient maintenance for the Ministers of the Churches and to take a care that their meanes be not delapidated and that they be not Sacrilegiously robbed of them 8. And what here I say of the Church I say also of Universities and Schooles that are the Seminaries of able men for the Church 9. He may grant unto the Church some Liberties Priviledges or Immunities as sundry Princes have done and confirme them by Law as we see in the Civill Law 10. He is bound with his Civill power to maintaine the Order and Discipline of the Church and consequently 11. To hinder all disorder in it And 12. By his Civill Authority to compell all refractory persons to obey the Church And 13. To banish and exile all Sects Schismes and Heresies as we may see by sundry of the Roman Lawes and especially in the first 13. Titles of the first booke of Instinians Codex in the Pandects and else where All this we grant to the Civill Magistrate and if the Quinq Ecclesian Ministers with the rest of that Sect contest it not we need not to prove it only we say that he doth all this by a Civill and Secular Supreame Imperiall Royall Aristocraticall or Democraticall Legislative and coactive Power armed with the sword howsoever extrinsecall to the Church but more Absolute Independent and Potent in suo genere then any Ecclesiasticall Power whatsoever which is Intrinsecall to the Church which is no waies Absolute nor Independent but Dependent no waies Coactive by Externall force but Spirituall meerly Ministeriall howsoever imperative in the name of God that cannot make any Lawes but of things meerely Circumstantiall much lesse abrogate the Lawes concerning the constitution and Government of the Church already made by God in his Word Now that the Magistrate hath an extrinsecall Power over the Church in compelling all refractory persons to submit themselves to her just commands since M. S. seemeth to question it and desireth a proofe of it I am ready to satisfie his desire herein Wherefore I prove it 1. From sundry examples of the Iudges and Kings of the people of God in the old Testament Exod. 32.27 Moses commanded the Levites to kill about three thousand of the Ring-leaders or principalls of those that adored the golden Calfe in the performance of which service the Text saith that they consecrated themselves unto the Lord verse 29. 2. Deut. 22.11 to the end of the Chapter we read how the rest of the Tribes of Israel resolved to warre against Reuben Gad and the halfe Tribe of Manasseh for building of an Altar as they believed in transgression against the Lord which they would not have done had they not conceived it to be just 3. Iudg. 6.31 Ioash ordained thus He that will plead for him i. e. Baal let him be put to death 4. 1 Kings 15.12 Asa removed all the Idols that his fathers had made 13. And also Maachah his mother even her he removed from being Queene because she had made an Idoll in a Grove and Asa destroyed her Idoll and burnt it by the brooke Kedron Here Asa punisheth his owne Mother for Idolatry and destroyeth her Idoll so no doubt may the Civill Magistrate doe with all false Doctrine Worship and Discipline false Doctors Worshippers and Church Governours he may abolish them and
punish their persons according to the quality of their false Doctrine Worship and Discipline and 2. Chro. 14.4 He i.e. Asa commanded Iudah to seeke the Lord God of their fathers 5. He tooke away the high places Chap. 15.12 They entred into a Covenant to seeke the Lord God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soule 13. That whosoever would not seeke the Lord God of Jsrael should be put to death whether small or great whether man or woman 5. 2 Kings 10. from the ver 18. to the 31. Iehu destroyeth Baal all his Images Prophets Priests Servants and Worshippers and this fact is highly commended and recompenced by God himselfe ver 30. 6. Iehosaphat 2 Chro. 17. tooke away the high places and Groves out of Judah ver 6. He sent his Princes the Priests and Levites to teach throughout all Juda ver 7.8 9. and Chap. 19. he reformeth the two Sanedrims and establisheth Amariah the chief Priest over them in all matters of the Lord and Zebadiah for all the Kings matters which he could not lawfully doe without some power Now we shall shew hereafter that it cannot be Intrinsecall to the Church since he was no Ecclesiastick Person Ergo it must be extrinsecall 7. 2 Kings 11.18 Under the King Iehoash all the people of the Land went into the house of Baal and brake it downe his Altars and his Jmages brake they in pieces throughly and slew Matton the Priest of Baal this they did in vertue of their Covenant betwixt the King and the People with their God and it is approved in Scripture as it appeareth by the Text. 8. 2 Kings 18.4 Ezechias remooved the high places and brake the Images and cut down the Groves and brake in pieces the brasen Serpent that Moses had made for unto those daies the Children of Israel did burne Incense to it Here not only is Idolatrie put downe but also the High Places remooved and the brazen Serpent a thing in it self indifferent but yet ex instituto Divino set up put down when the people abused it in matter of Religion Wherefore then may not the Civill Magistrate doe as much with Independency if it be found contrary to true Doctrine Worship or Discipline So 2 Chron. 31. He reformed the Discipline v. 2. and provided sufficient maintenance for Church Officers 9. Josiah 2 Reg. 23. put down the idolatrous Priests whom the King of Judah had ordained to burne incense in the High places in the Cities of Iudah He slew all the Priests of the High places whether they were Idolaters or not for the Text here hath no distinction and therefore it is not to us to distinguish So that no Kings dispensation Toleration or command can excuse any man from suffering if he sinne against God if the Magistrate that succeedeth him will doe his duty 10. So Manasses reformed the Church 2 Chron. 23.15 and 11.5 See the example of Ezra Ezr. 9. 10. and of Nehemiah Neh. 13. 11. So did Nebuchadnezzar ordaine Dan. 3.29 Therefore I make a Decree that every People Nation and Language which speaketh any thing amisse against the God of Shadrach Meshach and Abednego shall be cut in pieces and their houses shall be made a dunghill because there is no other God that can deliver after this sort Neither need I to speak 12 of Darius 13. Cyrus 14. Darius Histaspes 15. Artaxerxes and other Pagan Princes who imployed their Civill power about Religion Esd 1.1 2 3 4. and 4.17 18 19 c. and Nehem. 7. We have yet some other examples 16. of Phineas 17. Heliah 18. Mattathias 19. Judah and some others who in quality of extraordinary Iudges punished Hereticks and Idolaters yea some of them by death Num. 25.8 1 King 18.40 1 Macch. 2. 2 Macch. 36. Now howbeit these acts of extraordinary Iudges are not to be drawn into consequence by private persons neverthelesse they are to be imitated by ordinary Iudges for what they did extraordinarily in respect of their calling and in quality of Iudges ordinary Iudges should doe it ordinarily since it is their ordinary charge as the others extraordinarily and is commended in Scripture We have some examples in the New Testament in S. Peters person who in quality of an extraordinary Iudge when there was no Christian Magistrate put to death Ananias and Saphyra for their hypocrisie and dissimulation Act. 5.5.10 How much more might he have done it for Heresie which is worse And S. Paul strook Elymas the Sorcerer blind because he would have seduced Paulus Sergius the Proconsul from the saith Act. 13.8 10. because the Magistrate did not his duty or because there was no Christian Magistrate in those times Now what they did as extraordinary Magistrates not being ordinary the ordinary Magistrate may doe it ordinarily as an ordinary act of his charge We have also the expresse commandement of God to punish the Idolater Heretick or false Prophet and dreamer of dreames be he never so neare to us wife brother sonne friend c. Deut. 13.1 And the reason is because He hath spoken to turne you away from the Lord your God v. 5.10 So whosoever seduceth us from the Lord our God as Hereticks are to suffer if they be pertinacious Yea whole Cities are to be destroyed for this sin ver 15. See Exod. 22.20 Deut. 17.2 Yea it was not so much as permitted to the people of God to make any Covenant or mariage with Idolatrous people for feare of turning them away from Gods service Deut. 7.1 2 3 4 5 6. Exod. 34.11.15 Ezra 9.10 Nehem. 9. And this was signified by a prohibition not to let their cattell so much as gender with a divers kind not to sow their ground with mingled seed nor to wear garments mingled with linnen and wollen Levit. 19. as Zepperus in Explanatione legum Mosaicarum forensium l. 4. c. 2. expounds it We nave the Romane lawes in the first Book of the Code of Justinian through all the first 14 or 15 Titles and elswhere to this very Head So we have solemn Covenants in Scripture to observe the Law of God and consequently the first Commandement and so to destroy Heresie and Schismes which are contrary to it As 1 that of Moses pronouncing sundry benedictions to the keepers and curses to the transgressors thereof Deut. 27. 28. 2 Of Ioshua 23. 24. 3 Of Asa 2 Chro. 15.12 4 Of Joash 2 Chro 23.16 5 Of Josiah 2 Chro. 34.30 6 Of Ezra c. 10.3 7 Of Nehemiah chap. 9. v. 28. and 10.1 to the 30. They make a sure Covenant and write it and enter into a curse yea and that with an oath to walk in Gods law c. so far were they from tolerating Hereticks and Schismaticks that might turne them away from it as our Independents goe about to doe Our own Covenant also obligeth the Magistrate to punish all Hereticks and Schismaticks and the People to assist him herein yea the Independents themselves in as much as