by blessing him Indeed the words in Greek are both the same but ordination is expressed by another word Acts 14.23 and when they had ordained them Elders in every Church and had praied with fasting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a divine institution not holding up of hands in a choice of any Vid. Act. 10 41 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they commended them to the Lord Or if you will say that Timothies ordination though spoken of twice yet it only shewes that St Paul and the Presbyterie were associate in the work you will hardly find Calvin so to interpret 1 Tim. 4.14 in his Institutions But be it so * Chryl hom 13. in 1 ad Tim. cap. 4. that Presbyterie was a companie of Elders whereas Calvin saith they were Bishops yet you cannot by that prove that preaching Elders were of the same antiquitie with the Apostles except you take the Apostles themselves only for such Elders nor yet that preaching Elders saving the Apostles were of equall authoritie with Bishops Mathe. I pray Sir make that forth to me that Elders or Presbyters were not of equall antiquity and dignity with Bishops Phila. You are to observe that both the Office of Bishop and Elders were both at first included in the Apostles only as 1 Pet. 5.1 the Apostle Peter there cals himselfe a co-Elder while he exhorteth Elders yet that proveth not that Peter was only an Elder 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no more then it proveth that those Elders to whom he then wrote were all Apostles for none durst join themselves to the Apostles in commission Acts 5.13 till they had ordained and appointed them and therefore no doubt those that ministred had their approbation and appointment first from them except they had an immediate call from God as Paul had from heaven and Ananias in a vision to go and baptize Paul But their ordinary way was to give commission by laying on of hands and ordination Therefore we read Acts 6.3 that they appointed the seven elected Deacons and laied their hands upon them though they had the Holie Ghost before that Acts 6.3 yet had no commission to officiate that dutie till then Acts 6.6 So also Barnabas and Saul was separated by command from the Holie Ghost to the particular work to which God had appointed them and they were separated by the imposition of hands fasting and praier and to that work approved So we find that Barnabas and Saul ordain Elders in every Citie at Lystra Iconium and Antioch Acts 14.22 23. till which time we read not of the word Elders nor of ordination which power of ordination so far as I see was ever kept in the hands of the Apostles and such whom they made superintendents over many Churches So Paul having made Titus superintendent or Bishop over Creet appointed him to ordain Elders in every Citie Calvin Institu lib. 4. cap. 3. which power I find not given to every inferiour Presbyter nor yet to many of them associated without a superintendent I know some may say that those that sent Barnabas and Saul were not Apostles I answer though none of the twelve yet of the second order namely Apostolicall Prophets such as are spoken of Eph. 4.11 not by foretelling things to come but by expounding the divine oracles Ambrose in 1 Cor 12. who in that time were no lesse than Bishops for we read not of any of the 72 Disciples nor of any other meer Presbyters that ever took upon them imposition of hands and therefore when Philip had converted some people at Samaria the Apostles sent Peter and John to lay their hands on them Acts 8. by which they received the Holie Ghost by an holie consignation Eph. 1.13 not for miraculous operation Mathe. What other difference is there between Bishop and Presbyter Phila. As they were more ancient that by them Presbyters might be ordained so they were of more dignitie and authoritie then any meer Presbyters This dignitie and authoritie the Apostles kept to themselves a while First because as yet the Church was not setled Secondlie because at first few or none were found fit for that office But at last lest equalitie and paritie should breed schisme they set up superintendents or Bishops Hieron in Tit. c. 1. Ep. ad Evagri who did excell other Presbyters both in conferring rewards and also in censuring manners as in Tit. 1.5 he had power to ordain So they had a jurisdiction coactive and corrective transmitted to them from the Apostles as Timothy is bid by St Paul to charge some that they preach at Ephesus no other but sound doctrin 1 Tim. 1.3 and to restrain prophane and vain bablings 2 Tim. 2.16 And Titus is also authorized by S. Paul to put some to silence Tit. 1.11 as well as to rebuke others v. 10. yea to excommunicate some Tit. 3.10 Hieron 〈◊〉 Luciferi By this means faction was prevented which else likelie might have made in time as many schismaticks as Priests some people crying up Paul others Apollos others Cephas 1 Cor. 1.12 The Apostles therefore set up Bishops in divers Cities who were succeeded by others in place and authoritie still above Presbyters Aug. cont Manich. Epi. c. 4. to 6. which succession hath kept people still in the lap of the Church whose prosperity hath much depended upon their power and dignitie And that there hath been a continued succession of them the Ecclesiasticall histories sufficientlie declare And that they have been alwaies in higher dignitie then Presbyters must needs be allowed or else the Apostles left the Church in unwarrantable paritie contrary to Christs example who gave the twelve Apostles an higher title then the 72 Disciples Luke 10. and so did they set others above Presbyters And these we find sometimes called Apostles i. of the second order Gal. 1.19 So James the Lords brother was called an Apostle yet he was none of the twelve and also many other called so 1 Cor. 15.7 which were not of the twelve neither This no doubt was in regard of their precedencie as Epaphroditus was called the messenger or Apostle of the Philippians Phil 2.25 Theod. in 1 Tim. 3. and what is that saith Theodoret but their Bishop namely of that Church The twelve are alwaies in Scripture called the Apostles of Jesus Christ because they had from him their immediate divine mission but others that had only Apostolike ordination they are only called Apostles or Apostles i. Bishops of such Churches as Gal. 1.19 and 2 Cor. 8.23 And this appears further that such Apostles were Bishops because Christ commends the Angell of the Church of Ephesus for trying those that said they were Apostles but were not These that were tried could be none of the twelve for they were all known to that Angell if they were at that time living but it is most like to be some that like Diotrephes sought the preheminence of an Apostolicall Bishop which was above the
it was done by decree of St Paul upon the incestuous person 1 Cor 5. I have determined as if present to deliver him to Satan Amb. in 1 Tim. cap. 1. As for their assembling together at his command it was that the whole Church might see and fear that upon reading the sentence the spirit of Paul being present by the power of the Lord Jesus Satan should plainly smite him with some evill Chry. in 1 Cor. 5 hom 15. as once Peter did Ananias dead Acts 5. and Paul Elymas the sorcerer Acts 13. From this it is St Paul saith 2 Cor. 10. we have in a readinesse to revenge all disobedience and is called his rod 2 Cor. 13.2 1 Cor. 4. which he will not spare This I confesse was excommunication and somewhat more for many were excommunicated and yet not delivered to Satans power 2 Cor. 13.10 which was a sharp execution of that power the Lord had given him Thus we see the Apostles kept this power and by their command only it was executed Christ gave this power of the keies only to the Apostles John 20. and Paul being an Apostle used them without the authority of Presbyters Mathe. But whether doth the power still continue and in whom Phila. Some gifts were appointed to the Apostles persons As 1. Their calling by Christs own mouth 2. Their infallibility in truth 3. The visible assistance of Gods spirit 4. To speak extempore in divers tongues 5. To work miracles 6. To bestow the gifts of Holy Ghost upon others all which was given to them to beget and convert and confirm Christians at first But this milk is not necessary alwaies to be continued when the Church is grown to a ripe age for the Scriptures are afterward sufficient to make us perfect to every good work 1 Tim. and the miracles then done are a full confirmation of their truth But yet you must know that the authority of their calling liveth yet in their successors and to teach administer Sacraments to bind and loose sins to impose hands for the ordaining Pastours and Elders are not ceased nor can be wanting so long as there is a Church for these beget faith without which there is no Church Therefore their successors are stewards of the mysteries of Christ and are warned to take care of Christs flock Acts 20. and of this few doubt but the power of the keies troubles them to whom they are committed that is excommunication and absolution So others quarrell about ordination and these are the well-wishers to Lay-Eldership which they would have joined in this work with Apostles and Bishops but they find no warrant for it I know they bring commonly two or three places of Scripture for Presbyterie as the hands of the Presbyterie 1 Tim. 4.14 which I have shewed were the hands of Bishops and preaching Elders at least not of Lay Elders So they say Christ bids a man tell the Church Mat. 18. which if a man will not hear he is to be accounted as an heathen Now by this word Church they would bring in all the Lay Elders Chrys hom 61. in Mat. 18. Beza annot in Mat. 18. saith the chiefe implieth the whole But surely there is understood the spirituall Presidents and Governors so there we read of no Lay Presbyterie But they say that in the 1 Tim. 5. Paul tels us of ruling Elders and thereforre there were some Elders beside those that laboured in the word and doctrine as Rom. 12. he that ruleth let him do it with diligence but it is plain they are not distinct offices Beza annot in 1 Tim. 4. Chrys hom 15. in 1. Tim. 5. Hieron in 1 Tim. cap. 5. but sometime pertaining both to the Deacon or Preaching Elder who also ruled the Church and in regard of their good government deserved double honour of reverence and allowance but especially for laboring in preaching the Gospell because they cannot so well provide things needfull for themselves But for Lay Judges I never heard they were to be maintained by the Church stock of which maintenance the Apostle in 1 Tim. 5. speaketh and therefore here can be understood no Lay Presbyterie but rather such as did govern the Churches stocks as the Deacons did or ministers which either did both Beza annot in 1 Pet. cap. 5. or only laboured in the word for the name Elder compriseth sometimes all those that have any Ecclesiasticall function And St Chrysostome on 1 Cor. 1.17 on these words Chrys in 1 Cor. 1.17 Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach saith that few were able to preach but many to give baptisme therefore the inferiour sort of ministers baptized and the superiour in wisedome Evangelized They that performed the first well were counted worthy of double honour for their right ordering the Church but especially such as labored in the word and doctrine so that still we find no ruling for Lay Elders but rather the dutie and pains of their Pastors and Teachers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the one by ruling the flock well in his Church and charge whereof he is president by doctrine administration and example 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other for travelling with great pains of mind and body to dispense the Gospell and confirm Christians by travell and visiting in which sense Paul saith 1 Cor. 15. he laboured more then all the Apostles Yet I speak not this in derogation to Lay-men which are holy grave and wise but only that they had no place in ordination or excommunication yea I beleeve good use might be made of them for moderation of quarrels and strifes and examinations as 1 Cor. 6.4 and to end matters peaceably between Christians but not to censure Ecclesiastically for that belongs to the ministers nor to punish by the civill law for that belongs to the Magistrate The keies were given of Christ to his Apostles and of them to their successors which were spirituall pastors so that every godly minister hath power to put by an unworthy receiver from the Lords Table as well as to admit one that is worthy Amb. de poenit lib. 1. c. 2. without the assistance of Lay Eldership to whom neither power of preaching the Word nor administring the Sacraments Chrys de sacer lib. 3. was ever committed For when Christ said to Peter Aug. 5. Tract in Joh. I will give thee the keies of the Kingdome of heaven he meant and intended it to all the ministers of the Church as appeareth in giving the rest of the Apostles the same power after his resurrection Therefore saith Ambrose Amb. de dignita sacer c. 6. all we that are Priests received the keies in blessed Peter but he saith not Lay-men did also receive them Mathe. This may make Ministers take too much upon them Phila. Not if they be either wise and godly Cypr. l. 1. Ep. 2. for they are to use this power with moderation and great discretion for much
The politie of the Jewes being contained in the Law of Moses Deut. 21.19 it was necessary the Judges should be assisted by those that had the most skill in that Law 3. This preeminence followed the same family by inheritance and birth-right so not with us yet the order that God set for some to rule over others is not lightly to be refused since God saw it was the best order rather then to leave them to a generall equality of Priests therefore the Sanhedrim it selfe consisted not of all that would come in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but of seventy choice men But it is plain that the Leviticall discipline doth set a form of divers degrees among Ministers by the evident wisedome of God which may justly be imitated by the Christian Churches rather then parity which God never approved Mathe. But Christ used no such way of superiority himselfe nor setled any such as we read of Phila. It is true Christ used none such himselfe for he came to serve and give his life for the world Mat. 20. yet at that time he was head of the Church and was a King to rule a Prophet to teach and a Priest to clense But his Kingdome was not worldly and therefore he would not reign over his Church by his bodily presence So he was the disciples Lord and Master even then John 13. and all power in heaven and earth was his then but he did not challenge it til his resurrection Then he took the Scepter and Kingdome declaratively which he only exerciseth by inward and spirituall power and grace but leaves the externall government to others and keeps the spirituall effectuall and celestiall Kingdome in his own hand which by his spirit in his ordinances he conveieth into the hearts of his people and this Kingdome belongs only to the person of Christ and they that think that any man or corporation of men whether the Pope or the Presbytery succeeds Christ in this Scepter they be highly deceived And for the externall government he left it to the Apostles who had the mind of Christ and they did as I have shewed you They were 1. Greater then others in Christs favour alwaies hearing him 2. In gifts of the spirit far above others Acts 2. and in doing miracles 3. They received their abounding measure immediately from the Holy Ghost others received their measure mediately from their preaching baptizing or imposition of hands They shewed their superiority also by charging 2 Thes 3. commanding to Timothy and Titus ordaining contributions 1 Cor. 16. threatning 2 Cor. 13. so St John doth Diotrephes and their delivering up to Satan they that followed them durst not be so bold though the Pope is Ignat. ad Romanos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Ignatius saith I enjoin nothing to you as Peter and Paul did they were the Apostles of Christ but I the least So in another Ep. ad Trallianos he saith I command not as an Apostle but I keep my selfe within my measure Yet the Apostles after they had trained up men by their doctrines letting them accompany them in their travels they then left some in one place as Timothy at Ephesus Titus at Creet and gave them authority to ordain ministers and govern the Church and therefore they were superiour to others for equals have no power over their equals Mathe. But I find Christ forbidding superiority Mark 10. and the Apostles associating others with them in electing to offices Acts 6. and assembling Councils Acts 15. and imposing hands 1 Tim. 4. and in excommunicating Phila. It is true that upon the two brothers request to be the chief favourites in his Kingdome which they supposed would be an earthly dominion and being rejected the other disciples disdaining them the Lord tels them that they should not use civill jurisdiction over one another as the Gentiles did but he doth not deny degrees or diversity of administrations to them but he thereby instructeth them how to use the authority given of God 2 Cor. 10. not for subversion but edification so that hereby he forbids them compulsive dominion or violent jurisdiction over their brethren but to leave that to the secular power Also to be ready to humble themselves to the meanest and of the lowest degree to win them to the Gospell but that all ministers are by that place proved to be equall I understand not and that because as I have said they used power and authority above others which they would not have done if Christ had forbidden it yet I conceive the Apostles among themselves were of equall authority and towards the brethren they carrried themselves more like fathers than Lords or Masters Now for their associating other with them It is true that many places of Scripture seem to make for it viz. that they had the concurrence of Presbyters and others called a Presbytery in their severall dispensations which will not be found so if well examined For first in the choice of Matthias Acts 1. it is not expressed that the Church intermedled only Peter acquainted the rest that one must be chosen in the room of Judas but whether all the Disciples or the Apostles only named Barnabas and Matthias is not fully expressed for it is said they appointed two and praied and cast lots which actions are most likely to be performed by the Apostles who were led thereto by the spirit of God for certainly an Apostle might not be chosen by men however they might put men in election for it therefore God shewed which he had chosen viz. Matthias and he was accounted with the twelve Apostles I beleeve Peter and the rest might have chosen whom they pleased but then it would have seemed partiality and beside they had not yet the Holy Ghost poured upon them and therefore rather committed the choice to Gods providence Acts 6.2 So the seven Deacons by appointment of the Apostles were chosen by the multitude but approved by the Apostles ver 6. which men were at that time only confirmed in that office of trust to distribute the Churches stock impartially to the Grecists and Hebrew widowes not to teach or baptize and though Philip did so at Samaria yet he did it as an Evangelist not a Deacon so here is not any appearance that these were appointed by such a Presbyterie We grant that the people did use to shew their consent in elections by holding up of hands which was never held mysticall or sacred as imposition of hands and ordination is Socrat. l. 4. c. 30 as appeareth in the peoples choice of Ambrose to be Bishop of Millane who was before Lievetenant of the Province for that he had by good perswasions quieted the tumult that was made by the people about chusing a Bishop After which both the Emperor and they desired the Bishops to lay their hands upon him so that it is evident the people nor lay-Presbyters were associated in ordination or in imposition of hands So
Heres lib. 1. haer 27. Hier. in Jac. Theod. in Phil. cap. 1. and exercised the office of Bishops or overseers while they lived and so left it to other faithfull men afterward James was the first Bishop of Jerusalem as saith Eusebius lib. 3. cap. 5. and St Ierome saith the Apostles ordained him so And Theodoret upon the Philip. chap. 1. saith that Epaphroditus had the Episcopall office setled on him because Paul calleth him their Apostle Eph. 2.25 Mathe. Why were not Bishops trusted with the Church at the first erecting of it Phila. Because the Church had at first more need of Presbyters and Deacons Epiph. cont Aerium lib. 3. ho. 75. for whilst the Apostles continued neer the places where they had planted Churches there was no need of any Bishops or overseers save themselves by their presence letters or messengers But when they were finally to forsake those parts then they did secure the Church by fit substitutes 2. Sufficient men for the office were very scarce to be had as Phil. 2. I have no man like Timotheus who will faithfully care for your matters for all seek their own Calv. Insilt lib. 4. cap. 8. 3. Factions began by the equality of Presbyters as some among the Galathians set up circumcision So Phil. 3. some were called dogs and evill workers and were the enemies to the crosse So Col. 2. some burdened the Church with traditions others corrupted the Gospell with Philosophy Col. 2. So some impugned the resurrection 1 Cor. 15. and Col. 2. Others fained the day of Christ to be at hand 2 Thes 2. many wolves entred foretold Acts 20. and false teachers 2 Pet. 2. yea many Antichrists 1 John 2. and cap. 4. to prevent or represse which the Apostles set up superintendents or Bishops to rule the Presbyters as they to teach the people that the gainsaiers might be reproved Tit. 1.5 And that they exercised Episcopall jurisdiction is plain in that he had power of ordination 1 Tim. 5.2 Oecumen in 1 Tim. cap. 4. lay hands therefore suddenly on no man 1 Tim. 5. And also the power of correction So 1 Tim. 5.1 Rebuke not an Elder but exhort him as a father which plainly shewes the difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter And if we read ancient writers Epiph. haeres 25. Cypr. l. 1. Ep. 8. Ep. 4. you will find beside the proofe of Scripture both reason and practise enough for the setting of Bishops in the Church over Presbyters although in many cases the Presbyters did associate the Bishop Mathe. But how prove you Bishops to be chiefe Phila. It is not unlike but the Church having received this order from the Apostles would alwaies continue it and therefore from the Primitive times they had peculiar to themselves Hier. ad Rusti Monachum singularity in succession and superiority in ordination By singularity I understand one Bishop in one City though divers Presbyters and Deacons in divers Congregations and upon this singularity depends the safety of the Church Hier. advers Lucif which else would be rent asunder by as many schismes as there be Priests It may be you will object that St Paul seems to acknowledge many Bishops in one City Phil. 1.1 as at Philippi he writes to the Bishops and Deacons Oecumen in 1 cap. ad Phil. Chrys hom 1. in 1 chap. ad Philip. Opt. cont Pamerianum l. 25 But these were Presbyters yet called Bishops because as yet the name was common to both but afterward they were distinguished by their proper name as Theodoret writes in the 1 chap. to the Philippians And Optatus saith that he is a schismatick and a sinner that erecteth one Bishops seat against another 2. They had superiority in ordination for it was fit that the lesse should be blessed of the greater and that a superiour must ordaine the inferior It is true Concil Cartha 4. Can. 4. that the Councill of Carthage saith that Presbyters shall lay their hands neer the Bishops hand upon the head of him that is to be ordained so that shewes that Presbyters cannot ordain without a Bishop and therefore their hands were only laied by way of consent and approbation or else the Fathers and other Councils are deceived Yea Tit. 1.4 beside the Scripture settles it in the Bishop not in the Presbyters as you may read in another Councill who rejected a Presbyter that was ordained or consecrated by another Presbyter though the Bishop laied his hands upon his head but suffered the other Presbyter to read the words of consecration Concil Hispalenf Ca. 5. Epiph. haer 69. because himselfe was troubled with sore eies and could not well read So was one Colluthus a Presbyter reproved and all the Presbyters that he had presumptuously made were rejected in a generall Councill So it was decreed against Maximus a Presbyter in the same case Athan. apol 2. by the first Councill of Constantinople Can. 4. Mathe. But how prove you their succession Phila. First the Scripture tels us that the Apostles placed some in divers Cities in their life time as Timothy at Ephesus where Onesimus succeeds Eus lib. 3. cap. 35. Titus at Creet Epaphroditus at Philippi Polycarpus at Smyrna by St John Linus at Rome by St Peter Iren. l. 3. c. 3. Eus l. 2. c. 1. Iames at Jerusalem by the Apostles and he was succeeded by forty Bishops unto Macarius who sate in the Councill of Nice Eus l. 3. c. 22. So Euodias succeeds Peter at Antioch Ignatius was next who had seen Christ in the flesh Hieron in Ignat. Col. 4. Mark St Peter's scholler was Bishop of Alexandria to whom succeeded Arianus Caius of whom Paul speaks Rom. 16. was Bishop of Thessalonica Archippus of Coloss Dionysius Bishop of Corinth and so look and you shall find succession maintained by an holy care of the Church rulers commending it one to the other especially in those places and Cities that had their first Bishops from the Apostles hands and we find them in a plain succession for 676 years after Christ in the fourth fift and sixt generall Councils but by wars persecutions and the like the succession hath been in many places interrupted and sometimes at a stop in Rome it selfe but yet this sheweth there was and ought to be also so far as I see a succession of them continued Hieron ad Evagrium and therefore the Presbyters themselves till they grew factious in case there was none setled by the preceding Bishop they did elect one out of themselves and placed him in an higher degree and called him Bishop And this saith St Jerom was generall throughout the world after that men began to challenge those that they baptized to be their own and not Christs it was decreed that one of the many Presbyters in a City or Province should be chosen Hieron in 1. c. Epist ad Titum and set above the rest to whom the whole care of
that Church should appertaine and in these successions continued of one and no more though the Presbyters were many Ignat. in Epist ad Antiochen Therefore Ignatius in his Epistles to divers Churches warneth the Laity to obey the Presbyters and Deacons and that the Presbyters feed the flock till God shew who shall be your Pastor after my death Thus they succeeded one another and alwaies in an higher degree than Presbyters for although at first the name Bishop and Presbyter was used indifferently one for the other while the Episcopall office remained in the Apostles and Evangelists yet when they succeeded Calv. Instit l. 4. c. 4. S. 4. Theodor. in cap. 3.1 Ep. ad Tim. that were neither Apostles nor Evangelists then the higher degree were called Bishops answering to the Apostles by which term Apostle the Bishops were first called as was Epaphroditus * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phil. 2.25 but afterward they left that title to the twelve Apostles and took the name of Bishops or overseers to themselves so verifying the prophecie in Psal 45.16 concerning the Church instead of thy fathers i. the Apostles that begat thee thou shalt have children even such as thou hast begotten i. ministers Hieron in Psal 45. Aug. in Psal 45. whom thou shalt make rulers i. Bishops saith St Jerom whom the Church hath placed in the seats of her fathers and to bring them back to the cels of the Presbyters hath been accounted no lesse then sacriledge and however men may count it Reformation to abolish that order I shal pray that they may not find it destruction to the Church Exact Synod Chalcedon de Photio Eustathio and lastly to themselves a curse Pro. 20.25 Mal. 3.9 Mathe. However they succeed the Apostles in ordination and corrections yet the Presbyters think not themselves inferiour and therefore not subject to them Phil. They ought not so to think but to be subject because God hath made them Fathers and Pastors and Christ cals them the seven stars in regard of their rule as the seven Planets do govern naturall bodies and Angels in respect of their intelligence they have with Christs mind which they are to convey to others This name Angels saith Austin was given to the Ruler of the Church of Ephesas Aug Epi. 162. So Auth. in 1 Cor. cap. 12. And Bullinger saith the heavenly Epistle was directed to the Angell i. the Pastour of the Church of Smyrna which was Polycarpus who was placed there by St John fifteen yeers before he wrote the Revelation By which may be gathered that these were chiefe in authority and that Presbyters and people were to take direction and reproofe from them for he is charged above the rest and therefore surely he had some power and authority above the rest these being the chief Priests Aug. in Psa 45 and Fathers of Christs Church and therefore are to be obâ—ied not only by the people but the Presbyters also as saith Jerom to Nepotian Hier. ad Nep. teaching the duty of a Presbyter Be subject to thy Bishop and reverence him as the father of thy soule and that Presbyter that doth not so Amb. offi lib. 2. cap. 24 Cyp l. 3. Ep. 14 he through pride swarveth from the right way And Cyprian blameth some Presbyters that without regard to the Bishop set over them do take upon them to do any thing but he threatens to suspend such from their ministry Ignat. ad Mag. Therefore Ignatius advised the Magnesians that as Christ did nothing without his Father so they should neither without their Bishop whether you be Presbyter Deacon or Lay man And he chargeth the Sarsonses thus Presbyters be subject to your Bishops Deacons to your Presbyters and Lay men to all My soule for theirs that observe this order the Lord will be alwaies with them This man lived neer enough to the Apostles time to know how the Church was then governed And by the Apostolicall Canons the Presbyters and Deacons are to do nothing without the consent of the Bishop Can. Apost 8. Concil Arelat 1. ca. 19. Hier advers Lucif for to his charge the people are committed no they are not to baptize without the Bishops leave saith Ierom and affirmeth that the safety of the Church dependeth thereupon not that Bishops usurped and took this power upon themselves but by the Apostolike tradition and example and afterward by the allowance of Emperours and lawes of States and Provinces and Synodall Canons none of which did allow any domineering in Bishops but gave them power over Presbyters and yet Presbyters leave to appeale from them if they thought themselves wronged to the neerest Bishops Concil African can 129. or to the Primate or to the next Synod Mathe. Whether may the people have the election of Pastors by Gods Word Phila. We find no such election in Gods Word Oâ—â—umen in 1 Tim. cap 4. By the commandement and appointment of the Holy Ghest were Bishops made as Timothy by prophecy Thâ— dâ— in 1 Tim. 1. i. by divine revelation say Theodore The phylact and Ambrose oâ— the first Epistle to Timothy Next they 〈…〉 se others as I have shewed you Afterward came in popular elections grounded upon humane society which in reason challengeth an approbation at least of those to whom they submit themselves and allow maintenance But yet even in this the people had only rather a proposall of one or approbation of one then an election of one for they had two waies to settle a Bishop the first by election Cyp. l. 1. Ep. 1. the second was by postulation the election was thus performed When a Bishops chair was void some Bishops that were neerest consulted to meet there at a certain day of which they gave notice to the people and Presbyters of that place who came on that day into the Church and three Bishops at least came also from the adjacent places and there observed whom the Clergy named and whom the people proposed and as all or most agreed so the man was chosen but another day fixed for his ordination In the mean time any objections might be made but if he were clear the Bishops made him Pastor of that Church But secondly if that City wanted an approved man then they desired the Bishop of the ancientest City called the Metropolis and he the Metropolitan to send them such an one as he approved which he did after himselfe and three other Bishops had tried him Thus also Presbyters were setled and ordained by the examination of the Bishop and testimony of the people Concil Cartha 3. Can. 22. Conc. Laodic Can. 23. yet the multitude must not elect those that were called to be Priests though they might present such as they thought fit But alwaies three Bishops at least ordained a Bishop and one Bishop a Presbyter Can. Apost ca. 1 2. This was the common order except when the people made tumults Eus l. 1.
c. 24. Evag. l. 2. c. 5. c. 8. as the Church histories tell us For which uprores the Emperour Justinian took away that power from the people and setled in the Governors of the City to propound three two Novella Consti 123. or one orthodox and holy man without partiality and the Bishops were to ordaine him and if in six months this was not done then the Metropolitan might settle one So that we may see that the peoples election was not founded on Gods command but upon the reason of humane government and was subject to the Lawes and Canons of Princes and Priests Dist 61. S. for the rule was that in the choice of Priests the people was not to be followed but taught and therefore their power may be forfeited and transferred to the superiour and therefore if the multitude have a right then the Magistrate much more And we find that election of Bishops by default abuse or petition hath devolved to the Prince being a Christian Therefore lest variance should arise as oftentimes it did about the choice of a Bishop Theodosius the Emperor commanded the Bishops then present with him to settle Proclus in the Episcopal chair before Maximianus successor to Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople was buried Pelagius being chosen Bishop of Rome without the Emperors consent was excused by Gregory Platina in Pelag 2. because the Town was besieged and no messenger could passe to the Emperor Greg. Ep. l. 1. c. 5. Dist 62. S. breviter which Gregory was by the Emperor chosen Bishop of Rome without popular votes The Canon Law in this case hath a good rule viz the people is to present the Clergy to elect the Prince to consent Mathe. How came this to Princes hands at first Phila. There were at first few great Princes Christians and so could have no right in this businesse of electing Bishops 2. Bishops though they had greater authority than Presbyters yet they had no endowment but from the common charity and therefore the people after the Apostles time might justly expect some hand in the choice of them and so they had For Fabianus the nineteenth Bishop of Rome was chosen by their full consent and so they generally had it till after Constantine the Emperour But we read of Theodosius the elder commands the Bishops to give him a catalogue of such whom they thought fit to be made Bishop of Constantinople Sozom. l. 7. They did and the Emperour chose Nectarius one not yet baptized and hardly known yet the Councill though he was neither chosen by Clergy nor people thought it their duty after that he was baptized to pronounce him Bishop of Constantinople And this power in Princes arose sometimes from the desire of the Clergy as when Valentinian willed the Bishops to elect a Bishop of Millane to succeed Auxentius the Synod praied him being wise and religious to chuse one So sometimes by reason of differences in the choice it hath been referred to the Emperour and sometimes in regard of favour the Emperour had shewed to them in recalling them from banishment building Cities and Churches for them and giving them endowments to those Churches whereby the people were the more eased and the Bishops more free in the exercise of their function And this was much like the right of patronage which was alwaies allowed and is still with us here in England But if we search antiquity we shall find Synods allowing this power to Princes viz. that no man shall be ordained Bishop without the King Conc. Aurel. 51. Greg. Turonici hist Fran. The Kings of France kept this power and so have our Kings of England to themselves neither suffering Clergy nor people to meddle in the choice but by roiall assent no not the Pope himselfe Henry the first of England sent the Pope word that he would not lose the investiture of his Churches Mat. Paris in Hen. 1. an 1103 for the losse of his Kingdome And no wonder if Emperours and Kings looked narrowly to this power of which as the Pope did strive to rob them on the one side so did the Presbytery on the other Therefore the Statute of Provisors of benefices Stat. Edw. 3. anno 25. Westmo provides cleerly for the King in electing Bishops or collating Bishopricks And this is no more then was allowed to those that founded Churches and gave maintenance to them viz. to present a Clerk for they gave the Church so did the King Ansegilus legum Franciae lib. 1. cap. 84. Statut. de Marlebride Novella Consti 123. cap. 18. but neither King nor patron did consecrate or ordain nor may any Bishop nor authority refuse such being men of good life and learning if they doe the Plea of Quare impedit lieth against them The same liberty was given of ancient times by the Councill of Toledo an 654. And the Roman Lawes determined the same throughout the Empire by all which you may perceive how Princes had the power of electing Bishops Mathe. But I have heard some holy Fathers and Councils to have been against receiving of Bishops from the Princes Palace Phila. It is true Epist Athan. ad solit vitam agentes Athanasius saith that there is no Canon that a Bishop should be sent out of the Palace But Athanasius speaketh of such as were sent from Constantius the Emperour and placed in the Churches by force of his souldiers which was an invasion of the Churches rites because they had no admission by the Bishops So it is true that the second Councill of Nice alledged a Canon Nic. Syn. 2. Can. 3. that all elections of Bishops Presbyters or Deacons made by the Magistrate are void because a Canon saith that if any Bishop obtaine a Church by the help of the secular magistrate let him be deposed and put from the Lords Table and those that communicate with him But this Councill did not deny power to the Emperor or Prince to nominate but to impose a Bishop by his own command against both the Metropolitan and other Bishops admittance and ordination Nic. Syn. 2. Can. 3. Conc. Paris Can. 8. who should properly admit and ordaine them So the Council of Paris will have no Bishop imposed upon the people with the other Bishops leave viz. the Metropolitan and his Com-provincials for if any such were no man should accept him for Bishop And this was decreed long before in the Apostles Canons saying Can. Apost 30. If any Bishop resting on worldly governors by their help obtain a Church let him be deposed and excommunicated and all that join with him Mathe. How did the Bishops govern the Church Phila. They followed the Apostles rule namely to order their speciall congregations by their own singular power but in a matter wherein the whole Church was interessed they governed by Synods and Councils as the Apostles did also Acts 15. which Councils they at first before there was a Christian Magistrate called by
kingdome that he hath by dispensation is that free and voluntary kingdome which he received from God for the salvation of his Church and shall in the end of the world be given up to God the Father again 1 Cor. 15.25 28. in the mean time he is by dispensation the head and sole monarch of the Church But he hath neverthelesse a government ministeriall not only invisible by his spirit and Angels John 16.7 Heb. 1.14 but a visible ministration by the word and wholesome discipline to the exercise whereof some men are by his appointment delegated for the helping our infirmities and speaking to us in Christs absence 2 Cor. 6.1 And this hath alwaies been done by Bishops and Presbyters Acts 20.28 who by the Holy Ghost were made overseers of the flock not secular men though Princes had ever this externall government in the dispensation of spirituall things committed to them for then how was the Church ruled for 300 years after Christ till the daies of Constantine yet the secular power is to govern men as men but the ministers only governs them as Christians and therefore in this case Princes themselves have not refused subjection to this ministeriall government of Christ as the Emperour Theodosius to St Ambrose Bishop of Millane Theod. lib. 5. cap. 17. Nor have any dared to usurp their office without some exemplary punishment as Uzzah and Uzziah till these latter times 2 Sam. 6.7 wherein any tradesman dare take upon him the office of a minister and a seutor to be a soule member Beside if this ministeriall government were committed to secular powers then they might give the Sacrament and a woman if a Prince might preach too notwithstanding St Paul 1 Cor. 14.34 But we find Jehosaphat to distinguish the civill power 2 Chro. 19.5.8 from the ecclesiastick ministry in the Old Testament and surely the Church of the New Testament was not left to confusion in government 1 Cor. 14.40 Therefore the ancient Fathers have reproved even Emperors Amb. Ep 33. de Valentin Imper. Athâ—nâ—s Ep. ad agintes vitam solit when they took upon them to meddle with things divine which was no part of their administration for though God had committed to them the Empire yet to the minister the sacred things the mysteries whereof they are to teach not to be taught yet religious Magistrats are to rule over ministers by their civill power to which ministers are to subject themselves yea they may and ought to correct negligence in the practise of religion and vice which is a scandall to religion yea and heresies blasphemies and sacriledge proved to be so by Ecclesiasticall judgement but not to define points of faith nor to exercise ministeriall offices It is true that Moses Eli and Samuel and others did exercise both offices many times yet we cannot argue from an extraordinary action in a state not fully setled that it should be so in a setled Church and State for by the same reason a Priest may act the office of a Prince or a Judge at any time as did Moses Eli and Samuel But we find when the Priesthood was setled that Moses then medled not with Aarons businesse and Eli and Samuel were Judges by an extraordinary call in a corrupted State but ordinarily it was otherwise So in the New Testaments Church holy things were alwaies ordinarily and ordinately administred by Bishops and Presbyters Eph. 4.11 12. to whom those of the Church were to submit themselves Heb. 13.17 Nor was the Church governed by any one man but by them Acts 15.6 no not by Peter alone though he was in that Councill and the ancient Fathers decline that sole definitive judicature Cypr. lib. 31 Epi. 19. ad Cletum Amb. in 1 Tim. 1. Hier. in Epi. 1. ad Tur. which the Pope hath challenged to himselfe St Cyprian durst not do so and St Ambrose saith that first the Synagoue and afterward the Elders of the Church was to be consulted and without them nothing was to be done and St Jerom saith that till by the instinct of the devill contentions arose in the Church it was governed by the counsell of ministers Nor was the government of it democraticall or in the power of the people for then they must have this power from themselves or from God it cannot be from themselves for this power is not by right of nature or Nations but is supernaturall and of divine right nor have they it from God for no Scripture sets it forth but therein they are called the flock which are to be fed not to govern or chuse their Shepherds Yet it is true they were present at the ordination of Matthias Acts 1. and the seven Deacons Acts 6. but they only named or designed them but ordained them not however such a particular fact at first proveth not that it must be so alwaies no more then because the first Kings were chosen by the people therefore they must be so alwaies So that it seems to me that the Church militant is neither democraticall as governed by the people nor monarchicall by any one man but aristocraticall that is governed by some chiefe heads of the ministry Therefore the Pope can derive no such power from Peter as to be the head of the Church for Peter was never so constituted by Christ nor was ever so acknowledged by the rest of the Apostles for then they would never have contended who should be chiefe as they did Luke 22.24 Christ is only the head who is the head stone and the foundation of it Mat. 16.18 19 for though our Saviour said to Peter thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church yet he called him only Peter Aug. retract lib. 1. cap. 22. Cypr. lib. de unit eccles not Petra the rock for that was Christ for all the Apostles were endued with the same power which Peter had John 20.22 when Christ said to them receive the Holy Ghost whosoever sins ye remit they are remitted Nor can the Pope challenge succession from Peter who was Bishop of Antioch not of Rome as some write But the Scripture saith that the Jewes were especially Peters charge Gal. 2.7 who were all banished from Rome by Claudius Acts 18.2 and so Peter had but little to do there or if he were Bishop there yet the Pope cannot be his successor properly Amb. de incarn cap. 5. if he succeed him not in faith and doctrine for faith is the Churches foundation much lesse can he pretend to be Christs Vicar any more then any other Bishop who may be said to be vice Christi in the stead of Christ to wooe men to be reconciled to God Conc. Nic. can 6. Cypr. Ep. ad Papas 41.58 when he was at the best he was allowed to be but one of the Patriarchs nor called by the ancient Fathers but only brother colleague or fellow Bishop But had they taken him for Christs Vicar or the head of the Church
years after Meses Acts 7.27 It is true the Scripture saith he was learned in all the learning of the Aegyptians but their learning consisted rather in the hieroglyphick emblems then in letters And though there were Magicians and wise men among them before Josephs time Psal 105.21 Gen. 41.8 yet they are said to learn wisedome of Joseph and might also of the Patriarchs being in Aegypt four hundred years who had by tradition the sciences from Sheth which afterward might be called the learning of the Aegyptians who at that time had the Israelites in bondage and so took the name of learning to themselves But these books of Moses are most clearly divine and authentick declaring an history from the Creation for two thousand years forward with excellent revelation of divine oracles which teach men to know the true God 3. They be the word of God because it treateth of those works which are proper only to God and of which none can give evidence but the spirit of God and such as are inspired therewith As of the creation of the world the preservation and destruction of it the restauration of it again the qualifying of the Church with divine Oracles and religious services typicall and spirituall morall ceremoniall judiciall honouring it with unparalleld miracles declaring mans eternall redemption and by prophecies of the state of the Church to the worlds end Mathe. This proofe being taken only from Scripture will not suffice some who beleeve them not for their own sakes Phila. It is true such therefore may be confirmed of the truth of them from prophane writers who testifie of their truth and antiquity if they had rather beleeve such then the Scriptures themselves the Fathers or Ecclesiastick writers For many prophane Authors attest what is written in them as Homer and Plato and others Homer Plato Ovid. Hieron Aegypt Berosus Epolemus Plut. in l. ratio brutorum Vid Euseb l. 9. c. 34. de prop. Evangel Lactan. l. 4. c. 6. speak of the Creation others of the long lives of the Patriarchs as Ephorus and Alexander the historian before the flood others of the drowning of the world others of the Tower of Babel as Alydenus so Damascenus of Abrahams travels Plutarch of Noahs Dove so Pliny of Moses miracles Diodorus Siculus of Moses and Strabo with much reverence as well as Dionys Longinus The Sybils prophecied of mans Redeemer Suetonius in the life of Nero speaks of Christs miracles and Pliny of the wise mens star Macrobius of Herods massacring the infants of Bethelem Mathe. All this proves only the historicall part to be true Phila. If we beleeve the history to be a divine truth we cannot well doubt of the doctrinall part being interserted one with another and both of them equally attested by divine miracles both of Moses the Prophets and Christ and his Apostles which miracles being from the divine power would never have been produced to attest false doctrines in Scriptures therefore the Scriptures in doctrine as well as in history is the word of God But beside the rare modification of them sheweth them no lesse For though they transcend reason yet they deliver nothing contrary to right and pure reason nor any thing contrary in nature though things above nature Again the doctrinal part of them is agreeable to the nature of God is who Goodness Righteousnesse Love and Truth and Holinesse yea they discover to man all his secret corruptions which is the property only of God to do nor doth it in any thing contradict it selfe being rightly understood though written by divers men in divers ages and therfore surely were indited by that one eternall Spirit who is Unity in Verity as wel as Unity in Trinity Farther it shews man a way to be saved from sin and damnation without annihilating the Justice of God or making his mercy degenerate into fond pitty for want of satisfaction to his justice and this surpasseth the wisedome of Angels and men yea the effects of it are divine for it brings rest to a troubled mind which no book else can do and satisfieth mans knowledge in things worthy of faith and affords as much and more reason why we should beleeve them then any book beside Therefore the wisest and soberest men of all ages have consented to it and thousands of godly Martyrs have sealed it with their pious lives and constant deaths Vid. Martyrol Mathe. I pray give me some proofe that the Scriptures have as much reason and more to be beleeved then other writings Phila. 1. Because we can find no just exception against the Writers in regard of their abilities or their integrities and upon the same ground we beleeve all other Historiographers But if you say you know not whether those are the Authors of the books that are entitled to them as Moses and Paul I say you have as much reason to beleeve that as that any ancient writer is the Author of his own book 2. We may rather and ought rather to beleeve them then others not only because of the excellency of their matter as I said before but also because the Authors of them had no selfe interest in writing these books as either of gain or glory favor or the friendship of men nay they were content with labor and travell poverty and persecutions scorns and infamy misery and death Therefore certainly they be the Word of God Cyril 10. and so to be beleeved To call the Authors of them into question were to outdo Julian the Apostate who would not deny that Luc. Philo. and scoffing Lucian who did not deny Paul to be the Author of the second Epistle to the Corinthians twelfth chapter though he scoffs at his professed extasie Indeed they may challenge as much beleefe of their authors in this point as any writing both because they have been so successively delivered continually so mentioned and generally so acknowledged by all parties Mathe. Doth God declare himselfe in all the books of Scripture alike Phila. No but in some more historically as in the five books of Moses In some more my stically as in the Prophets In some more clearly as in the New Testament but in all instructively both for faith and manners perfectly and sufficiently Mathe. Why are some called Canonicall and some Apocryphall books Phila. They are called Canonicall which are the rule of faith and manners namely for us to beleeve and practice and they are numbred by the Church to begin with Genesis and to end with the Prophet Malachy for the Old Testament And the New Testament begins with St Matthew and ends with the Revelation of St John And all these are the subject of our faith but not all for our practice Mathe. Why so Phila. Because many precepts in it are temporall as the Ceremoniall Law some for the Jewes particular state only as the Judiciall Lawes the equity whereof we may observe though not according to the letter as we are bound to observe the
the beginning made heaven and earth Mathe. Why may not one think that this world came by a revolution of things or else by some fatall necessity or else by chance Phila. Because there is no reason to ground such thoughts upon for till something was made out of nothing by creation there were no things to be the subject of revolution or if there were yet revolution runneth to confusion without a disposer to order those things Nor by fatall necessity for who should determine or impose that fatality but God who hath done what he pleased both in heaven and in earth and for whose pleasure all things are and were created Rev. 4. ult Nor did the world come by chance for no man can impute erection or making things to chance but rather destruction as death not birth Every house is builded by some man but he that made all things is God Heb. 3.4 For God first made the common matter of all things included in the first words of Moses Gen. 2.2 In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth and the Earth was without form and void which the Poets called Chaos and the Philosophers The first matter Chehn Vabobu This was made by the effective word of God who is Being it selfe Heb. 11.3 who gave this fusion by his word which Chaos or fusion had no power in it selfe to produce any thing no more then an egge can make it selfe a chick without some heat added thereunto Therefore the Spirit of God moved or coured on the waters Gen. 1.3 who by its vertue made a perfect digestion of this heape bringing that into act which was before only in possibility by giving it life and form as an Hen by sitting on an egge produceth a living creature Omnia sub uno igne genita sunt Trisme For as he first made the universall matter so next he made out of that first things more generall as the elements then things more imperfect as things without life before things with life that the things that had life might feed on them which had not as beasts on the herbs and Adam on the fruits Mathe. What did God make first Phila. The Mahometans say the first thing that God made was a pen A simple conceit it may be their Prophet put in that to make them beleeve God have him a transcript of his mind for them This pen surely was his wisedome and power by which he did expresse his mind by his works and his first work was light not to give him light with whom is no darknesse but to give light to his works that they reflecting one upon the other might all glorifie him whose light is the life of men John 1. By this light contracting or dilating it selfe the evening and morning was measured till God on the fourth day made the light to know its center the Sun as he did make every herb before it grew in their center the earth Gen. 2.5 From whence come such divers occult qualities though many of them grew upon one turfe Mathe. When were the Angels created and in what numbers Phila. Their number no doubt is innumerable as Dan. 7.10 a thousand times ten thousand ministred to God And they were no doubt created with the third heavens Philo in Peri-Cosmo Job their habitation and that was made the first day Gen. 1.1 And therefore Job cals them the morning stars and the sons of God shouting for joy at the beginning And the Apostle cals them Angels of light 1 Cor. 12. And of these no doubt some were superiour some inferiour as may be perceived by their severall names in Scripture Isa 6.2 Gen. 3.25 1 Thes 4.16 Colos 1.16 Seraphims Cherubins Archangels Angels Thrones Principalities Powers Dominions none of which he made to help him in creating the world as Simon Magus and Cerinthus and other hereticks have taught and so brought in the worshipping of Angels confuted by St Paul Col. 2.18 But surely God made them the first witnesses of his works and to administer to the Church of God and hath imploied them in the highest matters of the Church except in matters of his own prerogative viz. the justification and sanctification and the donation of grace and the like And so the Law was given by the ministration of Angels Gal. 3.49 Dan. 12.1 Zach. 12.1 Drusius Zeza in Rev. 1.4 and Michael the Archangel stands for the Jewes Dan. 10.21 And Zachary tels us there were seven eies set upon one stone i. some say seven spirits watching and guarding the new Temple of which Zorobabel laid the first stone So Gabriel is sent to instruct Daniel in the Vision and to Zacharias about John Baptists birth Luke 1. and to the blessed Virgin Mary concerning Christs conception and birth So Raphael accompanied Tobias and Jerechmiel instructs Esdras Tobit 5.4 These were elect Angels not only by predestination but eminence Mathe. But all the Angels continued not in their created estate how came that Phila. In their fall appeared first the effect of Gods foreknowledge and decree for many of them kept not their first estate and so brought in the first mutability Their sin was pride rebellion and envy Pride in seeking to stand by their own created perfection Heb. 1.6 without dependency on the grace of the second person Col. 1.15 whom they were to worship as Gods first born The chiefe of these is shadowed out in Scripture under the name of Lucifer and his glory by Nebuchadnezzer and the King of Tyrus Isa 14.12 He drew to his faction many others who liked not the said dependency Zanc. de laps Angel And to this they were moved by envy say some finding either by diligent inspection into Gods work or else by revelation that Gods first born would be a medium of uniting a more inferiour creature then an Angell to himselfe 1 Tim. 3.16 seen of Angels and that all the Angels of God must worship that glorious Union Upon this they fall into rebellion against whom stood up Michael and his Angels and by the power of the highest drove them down to these lower regions where they are reserved in chains of darknesse in a dim and uncomfortable knowledge of God against the judgement of the great day In the mean time he ruleth as a Prince in the aire especially in the hearts of the disobedient for whom is prepared the blacknesse of darknesse for ever Mathe. How do you gather that this was their sin Phila. Because he not only continueth in the same but also hath endeavoured to draw men into the same sins of pride envy and rebellion as our first parents to be as gods and to envy to God their obedience and to rebell against Gods commandement Beside we see that he hath alwaies kept up the same sin among men by making men to set up Idolatry some to aspire to be worshipped and called Elohim or Lords some to debase God to the
themselves chosen without the Emperours consent by the votes of the Clergy and people of Rome and that Boniface the third had got the title of universall Bishop they began to break out into strange opinions and manners as that the Chair of Rome was infallible as you see in Pope Agatho his decree and excommunicating Emperours and suffering them to kisse his feet as did Pope Constantine the first and others Condemning Priests marriage and setting up the the service of the Church in Latine as did Nicolaus the first and that whatsoever the Church of Rome appointed should be perpetually observed as did Stephanus the fifth and setting up the Masse Purgatory Pilgrimages adoration of images invocation of Saints and transubstantiation and setting themselves above generall Councils in determinations of faith so that no decree or Canon could passe without the Popes approbation They getting thus aloft suppressed all that withstood their tenets From hence it came that the true Religion became eclipsed yet some God raised up in every age who wrote against both their pride and errors though by reason of the over ruling power of the Church of Rome they could not so plainly appear as in the time of Luther and afterwards For Basilius Magnus writes to the Bishops of the West that if they held themselves to be the head yet they could not say to the feet Bas transmar Ep. 77. About the 4th century of years I have no need of you which plainly reproved the Popes usurping supremacy as well as do the Protestants Gregory Nyssâ—n wrote against Pilgrimages to Jerusalem Mount Olivet and Bethelem saying that Pilgrimages from carnall lusts to the righteousnesse of God is acceptable to him Hist Magd. cent 4. cap. 10. and not pilgrimages from Cappadocia to Palestina and that no rewards will be given in the life to come but for such things which are done by the command of God so the Protestants hold also So Hilarius the Bishop of Arls opposed Leo Bishop of Rome by acknowledging that the Bishop of Rome had no dominion over the Churches of France For which though they accused him as a usurper yet he nothing regarded the Popes curses but went to Rome Leo ad Gal. Epis Ep. 77. 89. and to the Popes face maintained that Christ did not appoint Peter to be head over the rest of the Apostles nor had the Pope from Peter any such power so hold the Protestants So the Councill of Constantinople called by the Emperour Constantinus Copronymus deposed and excommunicated Germanus the Patriarch of that City for allowing the worshipping of images which sin also the Protestants abhor Serenus the Bishop of Marsieles in France brake down all images in the Church of his Diocesse more then 1000. yeers past so the Protestants So Albertus Gallus and Clement and Sampson Scotish men said Hist Magd. cent 8. cap. 10. that the Pope of Rome was the author of lies a disturber of the Christian peace a corrupter and a deceiver of the people and for this suffered bonds and imprisonment in France by the procurement of Pope Zacharias So the Protestants hold So Claudius Thurinensis cast down images and abolished the worshipping of the crosse out of his Diocesse of Thurin by Piedmont and said they might as well worship the Asse upon which Christ did ride and said that he was not to be accounted an Apostolike Bishop that sate in the Apostolike Chair but he that performed the Apostolike Office So think the Protestants Theophilactus Bishop of Bulgaria writ that Antichrist would spring up in the decay of the Roman Empire and called the marriage of Priests honourable and a step to Church government So held St Paul 1 Tim. 3.4 5. So the Protestants hold Berengarius a Deacon at Argiers 1100. writ against the popish opinion of transubstantiation or conversion of the bread and wine in the Sacrament into the very body and blood of Christ But he following the opinion of Augustine and Joannes Scotus he was condemned unheard by a Councill called at Rome by Pope Leo the ninth for an heretick Whose opinion the Protestants also do hold Radulphus Patriarch of Antiochia refused to be subject to the Pope of Rome saying that Antiochia was the ancient Chair of St Peter and therefore had a prerogative above Rome So think the Protestants if St Peters being Bishop of a place can give prerogative Arnulphus in his preaching â—â—us Tripart much reproved the Roman Clergy for their lewd lives of the number of holy daies spent rather in lawlesse pleasures then devotions and against the number of begging Fryers and the unchast behaviour of Church-men He was drowned by them in the night as is reported About this time sprung up Waldus of whom you have heard formerly His opinions be these following 1. That the Scriptures are only to be beleeved in matters of faith and contain all things necessary for faith and manners 2. That Christ is the only Mediator and that Saints are not to be invoked 3. He held traditions not necessary to salvation and denied Purgatory and Masses sung for the dead 4. That constrained fast daies and making difference of meats superfluous holy daies variety of superstitious orders of Priests and Monks Friers and Nuns hallowing of creatures vowes and also pilgrims and humane ceremonies were to be abolished and that no degrees should be received into the Church but Bishops Priests and Deacons 5. They denied the Popes supremacy over other Churches States and Governments 6. That the Church of Rome is spiritual Babylon and the Pope Antichrist and rejected the Popes pardons and allowed the marriages of Priests 7. And that they that hear the true word of God and beleeve it are the true Church 8. And that the Communion was to be eaten and not reserved for shew or worship For which opinions they endured persecutions of Pope Alexander the third who excited all Christian Princes to persecute them with fire and sword all which the Protestants hold for which they also have been persecuted as shall appear Hildebertus also abhorred the pride of Rome and said that Rome if it had no Rulers or at least such as did not violate the faith Bernard Abbot of Claravell held free justification by Christs merits and thought that all Christian people had conspired against Christ and that those were the chiefe persecutors that had the highest places in the Church So thought Protestants Nichetes Bishop of Nicomedia held against Anselmus Bishop of Havelburgh that the Pope was not the principall Bishop and that the power of binding and loosing was not given to Peter but also to all the rest of the Apostles even as they all received graces alike on the day of Pentecost Act 2. So hold the Protestants About 1300. yeers after Christ 1300. true Religion began to be much darkened by schoole disputations by many that followed school disputations and Peter Lombards Sentences as Albertus Magnus Aquinas Alexander de Ales and Scotus
followers accounted him the Son of God that was to come to judge the world and whosoever obeieth not his doctrine shall be rooted out and that their Family of Love shall possesse the earth and their posterity shall remain for ever He made himselfe a greater light then Christ and said that in his light Christ was perfected and that he was codeified in God and God hominified in him and this they count the everlasting Gospell spoken of Rev. 11.15 They said the speech of Christ was made good in H.N. I must walk to day and to morrow Luke 13.32 and the third day I shall be perfected that is by to day is meant the time of Christ by to morrow the time of the Romish Religion and by the third day the time of H.N. and his Family If you demand how this Sect came into England I answer by those that translated the book of David George called the Wonder Book and H. N. his book called the Gospell of the Kingdome So did one Christopher Viret a Joiner in Southwark in Queen Maries daies translated some of them out of Dutch into English If you desire to know more of their blasphemous and abominable errors you may read their confession set down by Mr Knewstub and Henock Claphams book Mr Knewstub Conf. called the error of the right hand and of the left They be made up of many heresies their conversation is full of uncleannesse they partake with the old Adamites of whom St Augustine writeth who in their Conventicles or Paradice made warm by stoves they exercise the rites of their religion in praying hearing of sermons Lamb. Horten. p. 53. Gaftius p. 222. and receiving the Communion all naked both men and women Some of these have begun to practice their naked truth as they call it here in England since the year 1642. Mathe. But it may be Sir I shall not find these books and so shall not be able to discover them when they speake and therefore I pray tell me some of their errors which you can remember Phil. They say every one of their congregation is as perfect as Christ Familists opinions or else he is a devill the latter part whereof I do believe Also that it is lawfull to do whatsoever the higher power commands though it be against Gods command Herein they perform blind obedience like Papists and the Jesuits Novices If a man do so how doth he forsake his father and mother for Christ Or why said the Apostles to the higher powers that it was more fit to obey God then man So they affirm that in saying God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost we acknowledge three Gods not perceiving we call them so because they are all but one God in essence 1 John 5.7 though three distinct persons Here they smell of the old heresie of Noetians that held there was but one person in the Godhead as the Socinians do now They say there is no other heaven nor hell than in this world among us What place then is that to which Christ is gone before to prepare for us or that fire foretold of Christ into which wicked men must depart So that they are not bound to give alms but to their own Sect yet St Paul saith do good to all So that there ought to be no contrary both to the Law and Gospell practice in all ages that there was a world before Adams time this is to be wise above what is written So that they ought not to bury their dead because it is said let the dead bury their dead Mat. 8.22 which he spake not as to have the dead neglected nor despising those that did that charitable work but to warn him that he out of too much care of worldly ceremonies neglect not the blessed state of life to which Christ called him saying follow me Also that they need not say Davids praiers because they have no sin but St John saith 1 John such deceive themselves and the truth is not in them But farther they have blasphemous opinions concerning God as that God hath no other Deity in himselfe but such as men partake of in this life 2 Pet. 1.4 Indeed we are said to partake of the divine nature but that is not by the participation of equality but of quality both of grace and glory not of the divine essence but the holy disposition or conditions thereof So they hold that Christ is not a person God and man but an estate or condition in men common to them only who have received the doctrine of Henry Nicholas So they say that Adam was all that God was and God all that Adam was as if God communicated his whole essence to Adam as to Christ which no man can well beleeve Again they would have none baptized till they be thirty yeers old Indeed Christ was not nor could not till there was one sent to baptize namely John the Baptist They say there was no truth preached since the Apostles times yes even that which they have often heard but perverted because they did not entertain it in a love thereof and so God hath given them up to delusions So they affirm that the resurrection of the body is only a rising from sin and wickednesse But St John tels us of another Rev. 20.5 6. Rev. 20.6 as well as St Paul in the 1 Cor. 15. They account marriage whoredome where the parties married have not true faith Yet surely it is more holy then the copulation of H. N. with the three women in his house clothed all alike and called his Wife Sister and Cousin which Cousin falling sick confessed that he had made unlawfull use of her body and made her beleeve she should never die The Governor hearing of it came to apprehend him but the unclean bird was fled so the Governor seized on his nest in the yeer 1556. even when H. N. was fifty seven yeers of age Knewstub p. 15.27 older than wiser As for their high conceits of H. N. that he could no more erre then Christ and of their great opinions of their illuminated elders I refer you to authors Knewstub p. 15.27 Mathe. Who else hath disturbed the Protestant Church Phila. The Antinomians so called Antinomians because they hold that there is no use of the Law under the Gospel Some say the first author of this Sect was one John Agricola of Isleby who set forth his opinions 1535. But the first that appeared here was John Eaton Curate of St Katherine Colemans Parish in London He writ the book called the Hony-comb wherein he endeavors to prove that God does not nor cannot see any sin in justified people That he seeth no sin to condemn them for is most true as Num. 23.21 He beheld no iniquity in Jacob to bring him under the curse yet he saw enough in Israel to punish them in the wildernesse To think otherwise is to take part with the
Chrysostom one of the Ministers of Antioch was sent for by Arcadius the Emperour to succeed Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople and he was chosen by the full consent of the Clergy and Laietie yet none of them laied hands on him but Theophilus Archbishop of Alexandria Socrat. lib. â— cap. 12. nor doth the fourteenth of the Acts from the Greek word prove any such thing for the word though by some strained will not properly signifie the holding up of hands in election but rather an institution of one to an office or if it did yet is there no mention made in that Chapter of such gesture used by any except Paul and Barnabas Acts 14.23 nor doth that place of Timothy 1 Tim. 4.14 which only text nameth Presbyterie in the New Testament where it is said Timothy had the hands of the Presbyterie laied upon him prove any such association of Presbyters and Lay-men with the Apostle For first 2 Tim. 1.6 if Timothy were at that time made an Elder or Bishop sure it was not by Lay-Elders for the lesse cannot blesse the greater If preaching Elders shall be understood in the word Presbyterie then Presbyters ordained Presbyters or Bishops which we cannot find exemplified in the new Testament What then was the Presbyterie here Chrysostome tels us they were not Elders Chrys hom 13. in 1. Tim. 4. Hiâ—â—on in 1 Tim. 4. but Bishops And for the word Presbyterie Jerome expounds it for the office that Timothy was called to viz. of a Bishop So doth Primasius and Haymo and Lyra say that Presbyterium is the dignity of an Elder or Bishop yea Calvin saith as much upon that place of Timothy Theodor. in 1 Tim. Theoph. in 1 Tim. Calv. Instit l. 4. c. 3. S. 16. yea Ambrose Theodoret and Theophylact before him and if so the sense must be thus as Calvin gives it Stir up the gift of God that is in thee by laying on of my hands not of others as if he had said look that the grace be not in vain which thou receivedst by imposition of hands when I created thee an Elder and so confesseth that he understandeth not 1 Tim. 4.14 to intend by Presbyterie the Colledge of Presbyters but only the ordering of Timothy to become an Elder Indeed that the Presbyterie laied hands on Timothy together with St Paul no place doth evidently shew and in that very place 1 Tim. 4.14 the word hath you see a divers signification but that St Paul himselfe alone did it that place of 2 Tim. 1.6 clearly sheweth whose hands alone were sufficient without the hands of the others to give one a degree above themselves namely to make Timothy an Evangelist to accompany Paul in his travelling or to make him a Bishop which was of no effect and of as little to make him an Elder or Presbyter because the lesse must be blessed of the greater namely such as had the grace of imposition of hands committed to them which Presbyters had not Therefore the Presbyterie spoken of 1 Tim. 4.14 if a number of men yet must be such as had Apostolike grace Theodor. in 1 Tim. 4. as saith Theodoret and if they had Apostolike grace yet could they not convey it without the Apostles hands for though God bestowed the spirit upon others as well as upon them as on the 70 disciples Aug. in Epist Joh. tract 2. and the rest Acts 1.15 as St Aug. witnesseth yet we read not any of them gave the Holy Ghost by laying on of hands but the Apostles Therefore we read of the seven Deacons were men full of the Holy Ghost before they were chosen Acts â— 3 and yet after that the Apostles had laied hands on them and that Philip preached and baptized at Samaria Chrys hom 18. in cap. 8. yet he laied hands on none of them but they received the Holy Ghost afterward by Peter and John Acts 8.15 because this was peculiar to the Apostles Mathe. Why did the Apostles use imposition of hands in their instituting Pastours and Teachers in the Church being it was an old ceremony among the Jewes Phil. It was an old ceremony indeed used in making praiers for any As Jacob did Gen. 48. in blessing the children of Joseph So Moses on Ioshua Num. 27. So on the heads of their sacrifices Levit. 13.4 So in accusation the Elders laid their hands upon Susanna And Christ did not reject it Mark 10. he laied his hands on children when he blessed them and Mark 6. on the sick when he cured them Now the Apostle Mark 16. receiving it from their masters example and warrant use the same ceremony in their dispensations as Paul on the father of Publius Acts 28. Ananias on Paul that he might receive sight Acts 9. So when the seven were chosen Acts 6. and Paul and Barnabas separated Acts 13. they had the hands of the Prophets laid on them So Paul on the Disciples that had not experience of the Holy Ghost Acts 19. laied his hands and made them Ministers of Ephesus Beza in Annot. act cap. 19. whereas yet were no godly assemblies to elect them nor Presbytery to join with him Mathe. What was the generall rule for elections and ordinations in the Apostles time Phila. We find three sorts 1. By the spirit 2. By lots 3. By voices Matthias was chosen by lot Acts 1. Paul and Barnabas by the spirit speaking by himselfe immediatly Acts 13. Timothy was designed by the spirit speaking in the Prophets who after received imposition of hands from St Paul By voices and suffrages I find some propounded Acts 6. but not ordained save by the Apostles and such to whom they gave Apostolike power as to Timothy and Titus Mathe. What need was there then of imposition of hands if chosen by the spirit or by lot guided by the spirit Phila. As a testimony that they were so ordained as the spirit had appointed So Barnabas and Saul Acts 13. with fasting and prayer were separated to convert the Gentiles not upon their own heads but by a solemn way they were commended to the grace of God for prospering the work For imposition of hands is not alwaies taken for ordination to be an Elder but also for a commending of a man by praier to the work propounded and so the Prophets might well join with St Paul in praier over Timothy 1 Tim. 4.14 Mathe. But we find others joined with the Apostles in deciding doubts of faith as Acts 15.6 So in delivering some up to Satan 1 Cor. 5. Phila. For the doubts in a point of faith of that concernment the Apostles no doubt were content that the professors in Jerusalem should come together but for the determination we find none medling in that Councill but Peter by way of advice ver 7. and James the Bishop of Jerusalem giving the definitive sentence ver 19. my sentence is that you trouble not the Gentiles about circumcision c. And for delivering up to Satan you may see
harm may be done by rash suspension from the Sacrament or excommunication from Christian societie nor lesse harm by facile and easie absolution Therefore though a Priest hath power to denie the Sacrament upon good grounds yet not to excommunicate from all society in the Church without the authority of his superiour nor was it wont that one should be received again to the Sacrament without the hand of the Superiour and Clergy was laied upon his head Cyp. l. 3. Ep. 16. in token of reconcilement So Bishops were wont to give account to Synods of their excommunicating men Conc. Nic. Can. 5. Concil Sardcens Can. 14. And for absolution of Schismaticks it is true the people have been called together to be satisfied in their repentance not to confirm the sentence but to satisfie their conscience in the absolution and to prevent schisms afterward they observing how the party was stricken with fear and recovered with shame but this was no proofe of a Lay Presbytery Mathe. What was then the Presbytery mentioned by St Paul Phila. It is but once mentioned in all the New Testament as in the 1 of Tim. 4.14 which I have proved to be only spirituall men as Pastours and Teachers called Elders as at Jerusalem fifteen years after Christs ascension were Apostles and Elders Acts 15. So at Antioch were Prophets and Teachers as Barnabas Simeon Lucius Manahen Saul and Mark and others Acts 13. which the Apostles placed in Cities where they had planted the Gospell This was done for the defence of beleevers against seducers that crept into houses and subverted many by teaching things that they ought not for filthy lucres sake 2 Tim. 3. And that those ruling Elders were Lay Judges that Paul speaks of it plainly appeareth to the contrary for the Apostle there speaks of maintenance allowed out of the Church stock which I never heard or read was given to any Lay ruler and certainly if St Paul was loath to have the Church burdened with a widow 1 Tim. 5. so long as her own kindred could maintain her would lesse put the charge of a Lay Judge upon it The Governors in the Apostles times were moderators of dissentions 1 Cor. 6.4 between party and party by their gifts of wisedome discretion and judgement by-which decision of controversies the slander of the Gospell might be prevented in their going to law before Magistrates who were Infidels 1 Cor. 6.1 But beside these I find no Lay rulers to meddle in Ecclesiasticall affairs 1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I mean common people called Lay from the Greek word that signifieth people or secular men but only Presbyters i. Priests in a short speaking Beside we find that God hath alwaies governed his Church by Regall Propheticall or Sacerdotall jurisdiction therefore Christ being all these in himselfe governeth his Church so by Magistrates Teachers and Pastors Now the Lay Elder is neither of these for they are no Prophets because they have no charge of his word nor have they Priestly power in regard of sins and Sacraments as Jam. 5.14 15. If any be sick let him send for the Elders of the Church who shall pray and annoint him with oile and his sins shall be forgiven him These Elders were not Lay men but such to whom was committed the gift of healing and absolution Nor have they the Regall power for then the Magistrate must be subject to them not they to him or if they had it can last no longer than when the Magistrate is a Christian So that I see not how Lay Elders should be governors of the Church but they must be Magistrates or Ministers Mathe. If there be no Christian Magistrates must then the Ministers take all the power of government Phila. They may do as was done in the Primitive times when the Church was not protected by the civill sword but rather persecuted Mathe. But what if they grow Hereticks or prove pernicious Phila. Then the whole may avoid the unsound for in such cases the people have power of desertion but not of coercion they may avoid or decline but not punish their Pastors as John 10. my sheep know my voice but strangers they will not follow So Rom. 16. mark them that cause divisions and avoid them for no doubt where the publike State is not Christian Cyp. l. 10. Ep. 4 the people have power to chuse a good Pastor and refuse a bad one Mathe. What Presbytery is that which the ancient Fathers do so often speak of in their writings Phila. First you must know that the Scriptures speak of three degrees in the Church and so do the Catholike Fathers viz. of Deacons Elders or Presbyters and Bishops and when they speak of a Presbytery they mean a company consisting of these as if you read them you shall find in Ignatius Jerom in Tit. 1. Amb. in 1 Tim. 5. Ignat. ad Trallianos Magnes Philad Smyrn Antioch Aug. de civit dei l. 20. c. 9. in Psal 106. Isid Originum lib. 7. Tertul. in Apolog. In his tract of flight in the time of persecution And Aug. speaking of seats of Church Governors shewes plainly that Lay men had not judgement seats in the Church for who governed the Church he tels us in Psal 106. they that sate at the stern as himselfe did Mathe. How came Bishops to be above the Presbyters Phila. Christ made a difference in the degrees of Apostles and disciples so did the Apostles of Bishops and Presbyters for though at first both the Bishop Presbyter and Deacon were all included in the Apostles yet as they found reason to lead them to make Deacons Acts 6.3 and also Presbyters in severall places to keep up the Gospel which they had planted as there were Presbyters at Ephesus Acts 20. and also among the converted Jewes 1 Pet. 5. where St Peter calleth himselfe a fellow Presbyter i. in care and pains not in office and degree 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so the equality of Presbyters breeding faction among the people they were forced to commit the care of the Church planted to some choice person who might oversee the flock as Pastor of the place and the rest to be his helpers in dispersing the word and advising in the Church government and to these were committed ordination and imposition of hands and the keies not to the Presbyters which the Fathers call Episcopall power This may be seen by Paul's Epistles to Timothy and Titus 1 Tim. 1.2 So c. 5.22 Tit. 1.5 and how they kept the keies to themselves may be collected from the 2 Thes 3. where he bids the Presbyters only note him by a letter that would not obey his words but the use or sparing of the rod he keeps to himselfe 1 Cor. 4. 2 Cor. 12.13 and delivers it to those no doubt whom he made overseers or Bishops like themselves who were also called Bishops Cyp. l. 3. Ep. 9. Amb. in Eph. 4. Epiph. cont
extinguished because the party offended reapeth as much benefit as if the fault had never been committed but if the offended shall accept only of a bare acknowledgement of a fault or a promise of amends that cannot be pleaded for satisfaction to justifie or if the fault be of so high a nature that no sufficient amends can be made there is no means for the offender to be justified otherwise if the party offended have made full satisfaction then is he free from punishment and to be reputed blamelesse Now this satisfaction is made by doing or suffering that which saving the fault is not due And this may be done by the offender himselfe or by another for him The offender himselfe may plead satisfaction if he can prove that the plaintiff hath committed as great a fault against himselfe But satisfaction made by another is when the doing or suffering by another is accepted for the doing or suffering of the offender himselfe and this may satisfie for the offender better then he can satisfie for himselfe oftentimes So a man cannot satisfie God for his offence by any act of his own because his best righteousnesse is imperfect and sinfull but being justified by anothers satisfaction he is made just by the justice of another that is by the imputation of the others merit though that merit be not reputed as done by the offender but accepted for him no more then the offenders sin can be reputed his that justified him though it may be imputed to him Now the effect of justification is pardon which is the remitting of punishment deserved by an offence yet it is not any essentiall part of justification but only a consequent or contingent effect thereof Now justification is before God or man that before man you may apprehend by what hath been said that before God is thus to be considered God is infinitely just sinne is a transgression of his infinite will and wisdome which is the rule of justice the punishment due to this sin is everlasting torments in hell therefore to be justified before God is to be cleered in his sight from the guilt of sin and to be absolved from that punishment which in divine justice is due to sin and this none can avoid unlesse he can plead the fulfilling of the law or that which is proportionable thereto we cannot plead the fulfilling of the Law for the most righteous man doth transgresse it Luke 1. sine querela non sine culpa Zachary and his wife Elizabeth walked in the law blamelesse i. before men not God and there none can plead any formall or inherent righteousnesse of his own and if no man can be so justified by pleading his own righteousnesse then he must be justified by some other proportionable satisfaction to Gods justice namely by the righteousnesse of Christ Rom. 3.23 24 26. for it were a blemish to Gods justice to free a sinner from punishment without his justice be satisfied No man can do that if he offend but one tittle of the law nor free himselfe from everlasting punishment nor can he plead that he hath suffered any injury at Gods hand whereby he can claim acquittance from the least sin nor can any other meer creature make satisfaction for him that creature being sinite and Gods wrath infinite therefore he that justifieth man must not only be perfectly righteous himselfe but infinite also and Almighty and so no lesse then God Esa 63.1 2 3. Heb. 1.2 6. Again God being but one cannot properly be satisfied meerly by himselfe Gal. 3.20 for that were in a manner to forgive without satisfaction and to pardon without justification therefore the person that makes satisfaction must be not only God but some way differing from him and so inferiour to him Joh. 4.28 Now it would have puzled Angels and men to find out such an one God only hath revealed him in the Gospell namely Jesus Christ the only begotten son of God the second person in the most glorious Trinity 1 John 14.18 Rom. 3.24 by whom we are justified by his satisfaction and are made righteous before God by that righteousnesse which is formally in Christ alone Rom. 3.20 Phil. 3.8 9. 2 Cor. 5.21 This Jesus Christ that he might make full satisfaction for the sins of his elect did take upon himselfe the guilt of their sins Esa 53.12 1 Cor. 15.3 and assuming the nature of man into the person af his deity that so he was true God and true man a fit mediator between God and man and so by the power of his divine nature made full satisfaction in his humane nature Phil. 2.7 Heb. 2.14 and that by doing what we had and by suffering what we ought and our failings are perfected by his active obedience and punishment remitted by his passive and by both the whole man is justified both being imputed to us and accepted of God for us the one for that inherent righteousnesse which should have been in us and the other for that satisfaction that we should have made in our own persons for now God esteemeth us as free from originall and actuall sin Rom. 5.8 and from all sins of omission and commission 1 John 1.9 and therefore are esteemed as perfectly righteous and therefore free from all punishment for you are not to understand that by Christs sufferings we are freed from sin Rom. 4.25 by his active obedience made righteous but by both jointly For they cannot be separated no more then we can find a medium between a righteous man and him that is no sinner Now of this justification they alone doe partake who by faith lay hold of it and apply it to their selves by which they may know they are justified Another mark of a true Christian invisible is sanctification not of office as consecration but an holy quality of mind and disposition and renovation of spirit by which we put off the old conversation and put on the new man which after God is created in righteousnesse and true holinesse And by this means we come to walk worthy of our calling to holinesse 2 Tim. 1.9 which must be now as our professions are in the Commonwealth wherein every one desireth to excel by making his calling his business and to shew himself a work man that needeth not be ashamed This the Apostle cals glorification Rom. 8.30 because indeed grace is but glory initiated and glory is but grace consummated This is done when God is pleased to magnifie the power of his word in our hearts to sanctifie so throughly that our spirits soules and bodies may be blamelesse Of this many boast of it and the Papists nouzle them in it by saying that sanctification is incident to reprobates and that castawaies may partake of the renewing of the Holy Ghost But surely they may say as well that they are united to Christ how else can they partake of his spirit or can they be sanctified that have not his spirit or have they