his subjects who bears the same relation to a Master of a family school or society as the whole does to a part But say they if Magistrates as such have such an authority then all Magistrates in all Nations have the same power Then if we lived in Turkey we must receive the Alcoran and be worshippers of Mahomet if in Spatu be Papists as in Hen. 8. his daies sometimes Protestants as in Edw. 6. his daies c. Ans This is the very argument of the Papists in Calvino Turcismo l. 4. c. 10. and improved by Champnaeus But it s answered by Mason de Ministerio Anglicano l. 3. c. 5. And hereunto I further say That as all Magistrates in all Nations have power in matters of Religion so they have the same power but not the same skill to govern nor the same Rule to go by in governing as for instance ones Rule is his will another's is the Law and of those that are limitted by Laws some rule by some Laws others by other Laws different from them So 1. in matters of Religion Magistrates do rule according to the book delivered unto them some have only the book of Nature put into their hands and these have a faculty thereby given them to rule and order Religion according to that such hath the Turk and all unconverted Magistrates Some have the Book of the Old Testament delivered into their hands and those were sometimes to rule according to that So Deut. 17. 18. it is said that when the King sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom be shall write him a copy of the Law in a book out of that which is before the Priests and Levites and it shall be with him and he shall read therein all the daies of his life And in 2 Chron. 23. 11. it is said that they brought out the Kings son and put upon him the crown and gave him the Testimony and made him King c. Some have the book of the New Testament put into their hands and these are to order matters of Religion according to this such are all Christian Kings Princes and Governours Now whereas they would infer that therefore we must receive the ALCORAN be Papists and I know not what according to the sole will of our Governours whatever perswasion they be of This is not so for albeit whatsoever they enjoyn according or not contrariant to these Books be firm and inviolable yet whatsoever they determine without or against these Books is void so that the Turk hath not a stable and inviolable power given him to impose the ALCORAN and to enjoyn worship to Mahomet in as much as no such rule is given by the book of Nature delivered unto him Nature dictates no such thing and therefore such a thing must be given by God himself who is above Nature or else it must be acknowledged to be as it is indeed a meer Imposture The Kings of Israel had power given them to Rule by the Book of the Law in matters of Religion But they that did set up Idolatry contrary to the contents of that Book did abuse their power and in that regard their Injunctions were of no force The King of Spain hath the book of the New Testament put into his hands and consequently the moral part of the Old Testament but he permitting Idolatry and giving up his power into the Popes hands whose Vassal he becomes as all Popish Princes do he abuses this power If any other Prince does the like he is not to be followed therein He is neverthelesse passively to be obeyed that is a Christian-Subject is not to resist him but he is to submit to such punishment as he shall inflict upon him in as much as an errour in the understanding upon which proceeds the abuse of his power which is accidental does not make void his power which is essential to him and whereunto every soul is subject in foro externo The Spirit of God sayes in the same breath Fear God honour the King He who doth any thing by command from the King contrary to the command of God does not fear God and he that rebelleth or resisteth for it is all one the King upon any pretence whatsoever doth not honour the King but despise him yea and resist the Ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation Rom. 13. The same may be said of the Turks forbidding a man to believe in Christ or any thing of absolute necessity to salvation wherein he is not to be obeyed in as much as it is not a thing contrary to the Law of Nature but of the Institution of the God of Nature that we believe in God and in him whom he hath sent Jesus Christ his Son 2. Secondly they say that since our Saviour tells us that all power is given him in heaven and in earth if the Magistrates have any such power it is committed to them from the Lord Jesus Christ and written in the New Testament I answer That no power could be given to Christ which he had not before being God eternal and therefore we must say that all power was in Christ naturally and essentially But there 's a power given him which he had not but by gift dispensatorily as he is the Mediatour which is nothing else but a Rule which he observes in the salvation of men as a thing added to his essential power Now infidel Kings receive their power from Christs natural and essential power only being not bound to believe in Christ nor to observe the Rules he gives till revealed unto them but to observe the Law of Nature given in Paradise according to which they and their subjects infidels shall be judged Wherefore I hope they will not send us to find this in the New Testament Though they should I have a text for them there too Rom. 1. 19 20 21. Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them for God hath shewed it unto them Kings that believe receive their power not from Christs natural and essential power onely but from his dispensatorie power as he is Mediatour and great Lawgiver to his Church by which power he does not take away the former but establish it rather Let them shew me where he takes it away If they do they must shew me a contradiction to the words of the Apostle who saies Rom. 13. Let every soul be subject to the higher powers Oh but these were heathen Magistrates say they Whereunto I answer that if every soul must be subject to Heathen Magistrates much more then to those that believe in Christ who came not to destroy but to rectify and perfect the Law of Nature 3. The third thing that they say will fall to the ground upon what has been already spoken viz. That the Apostles themselves refused to be obedient to their Rulers Act. 4. 19 20. When they were commanded to forbear that which they judged to be a part of the worship of
himself and his Commonwealth with Religion and all Suppose then that he had nineteen parts on his side and only the twentieth part remained Idolaters were he to destroy that twentieth part no surely we neither think so nor ever said so The reason is because they were never yet converted they have not as yet Cognitionem Juris the ignorance whereof excuseth them and who knows but that they may be in due time converted The Question is Whether in case of revolt after conversion to Idolatry or the like and in case they remain obstinate going on to blaspheme the Church-censures may not reach them and the civil Sword over take them and cut them off that the infection spread no farther We answer that they may and this is Law in God Justin l. 2. Tit. 11. de Paginis sacrificâ—is Templis Qui post sanctum baptisma in errore paganâ—r manent ultimo supplicio plectunt Let those that ask baptisme remain in the errour of the Pagans be put to death but for those that are not yet baptized let them without delay take care that their children be baptized but let the elder first be taught the Scriptures according to the Canons and hereunto there is no such penalty annexed mean while all men are forbidden to assay any thing of Pagan superstition under pain of corporal torment and condemnation to the stanneries or perpetual banishment Lege Qui. ub supra There is a difference then betwixt a Heathen and one that is As a Heathen A Heathen ought not to be excommunicated for it is impossible nor punished with death for his Idolatry though some one that is As a Heathen that is one that hath been a Christian and becomes Heathen again may and hereby his conversion is not hindred for the Apostle to the Hebrews sayes That its impossible for such to be renewed by repentance Heb. 6. 6. In the next place they deny that the Kings Majesty hath the same power in causes Ecclesiastical that the Godly Kings had amongst the Jews for say they albeit the Kings of the Jews had power to punish-Idolaters and Blasphemers and some other transgressors of the then Law of God yet who tells them that the Magistrates under the Gospel-dispensation have such power hath the Lord Jesus said any such thing or if he has where is it writen nay where is it written from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the Revelation that Magistrates under the Gospell should have the same power in religious causes as those under the Law If the Judicial Law be a Rule for Magistrates under the Gospel to walk by then why must it be mangled in pieces by some sort of sinners with death and not cursers of parents man-stealers adulterers Sabbath-breakers which were so punishable by the Judicial Law I Answer That that place of the Prophet Esai 43. 23. is between the beginninh of Genesis and the end of the Revelation wherein it is said that Kings shall be h. e. under the Gospel Thy that is the Churches nursing fathers and Queens thy nursing mothers The Original is giving suck or nourishers Now she that gives milk and nourishment to a child will not suffer the least mote to be in it that may do the child hurt much lesse such things as may poyson it So it is with a Christian Magistrate It is not enough to see that the milk of the word be duly distributed to the people but also that blasphemers and idolaters to the poyson of Religion be rooted out To what purpose is it for him to defend her from rapine and violence from abroad as it is v. 26. if he leaves perdition and ruine at home And now whereas they say Why does the Magistrate punish Idolatry and Blasphemy with death and not cursing of father or mother man-stealing adultery Sabbath-breaking Answ Because Idolatry and Blasphemy are so punishable by the Law of Nature as well as by the Judicial Law of Moses Job 2. 9. Sayes Job's Wife to him Doest thou yet retain thine integrity curse God and die Whereby it seems that present death was the sure reward of blaspheming God And Job 31. 26. If sayes he I beheld the Sun when it shined or the Moon walking in brightnesse and my heart hath been secretly enticed or my mouth hath kissed my hand this also were an iniquity to be punished by the Judge for I should have denied the God that is above From whence it is evident that heathenish Idolatry is punishable by the Magistrate but how surely not with lesse then what is due to blasphemy which see here made a consequent of Idolatry The other sins mentioned in their objection are made capital by the Judicial Law alone which indeed is in most things practicable under the Gospel too if it seems necessary or expedient to the Magistrate and not otherwise only as for Sabbath breaking there can be none where there is no Sabbath binding nor has been since the abrogation of the Law Wherefore this their argument taken from things of different Natures thus jumbled together is as very a fallacy of many Interrogations as this is viz. Nonne Socrates Plato Aristoteles Petrus Bucephalus Leviathan sunt animalia rationalia For as some of these are animalia rationalia some not so some of those appertain to the Judicial Law some not some may be the subject of a positive Law under the Gospel if it seems good to the Law-giver some as namely Sabbath-breaking cannot because the Jewish day and the Jewish observation of it is abrogated Hereunto they add That the Kings of the Jews had advantages which we want to direct them in judgement as the standing Oracle the Vrim and Thummim extraordinary Prophets Therefore Ahab and others leaving these ran into various errours persecuted orthodox Prophets as Jeremy Michaia and Elijah Answ That our Adversaries even now confessed that the punishment of Idolaters Blasphemers and some other transgressors was written in plain precepts of the Mosaical Law for in answer to an Objection page 21. they have these words viz. But in answer we deny not but the Kings of the Jews had power to punish Idolaters and Blasphemers and some other transgressors of the then Law of God which power was given them of God and written in plain precepts in the Mosaical Law If they had power to punish these things then what these things were was notoriously known otherwise the punishment had been unjustly inflicted Why then do they and that almost in the same breath alledge the Urim and Thummim Oracle and Prophets to direct Judges in matter of Law and Jus universale which every man is bound to take notice of And for matter of fact Urim Thummim Oracle and Prophets were extraordinary wayes of discovery of this or of any thing else never to be made use of but when the thing could not otherwise be known and that in a matter of great moment too The ordinary way of discovering matter of fact was by witnesses or
THE Dew of Hermon Which fell upon the Hill of SION OR AN ANSWER To a Book entituled Sions groans for her distressed c. offered to the Kings Majesty Parliament and people Wherein is pretended to be proved by Scripture Reason and Authority of fifteen Ancients That equal protection under different perswasions is the undoubted right of Christian Liberty BUT Hereby confuted wherein the power and proceedings of the Kings Majesty and the Church are vindicated 2. Per. 1. 1 2 3. But there were false Prophets among the people as there shall be false Teachers among you by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of Jude 8. These filthy dreamers defile the flesh despise dominion and speak evil of dignities Jude 16. These are murmurers complainers Jude 19. These be they who separate themselves sensual having not the Spirit LONDON Printed for H. Robinson and are to be sold at the Sign of the Three Pigeons in Sr. Paul's Church-yard 1663. Imprimatur Geo. Stradling S. T. P. Rev. in Christo Pat. D. Gilb. Epise Lond. a Sac. domest Ex Aed Sab. 12. Feb. 1662. FOR Colonel R. ATKINS One of the Deputy Lieutenants of the County of GLOUCESTER SIR I Have perused the Pamphlet you left at my Lodging and according to your desire grounded upon the consideration of the advantages which seditious persons suck in things of this nature from the silence of the Orthodox given you my sense of it Which task if it prove satisfactory to any and particularly to render that Friend of yours and of your most accomplisht Lady's steddy who is yet balancing in her resolutions I shall put upon the account of favours done to SIR Your humble Servant H. S. THE CONTENTS Sect. 1. THe events of these times the same with those after the passion of Christ only those were meerly eventual these consequential Three Churches in three persons of one house The Golden Rule of our Saviour wrested by our Adversaries Fears and jealousies like those that caused the war causeless Sect. 2. Their Epistle dated the eighth day of the third moneth The vanity of such date evidenced in answer to three queries 1. What the moneths in Scripture were 2. By what names they were called 3. When they began And herein 1. What was the first moneth 2. When was the first day of that moneth What the Rabbies amongst these men understand by the first month Their affectation of singularity Sect. 3. How cheap the shedding of mens bloud was to them which now they would have prevented towards themselves They would have none but arbitrary government Of all they dislike Kingly most What is meant by the Harlot in the Apocalypse which they would have understood of the Pope only Simon Magus the Deceiver Those that work in his vertue and power Antichrists The Harlot like a Bird of prey The men of this generation compared to the Cast of Sacres that made the Eagle their quarry The Pope and they meet in the Antipodes The History of Stork Stubner and Muntzer Ring-leaders of the Fanaticks Their practises to deceive That they are Antichristian Their sacriledge and their pretext for it Sect. 4. The use of Musick in Churches Commanded in Scriture in every thing that tends to edification Musical Instruments whether wind or stringed and Chromatick Musick allowable not typical Those that are against the use of it under the New Testament would have it to be they know not what themselves And if any thing it is what we hold it to be Sect. 5. Vestments distinctions of persons serving and of services under the Gospel allowed by the Law of Moses and of Nature No Vestments but Vices reprehended in the Heathen in the New Testament The Druides sacrificed not only in white but under Oaks which by them were had in veneration and which the men of this generation seem to allow of in as much as upon all their Crowns and Scepters which they wore and bore they placed the Acorn instead of the Crosse a figure which the Devil cannot abide Of happy presage to us They confute themselves by condemning of us And in justifying themselves they justifie us a fortiori Nothing but order and decency in our Ceremonies Sect. 6. Bishops Timothy and Titus were Bishops so were the Angels of the seven Churches in the Apocalypse in the judgement of old Doctor Reynolds Doctor Usher and Grotius How the Bishops resemble the high Priests And the whole frame of Church-Government answers to the like order and distinction under the Old Testament A Scheme thereof drawn by Bishop Andrews The Ministers of the New Testament do succeed to Priests and Levites as the Lords day does to the Sahbath The Lords Prayer contains not only ancient forms in use among the Jews but also the very design of the Sacrifices under the Law The comparison made The Lords Prayer the first Liturgy The Jurisdiction of the Bishops proved 1. as to their power 2. as to the distribution of their power and both out of the New Testament Their right of sitting in Parliament asserted Sect. 7. Of Churches The lawfulnesse of them proved from the example of primitive Christians in the New Testament 2. Their conveniency proved 1. In respect of their capacity for the Diocesse and Parishes 2. In respect of their scituation in relation to the Diocesse and Parishes 3. In respect of their scituation of East and West Christians anciently adored towards the East Of the Church at Richlieu in France whose Altar stands at the West-end Of Covent-garden Church in London 4. Convenient for the scituation of parts within themselves They are Naves inversae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in them what Some built with a single Crosse some with a double and why The mark in Ezekiel 9. 4. was the Crosse and that proved not only from the figure of the Letter Tau which was anciently a Crosse but also that in all probability it must be so though it be set a mark or mark a mark and no more in our Translation The necessity of Churches proved No stumbling-block to the Jews or Gentiles Sect. 8. How they slander the good Laws of the Kindome The same thing they impute to us is applicable to themselves The Harlot in the Apocalypse why so called The integral parts of Antichrist Their fury and hypocrisy parallel'd by those in France English Scottizing c. Rebellion under pretence of Religion unwarrantable Sect. 9. Of Magistrates Their power is of God and how Religion the foundation of all Government proved by several arguments Answer to their arguments of receiving the Alcoran and becoming Papists in some cases A threefold book put into Magistrates hands An errour in Government which is accidental makes not void his power Their second argument answered their third argument answered their fourth answered their fifth answered What power the Church hath to decree Rites and Ceremonies Their argument taken from the ceasing of the Cross of Christ answered Their argument from the example of Gallio
spirit of contradiction carries men away that they dare confound things which the Spirit of God so manifestly distinguisheth de Imp. sum not circa sacra c. 11. And I more wonder that these men should say that there is not one word for them in the New Testament or that they should be set up by us as Antitypes of the high Priests under the Law No Christ is onely that Neverthelesse in regard of the distinction which was an Ecclesiastical thing among the Jewes I say that the Bishops do resemble the High Priests and the inferiour Clergy the other Priests For there were in this respect many High Priests at once of whom we read many to have been assembled together Mark 14. 1. every one of which was summus sacerdos istius Classis the High or chief Priest of that Rank These ranks had their several courses Zachary was of one of these courses viz. of that of Abia Luc. 1. 5. not all these but one only was typical shadowing forth Jesus Christ unto them And even in this High Priest there was something besides the representation as is plain by St. Paul who yielded his obedience to the High Priest as governour of the people Acts 23. 5. and that after the Type was expired which had been unlawfull had there not been somewhat remaining in him besides the figure Eleazar in Aaron's life-time was Princeps Principam or Praelatus Praelatorum Num. 3. 32. and yet not reputed a Type of Christ and 2 Chron. 35. 8. we read of three at once one onely whereof was the High Priest which was the Type of Christ the rest were not so yet by reason of their dignity paramount to others might resemble Archbishops themselves And the other forementioned High Priests in regard of the place they held above the rest of their Classe are in a sort resembled by our Bishops And that this may not seem strange to any 't is a matter obvious to our observation that scarcely any Ordinance or Order under the New Testament can be named which is not derived from others under the Old by some kind of resemblance intended between them Imposition of hands by the Apostles was taken up in imitation of that practised under the Old Testament for the designation of successors as Moses used it towards Josuah Num. 27. 18 20. That the whole frame of Church Government answers to the like order and distinction of persons and offices in the Old Testament is evidenced by the learned Bishop of Winton in a scheme to that purpose thus drawn viz. Aaron should be resembled by Christ Eleazar Archbishops Princes of Priests Bishops Priests Presbyters Princes of Levites Archdeaâ—ons Levites Deacons Nethinims Clerks and Sextons And hereunto he is led by the opinion of the ancient fathers who seem to be of the same mind viz. that the same form should serve both so is St. Cyprian so St. Hierome St. Leo and Rabanus de vita clericor The Government of the Church of the Old Testament saies the Archbishop of Armagh was committed to Priests and Levites unto whom the ministers of the New Testament do now succeed in like sort as our Lords day hath done unto their Sabbath So he in his Original of Episcopacy and if it were reasonable for Christians to take the Jewes for their pattern in drawing their scheme of Church government much more is it for modern Christians to follow the ancient a thing which our Church has done in her reformation which has retained all things of ancient usage in the Church of Rome lest men should be scandalized at us whilest we seemed to set up a new Religion instead of reforming the Old The very Lords Prayer hath much of conformity not only to the forms used by the Jewes as others have observed but also as it seems to me to the very design of the sacrifices of the Law which are all reducible to three kinds The first was the whole burnt-offering to God as absolute Lord of Heaven Earth and as one to whom belongeth honour from us should he never bestow any special favour upon us The second was the peace-offering whereby to obtain at his gracious hands all those blessings and the degrees thereof whereof men stand in need whether publick or private as also to expresse a thankfulnesse for all blessings and for all those gracious returns he makes to the prayers of his people from time to time or at any time The third was the sin-offering for the expiation of all or any transgressions of his holy and divine commandments and for health of soul In conformity whereunto our Saviour hath in that perfect and absolute form taught us to offer by him a spiritual holocaust to the honour of his name who inhabits eternity in these words Our Father which art in heaven hallowed be thy name Secondly a spiritual peace-offering for the advancement of his Kingdom in us and the adimpletion of his will by us as also for a supply of all outward necessaries in these words Thy Kingdom come thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven Give us this day our dayly bread Thirdly a spiritual sin-offering for the forgivenesse of sins past and for prevention of sin for the time to come in these words And forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespasse against us and lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil And these not without a doxology as a spiritual Libamen or meat-offering without which no burnt-offering was to be made under the Law in these words For thine is the Kingdom the power and the glory for ever and ever Amen And so having not only proved the order and distinctions of Ecclesiasticks under the New Testament but also the first Liturgy so the Lords Prayer is proved to be by Cassander in Liturgicis ex Dionysio and stands undeniably true to be instituted in resemblance of the like under the Old Testament I come now to prove the jurisdiction that they have one over another and over the rest of the Church wherein two things are to be considered in relation to our Bishops viz. 1. Their power 2. The distribution of this power As for the first Their power is so connatural that the chief Judge in Areopagus was a Priest hence Cohen in Hebrew was a common name to Magistrates and to Priests Gen. 41. 45. Potipherah was Priest h. e. Prince of On. The Druides among the Galls were of the noblest stock of kindred they were so in Epirus and Cappadocia it was usual as well among the Grecians as Romans for Kings to be Priests and as Schedius de Dis Germ notes out of Fenestella the Priest was never made a distinct person from the civil Magistrate till the expulsion of Kings out of Rome and that this power so challenged by the voice of Nature in the Heathen themselves is warranted by the Scriptures of the New Testament I shall have occasion to shew anon in answer to their objections
the other side what if no Rites or Ceremonies were decreed against the Word of God and nothing imposed upon them as necessary to salvation but liberty were granted them to embrace nothing but what they could easily so allow what sword of the Magistrate would be drawn against them And would not the Cross of Christ cease in their own sense So then there were no better way of answering their Argument drawn from the ceasing of the Crosse of Christ then by granting them their desire In the last place they urge the example of Gallio the Roman Deputy of Achaia Acts 18. 12 13 14 15 16. Which worthy example say they if Magistrates would be perswaded to follow by judging and punishing only civil injuries and wrongs and leaving spiritual differences to be decided and judged and punished by jesus Christ according to the Gospel they would then find themselves quickly free from many inconveniencies c. Answ These men either speak merrily or else they wanted examples to prove their Assertion who had none to cite but that of the most corrupt Magistrate that ever sate at the helm of Government And behold the worthy example which he gives He judged and punished civil injuries say they But no such matter for the Insurrection against Paul was a civil injury they cryed for justice or rather for injustice in a tumultuous way against an innocent person and this Gallio never relieved or as much as heard him speak which had he done that innocent person St. Paul would haply have proved there as formerly he had done at Athens that that God whom they ignorantly worshipt did he declare unto them And it seems that he gave the Greeks so good satisfaction in the matter that they took Sosthenes the Ruler of the Synagogue and probably the Ring-leader of that Riot and beat him before his face as he sate in judgement he not as much as rebuked them for it As for the differences concerning Worship it is said of them as well as of the civil ones that Gallio cared for none of those things who probably might have the same design upon some of them in this kind of deportmentof his that Faelix had Acts 24. 26. who hoped for a bribe to be given him by Paul for this controversie in all likelihood did not end here though the event be omitted as impertinent to this sacred story Mean while who can justifie this to be a worthy example which was so unworthily done viz. that he would not heed things that concern the worship of God which all the company judged of right to have appertained unto him Neither did he himself deny that he had but that he would have any thing to do with such matters For why had not he as much authority as Areopagus Acts 17. which was the highest Court in Athens and the exactest in the world in their proceedings as we learn from Aristotle 1 Rhet. I. who took upon them to be Judges of such matters which the Philosophers themselves knew right well to appertain unto them when they brought St. Paul to be tryed before them for his Doctrine neither did the Apostle demurre to their Bill of information as if it had not been within their Instructions for their Jurisdiction Sect. 10. ANd now having answered all their objections against a Magistrates power of imposing any thing in worship and service of God as he is a Magistrate only I come to answer their second part of the proposition and their reasons to confirm it viz. That No Magistrate hath any such power as he is a Christian For answer whereunto the contrary is evident For as every member of the Church consisteth of an outward as well as of an inward man so the Government of the Church regardeth the outward as well as the inward man which consisteth in defending it and delivering it from its enemies as also in ordering and adorning it As then sayes Grotius the universal providence of God which watcheth over all things though it be of it self sufficient to dispose and execute every thing yet for the demonstration of its manifold wisdome it useth potestatibus vicariis the substitution of worldly powers for the conservation of the common society of men whence it is that they are called Gods So also the special providence of God watching over his Church adopteth the same powers to himself as his Vicars and Patrons of the true faith kissing Christ on whom also he confers his name that is to say Annointed These are Kings Princes that govern together with Christ not in equal share of power but by delegation and Vicarship only Wherefore since things subordinate do not crosse one the other neither does it misbecome the Majesty of Christ to govern the principalls of his Kingdome immediately by himself the other partly by himself and partly by others as it is also most certain that he uses the help of Angels it follows that an earthly Kingdome even as if it respects holy things nothing hinders the heavenly and divine Empire of Christ Adversaries to this Doctrine on the one side are Papists and Presbyterians both acknowledging a temporal power in order to spirituals but one of them putting this power into the hands of the Pope the other into the hands of the Presbytery those constituting Imperium supra imperium these Imperium in imperio at least And they prove it by this argument viz. The Magistrate is not of the essence of the Church Therefore he 's not necessary to the Government thereof Answer So neither is the Magistrate of the essence of a Physician or a Merchant or of a Mason yet he equally governs them all They both object that Kings are enjoyned to adore the Church Answer That is to say to adore Christ in the Church sayes Hugo Grotius there is a Trope in that part of the prophecy neither can the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sayes he be rigidly urged unlesse we will transferre that Majesty to the Church which is due to Christ who is prince of the Earth Apoc. 1. 5. It cannot be denied but that as the Church-men have a distinct charge from and above others yea even Kings themselves so there is a proportionable honour and a submission due to them Heb. 13. 17. Obey them that have the Rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your souls as they that must give account c. But I answer that that is enjoined to Prince and people viz. that they submit themselves to their Pastors quatenus as they speak unto them the word of God as the holy Ghost himself expounds it v. 7. of the same Chapter The King as he is a sheep of the fold of Christ is fed by the Bishop or Pastor The Bishop as a sheep and a subject is fed by the King The Bishop as he teaches the King and administers holy things unto him is above the King that is in the actual execution of his functions But the King as he establishes
be seen in Cod Justiniani l. 1. c. 9. de Judaeis Caelicolis where it is decreed That if any of those Judaei or Caelicolae did attempt any mischief against them that refused to entertain their Sect they and their confederates should be committed to the fire And again If any Jew did presume but to traduce any one to his religion he was to be condemned to a proscription of his goods and punished after a miserable manner And a third Law sayes That if a Jew presumed to draw a Christian to his religion he was to be proscribed and sustein the punishment of bloud They have been heretofore permitted to live here as they are now elsewhere amongst Christians but how little it has wrought upon them all the world knows it is not Gods time yet it seems to take away the vail that is drawn over their eyes Mean while you must understand that the Jews remaining Jews do not acknowledge themselves the natural subjects of any Prince in the world They will admit themselves to be the local subjects of those under whom they are and will not be received to that neither but upon conditions of freedome wherefore it was a Law Imperial Cod. Justin l. 1. Tit. 9. de Judaeis Caelicolis Ritus suos citra contemptum Christianae religionis retineant that they might retain their Rites without contempt of the Christian Religion Neither will it be for the purpose of our adversaries to urge the Toleration of more then one Religion in other parts of the world as in France and several parts of Germany for first In tolerating of them they tolerate not blasphemy or heathenish idolatry for in France it self their civil courts take cognizance Des crimes de leze-Majeste divine humaine h. e. of crimes of Treason against God and the King 2. in France the King permits but two Religions not all as these men would have done here So in Germany Popery and the Augustane confession have been permitted together but not all Religions and how comes even these things to pass but because Princes give away that power over the Church wherein God has vested them to the Pope or people That the King of France hath so done is clear from the Pragmatica Sanctio wherein it s acknowledged that the Kings of France own originally no Superiour but God and that without the said pragmatical sanction the Acts of the Council of Basil were of no validity which was done at Bourges by an Assembly of the Estates and confirmed by the King shortly after the celebration of the said Council of Basil which was anno Domini 1436. And that this hath ever since obtained in France appears by the following censure of the contrary doctrine Censure de la sacree faculte de Theologie de Paris contre la puissance temporelle du Pape LE premier jour d' Auril mil six cents vingt six apres la Messe du St. Esprit l' assemblee s estant faite a l aâ—coustumee en la salle du College de Sorbonne touchant le lieure impie de Saternelly Jesuite ouy le rapport de docteurs que la faculte avoit deputez lesquels ont expose qu es deux chapistres qui leur avoiint estez Marquez estoyent contenues les propositions suivantes Que le Pape peut punir les Roys les Princes de peines temporelles les deposer priver de leur Royaume estats pour crime d' Heresie deliurer leurs sujects de leur obeissance que telle a tousjours este la coustume de l' Eglise Et non sculement pour l' heresie mais encore pour d' autres causes ascavoir pour leur pechez s' il est ainsi expedient si les Prences sont negligens s' ils sont incapables inutiles De plus que le Pape a la puissance sur les choses spirituelles sur toutes les temporelles qu'il a cette puissance de droit divin qu'il faut croire que le pouvoir a este donne a l' Eglise a son Souverain Pasteur de punir de peines temporelles les Princes qui pechent contre les Loix divines humaines particulierement si leur crime est une heresie Ils ont aussi dit que Saternelly affirme que les Apostres estoient bien sujects au Princes seculiers mais non de droit mesme qu' aussi tost que la majestie du Souverain Pontife a este establie tous les Princes luy ont este sujects bref ils ont rapporte que cet Autheur explique ces paroles de Jesus Christ Mat. 16. Tout ce que vous liez sur la terre non seulement de la puissance spirituelle mais aussi de la temporelle qu'il corrompt le text de St. Paul 2 ad Cor. 10. Potestatem dedit nobis Dominus in aedificationem non in destructionem en retranchant une negation fait dire a plusieurs autheurs qu'il cite de choses a quoy ils n'ont jamais pense concluans que tant ces choses que plusie autres qu'ils ont rapportees meritoient tres-justement la correction la censure de la faculte Monsieur le Doyen ayant mis la chose en deliberation apres que les opinions de tous les Docteurs ont este ouyes leurs voix recuillies la faculte a improuve condamne la Doctrine contenue en ces propositions aux conclusions desdites chapitres comme estant nouvelles fausses erronees contraire a la parole de Dieu qui rend la dignite du Souverain Pontife odieux ouvre la chemin au scisme qui deroge a l' authorite Souverain de Roys qui ne depend que de Dieu seul empeche la conversion de Princes infidels heretiques qui trouble la paix universelle renverse les Royaumes les estats les Republiques Bref qui detaurne les sujets de l' obeissance qu'ils doivent a leur Souverains les induit a des factions rebellions seditions a attenter de la vie de leur Princes fait en Sorbonne les jour an que dessus receu le 14. Auril 1626. Par le commandement de messieurs les Doyens Docteurs de la sacree faculte de Theologie de Paris Signe Ph. Bouvot The French deriving themselves from the confines of Germany The like may be said of the German Powers and the powers that are are of God Rom. 13. and depend immediately upon him But these powers I say are for the most part given away to the Pope by the true owners of them whereas did they reform Religion by their own authority as the Kings of England have done all men might quickly be brought to subscribe and submit to that Religion and Government which they should authorize according to the word of God and the consent of antiquity which
or mens being persecuted by other Christian or Christians for matter of opinion If generally understood I oppose thereunto the 10 Persecutions which happened in the first 300. years The 1. was under Nero anno 67. whose decree was that to confesse a mans self to be a Christian should be capital The 2. under Domitian ann 90. The 3. under Trajan ann 100. whereof Plini to Trajan l. 10. Epist 111. The 4. under Adrian and Antoninus Piuy ann 126. The 5 under Antoninus Philosophus and Antoninus Verus ann 168. The 6 under Severus ann 203. The 7. under Maximinus ann 236. The 8. under Decius an 251. The 9. under Valerianus ann 258. The tenth under Diocletian ann 303. If this would be understood restrictively of any man or mens being persecuted by other Christians I answer 1. That I hope they will recall their word persecuting Horrid opinions may be prosecuted and punished not persecuted I mean in the Scripture acception of the Word though in the Law it be so accounted God l. 1. t. 5. l g. Manichaeos seu Manichaeas vel Donatista meritissima severitate persequimur 2. If horrid opinions were only commenced they were but begun but sin when it is perfected and not before bringeth forth death by the Laws of God and if horrid sin by man too 3. For prosecuting or as they call it persecuting for opinions either commenced or perfected what power had they to do it withall when all the Emperours were Heathen there was no eminent Magistrate to take cognizance of differences among Christians themselves otherwise then to foment them that thereby they might become the ruine one of another 2. Of the Authors alledged the Historians whom only I look upon for matter of fact say nothing in the business and therefore prove nothing at all As for instance Sulpitius Severus says nothing of one Christians persecuting another Ergo one Christian did not persecute another this is a non sequitur it being an argument from humane authority and therefore holds not negatively especially from the authority of one that has written but an Epitome a very manual of history which cannot be comprehensive of all things neither does he mention any thing but the ten persecutions and what relates to them in all that three hundred years which he does too in less then one hundred and fifty lines in Octavo of a St. Augustine print which could not have been much had it been so many lines in a Minion or Nonparil And as Sulpitius Severus did not so Socrates Scholasticus could not speak any thing of this matter in as much as his history begins with Constantine which was after the expiration of the said three hundred years Thirdly did any of those Authours speak against persecution for matter of opinion then this is an argument that there was such a persecution so our adversaries are pleased to call it or else they fought with a shadow Their dislike hereof consisted in two things 1. That any should be put to death meerly for his opinion and this was St. Austin's dislike who was first of opinion that it was not honest to use any violence to misperswaded persons but afterwards he retracted it Retract l. 2. c. 5. quoted by the Dr. himself lib. of proph sect 14. We agree with St. Austin as we have signified all along that no man is to be put to death for simple heresy h. e. qua heresy unless it has joyned with it Blasphemy Heathenish Idolatry Sedition or the like The Doctour himself allows punishing Romish priests with death not as for Religion but as enemies to the state Serm. at St. Maries on Gunpow Treason neither does the said Dr. disallow of Laws for punishing of Hereticks in general with corporal punishment only he would have the execution of those Laws upon emergencies committed to the discretion of the Governours of the Church ib. sect 17. The second thing those forementioned Authours or any of them disliked was that any man should be compelled to a Religion not that he should be corrected for his wandrings from it and so much is learned from Tertullian ad Scap. Nec religionis est cogere religionem quae sponte suscipi debet non vi and this has been our tenet all along But say they This restraining of liberty imposing upon mens consciences and lording over their faith came in with the train and retinue of Antichrist that is they came as other abuses and corruptions of the Church did by reason of the iniquity of the times and the cooling of the first heats of Christianity and the increase of interest and the abatement of Christian simplicity Ans That if this restraining and imposing and lording be meant of the Popes infallibility and resolving every thing into that Chimera then I agree that it came in with the train and retinue of Antichrist And it s an argument the men of this generation are the train and retinue of Antichrist whose opiniatreté or self-conceitedness is such that every one thinks himself a Pope in that regard Therefore the granting of liberty to them is to acknowledge their infallibility and consequently were there a thousand Religions amongst them every one must be acknowledged to be the true and then what would become of ONE LORD ONE FAITH ONE BAPTISME Ephes 4. 5. but if this restraining be meant of any other restraint by the Civil Magistrate Liberty was restrained before Phocas his times who was called the Midwife of Antichrist as may be seen in Cod. Justiniani l. 1. t. 5. and t. 9. which Code was composed Anno 529. and 530. above seventy years before Phocas not of Laws then newly enacted but of such as had been made by his Predecessors long before amongst which those that touch the present business were those of Arcadius Honorius Valentinianus Theodosius c. all promoters of the orthodox faith and therefore ushered not in the train and retinue of Antichrist which never did so lordly and imperiously appear as in Pope Hildebrand called Gregory the seventh who sate at Rome between four hundred and five hundred years after Phocas and above five hundred and forty years after the last composure of the Code He first of all the Popes excommunicated the Emperour and arrogated to himself the power of instituting an Emperour I agree likewise that the King of France his giving permission to the Huguenots has proved prosperous to that Nation though most prosperous to the Huguenots themselves who have found more happiness in peace and obedience then ever they did in rebellion and holding out against the power and authority of their King But had he given the same liberty to all Religions it must have been the confusion of it and as displeasant to the Huguenots as the denyal of liberty to themselves had been before In every assembly of the Huguenots the King has a Commissary to see that nothing be decreed amongst them against the interest of the Crown But how can such a thing be among
men of all Religions and no Principles I agree likewise That liberty of conscience should be preserved in all things where God hath not made a limit For the Article of our Church before mentioned sayes That she has not power to impose any thing contrary to the Word of God yea oâ— besides it as necessary to salvation I agree That the soul of man should be free and acknowledge no Master but Jesus Christ And yet may it be subject to humane Laws which do bind the conscience in themselves not for themselves but for and on the behalf of God and Jesus Christ who commandeth every soul to be subject to the higher power Rom. 13. and in this regard matters spiritual may be restrained by punishments corporal as we have already said I agree too that meeknesse and charity and longanimity should be exercised towards those in errour and lastly That the infirmity of man and difficulty of things should be both put in the balance to make abatement in the desinitive sentences against mens persons But what is all this to idolatry sedition and blasphemy which our Adversaries have herein endeavoured to maintain as not punishable by the Magistrate And what is this to those steams of opinions breathed out of the bottomlesse pit against which they would not have the Magistrate as much as hold his nose Therefore they go on and say That the best of men and most glorious Princes were alwayes ready to give toleration but never to make execution for matters disputable as Eusebius in his second book of the life of Constantine reports Ans All this we grant But what is all this to horrid opinions or practises against which severe Laws were made by glorious Princes These were not os things disputable de quibusdam voculis as they are termed in the title of the Chapter of the said second Book of Eusebius concerning which there was no Law made nor like to be made against which any toleration or whereupon any sentence might be given upon which any execution might be suspended But they were of matters of higher concern as will appear by the Laws themselves The first was that of Constantine the Great who after the Nicene Council commanded the books of Arius to be burnt and that he who neglected it should be put to death as is observed by Alphonsus a Castro de just a Hereticorum punitione l. 2. c 15. So Theodosius commanded the Donatists to be put to death as Minus Celsus Senensis himself witnesseth But the Cod. of Justinian l 1 Tit. 5. testifies more in this matter then I need now to write wherein we find that there is a Law made by the Emperours Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius for the perpetual silencing of heresies and Hereticks ut Haereses perpetuo quiescant Another for interdicting all Conventicles of them to be held either night or day made by Arcadius and Honorius Another against the Manichees in particular That they be Out-laws suffer a publication of their goods barred of all liberality of or succession to others that all power of giving or selling or contracting be taken away from them and much more Another made by Theodosius and Valentinian against the Arians Macedonians Pneumatomachi Apollinartans Novatians or Sebatians Eunomians Tetradites or Tessarescaedecadites Valentinians Paulians Papianists Montanists or Pricillianists the Phryges or Praepusites Marcionites Borborites Messalians Euchites or Enthusiasts Donatists Audians Hydroparastats Tascodrogites Batrachites Hermogenians Photinians Paulianians Marcellians Ophites Encratists Carpocratites Saccophorites qui ad imam usque scelerum nequitiam pervenerunt the Manichees that they have no place either of abode or convening in Romanum locum As for the Manichees they were not only to be banished the Cities but they were to be tradendi ultimo supplicio delivered to death least the Elements should be infected with them or injured by them Another Law was made by them That they that adhered to the opinion of Nestorius should not be called Christians but Nestorians from their Author Nestorius whose impious books written against the Decrees of the Council of Ephesus every man was forbidden to have to read or to write out but were diligently to be searched for and burned All places of meeting were thereby forbidden these Nestorians and whoso offended against this Law was to suffer publication of his goods Another Law was made by Valen. and Marcian against the followers of Eutyches whose opinions were condemned by the Council of Nice consisting of three hundred and eighteen Fathers and in the Constantinopolitan Council consisting of one hundred and fifty other Bishops These were called also Apollinarists and were to ordain no Presbyters under pain of confiscation they were to have no Monasteries nor meetings by day or by night under pain of forfeiture of the house if the owner were aware of it or else ten pound in gold they were to have no room in the Militia c. Divers other Laws are there to be seen whereby the Manichees are punishable with death other Hereticks with confiscation or the like Now albeit the capital punishments here mentioned were seldome inflicted yet others doubtless were even those of banishment and confiscation Nay as we have noted before that severe Laws were made against the misbehaviour of the Jews So Soc. Scholast tells us H st 7. 16. that condign punishment was undergone by some of them upon the command of the Emperour for scossing at Christ and Christianity in their Crucifixion of a Christian Boy To these Laws it is probable that King James had an eye in his Declaration against Vorstius sent by an Embassadour to the States of Holland wherein he manifesteth his detestation of Vorstius's horrid opinions as deserving the banishment of the Author rather then the honour of his being a publick Professor in that famous University of Leyden And this learned King of happy memory I mention the rather because our Adversaries alledge him writing to the United Provinces and advising them to maintain peace by bearing one with another in such differences of opinions and judgement Answ This is true if by such differences be meant disputable things and such perhaps as were meant by Constantine in the foresaid 55. c. of the second book of Eusebius though not the same wherein he would have men perswaded to a pious Syncretisme rather then a Schisme which might occasion the Magistrate to make use of his Sword which wholesome counsel it were to be wished men would take amongst us where one party decryes the other for Arminian which is it self as fast decryed for Calvinist on the other side both though they differ in their Doctrines agree in their Uses and Applications and take all the Articles of our Church to be for them as is observed by the Kings Majesty of blessed memory in his Declaration set before the book of Articles But that they might as well agree in Doctrines as Uses they should do well to take up that excellent moderation prescribed by our