least yea a great share in Ecclesiasticall government for so they had in the Supreme Sanhedrin of the Jewes And further the Jewes had their Synagoga magna which Grotius on Matth. 10. 17. distinguisheth from the Sanhedrin of 71. for both Prophets and others of place and power among the people praeter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 besides the members of that Sanhedrin were members of that extraordinary assembly which was called the great Synagogue such as that Assembly Ezra 10. which did decree forfeiture and separation from the Congregation to be the punishment of such as would not gather themselves unto Ierusalem in which assembly were others beside those of the Sanhedrin Of the men of the great Synagogue I read in Tzemach David pag. 56. â—…dit Hen. Vors that they did receive the traditions from the Prophets and it is added Viri Synagogae magnae ordinarunt nobis preces nostras The men of the great Synagogue did appoint unto us our prayers meaning their Liturgies which they fancy to have been so instituted The Hebrews themselves controvert whether all the men of the great Synagogue did live at one and the same time or successively but that which is most received among them is that these men did flourish all at one time as is told us in the passage last cited where also these are named as men of the great Synagogue Haggai Zechariah Malachi Zerubbabel Mordechai Ezra Jehoshua Seria Rehaliah Misphar Rechum Nehemias Rambam addeth Chananiah Mischael and Azariah Finally as Prophets Priesâ—s and Scribes of the Law of God had an interest in the Synagoga magna after the Captivity so we read of occasionall and extraordinary Ecclesiasticall Synods before the Captivity as that assembly of the Priests and Levites under Hezekiah 2 Chro. 29. 4. 15. and that erring Synod of the 400 Prophets 1 Kings 22. 6. Herod also gathered together the chiefe Priests and Scribes Matth. 2. 4. I conclude that if it should be granted there was no Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jewes distinct from the civill yet as the necessity of a distinct Ecclesiasticall Government among us is greater then it was among them in respect of the foure considerations above mentioned so likewise the Priests had a great deale more power and authority in the Jewish Church not onely by occasionall Synods but by their interest in Synagoga magna and in the civill Sanhedrin it selfe then the Erastians are willing that Church officers should have in the Christian Church CHAP. II. That the Iewish Church was formally distinct from the Iewish State or Common-wealth IT hath been by some with much confidence and scorne of all who say otherwise averred that Excommunication and Church-government distinct from the Civill hath no patterne for it in the Jewish Church I am sure saith M r Coleman in his Brotherly examination re-examined pag. 16. the best reformed Church that ever was went this way I meane the Church of Israel which had no distinction of Church government and Civill government Hast thou appealed unto Caesar unto Caesar shalt thou goe Have you appealed to the Jewish Church thither shall you goe Wherefore I shall endeavour to make these five things appeare 1. That the Jewish Church was formally 〈◊〉 from the Jewish State 2. That there was an Eccleâ—iasticall Sanhedrin and Government distinct from the Civill 3. That there was an Ecclesiasticall Excommunication 〈◊〉 from Civill punishments 4. That in the Jewish Church there was also a publike exomologesis or declaration of repentance and thereupon a reception or admission againe of the offender to fellowship with the Church in the holy things 5. That there was a suspension of the prophane from the Temple and Passeover First the Jewish Church was formally diâ—tinct from the Jewish State I say formally because ordinarily they were not distinct materially the same persons being members of both But formally they were distinct as now the Church and State are distinct among us Christians 1. In respect of distinct lawes the Ceremoniall Law was given to them in reference to their Church state the Judiciall Law was given to them in reference to their Civill State Is. Abrabanel de capite fidei cap. 13. putteth this difference between the Lawes given to Adam and to the sonnes of Noah and the divine Law given by Moses that those Laws were given for conservation of humane society and are in the classis of Judiciall or civill Laws But the divine Law given by Moses doth direct the soule to its last perfection and end I doe not approve the difference which he puts between these Lawes This onely I note that he distinguisheth Judiciall or Civill Laws for conservation of society though given by God from those Laws which are given to perfect the soule and to direct it to its last end such as he conceives the whole morall and ceremoniall Law of Moses to be Halichoth Olam tract 5. cap. 2. tels us that such and such Rabbies were followed in the ceremoniall Lawes other Rabbies followed in the Judiciall Lawes 2. In respect of distinct acts they did not worship God and offer Sacrifices in the Temple nor call upon the name of Lord nor give thanks nor receive the Sacraments as that State but as that Church They did not punish evill doers by mulcts imprisonment banishment burning stoning hanging as that Church but as that State 3. In respect of controversiâ—s some causes and controversies did concerne the Lords matters some the Kings matters 2 Chro. 19. 11. To judge between blood and blood was one thing To judge between Law and Commandement between Statutâ—s and judgements that is to give the true sence of the Law of God when it was controverted was another thing 4. In respect of Officers the Priests and Lâ—vites were Church-officers Magistrates and Judges not so but were Ministers of the State The Priests might not take the Sword out of the hand of the Magistrates The Magistrates might not offer Sacrifice nor exercise the Priests office 5. In respect of continuance when the Romans tooke away the Jewish State and civill Government yet the Jewish Church did remaine and the Romans did permit them the liberty of their religion And now though the Jewes have no Jewish State yet they have Jewish Churches Whence it is that when thâ—y tell where one did or doth live they doe not mention the Town but the Church In the holy Church at Uenice at Frankford c. See Buxtorf lex Rabin pag. 1983. 6. In respect of variation The constitution and Government of the Jewish State was not the same but different under Moses and Ioshua under the Iudges under the Kings and after the Captivity But we cannot say that the Church was new modelld as oft as the State was 7. In respect of members For as M. Selden hath very well observed concerning that sort of Proselytes who had the name of Prâ—…selyti Justitiae they were initiated into the Jewish religion by Circumcision Baptisme and Sacrifice and they were
AARONS ROD BLOSSOMING OR The Divine Ordinance of Church-Government VINDICATED So as the present Erastian Controversie concerning the distinction of Civill and Ecclesiasticall Government Excommunication and Suspension is fully debated and discussed from the holy Scripture from the Jewish and Christian Antiquities from the consent of latter Writers from the true nature and rights of Migistracy and from the groundlesnesse of the chiefe Objections made against the Presbyteriall Government in point of a domineering arbitrary unlimited power By George Gillespie Minister at Edinburgh For unto us a child is born unto us a sonne is given and the government shall be upon his shoulder Isaiah 9. 6. Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour 1 Tim. 5. 17. And the spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets for God is not the Author of confusion but of peace 1 Cor. 14 32 33. August lib. contra Donatistas post collationem Cap. 4. Ne fortè aut indisciplinata patientia foveat iniquitatem aut impatiens disciplina dissipet unitatem Published by Authority London Printed by E. G. for Richard Whitaker at the signe of the Kings Armes in Pauls Church yard 1646. TO THE Reverend and Learned Assembly of DIVINES Convened at WESTMINSTER Right Reverend THough many faithfull servants of God did long agoe desire to see those things which we see and to heare those things which we heare Yet it hath been one of the speciall mercies reserved for this Generation and denied to the times of our Ancestors that Divines of both Kingdomes within this Island should be gathered and continued together to consult peaceably and freely concerning a Reformation of Religion in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government 'T is a mercy yet greater that two Nations formerly at so great a distance in the form of publike Worship and Churchgovernment should to their mutuall comfort and happines and to the further endearing of each to other through the good hand of God be now agreed upon one Directory of Worship and with a good progresse advanced as in one Confession of Faith so likewise in one forme of Church-government For all which as the other Reformed Churches in regard of their common interest in the Truth and Ordinances of Christ so especially your Brethren in the Church of Scotland are your debters Your name is as precious Oynment among them and they doe esteeme you very highly in love for your workes sake A worke which as it is extraordinary and unparalleld requiring a double portion of the Spirit of your Master so You have very many Hearts and Prayers going along with you in it that the pleasure of the Lord may prosper in your hand As for my Reverend Colleagues and my selfe it hath been a good part of our happinesse that we have been partakers of and Assistants in your grave and learned Debates Yet as we declared from our first comming amongst you we came not hither presuming to prescribe any thing unto You but willing to receive as well as to offer light and to debate matters freely and fairely from the Word of God the common Rule both to you and us As herein You were pleased to give testimony unto us in one of your Letters to the Generall Assembly of the Church of Scotland so the great respects which in other things and at other times you have expressed both towards that Church from which we are entrusted and particularly towards our selves doe call for a returne of all possible and publique testimonies of gratitude For which purpose I doe for my part take hold of this opportunity I know that I owe much more unto You then I have either ability to pay or Elocution to set forth Yet although I cannot retaliate your Favours nor render that which may be worthy of your selves I beseech you to accept this part of my retribution of respects I doe offer and entitle unto You this Enucleation of the Erastian Controversie which is Dignus vindice nodus I hope here is a word in season concerning it Others might have done better but such furniture as I had I have brought to the worke of the Tabernacle I submit what is mine unto your greater learning and better judgement and shall ever continue Yours to serve you GEO. GILLESPIE To the Candid Reader I Have often and heartily wished that I might not be distracted by nor ingaged into polemick Writings of which the World is too full already and from which many more learned and idoneous have abstained and I did accordingly resolve that in this Controversall age I should be slow to write swift to read and learne Yet there are certaine preponderating reasons which have made me willing to be drawn forth into the light upon this subject For beside the desires and sollicitations of diverse Christian friends lovers of truth and peace seriously calling upon me for an answer to M r Prynne his Vindication of his foure Questions concerning Excommunication and Suspension the grand importance of the Erastian controversie and the strong influence which it hath into the present juncture of asfaires doth powerfully invite me Among the many Controversies which have disquieted and molested the Church of Christ those concerning Ecclesiasticall Government and Discipline are not the least but among the chiefe and often mannaged with the greatest animosity and eagernesse of spirit whence there have growne most dangerous divisions and breaches such as this day there are and for the future are to be expected unlesse there shall be through Gods mercy some further composing and healing of these Church-consuming distractions which if we shall be so happy as once to obtaine it will certainely contribute very much toward the accommodation of civill and State-shaking differences And contrariwise if no healing for the Church no healing for the State Let the Gallio's of this time who care for no intrinsecall evill in the Church promise to themselves what they will surely he that shall have cause to write with Nicolaus de Clemangis a Booke of lamentation de corrupto Ecclesiae statu will finde also cause to write with him de lapsu reparatione Justitiae As the thing is of high concernment to these so much disturbed and divided Churches so the elevation is yet higher by many dègrees This controversie reacheth up to the Heavens and the top of it is above the clouds It doth highly concerne Iesus Christ himselfe in his glory royall prerogative and kingdome which he hath and exerciseth as Mediator and Head of his Church The Crowne of Iesus Christ or any part priviledge or pendicle thereof must needs be a noble and excellent Subject This truth that Iesus Christ is a King and hath a Kingdome and government in his Church distinct from the kingdomes of this World and from the civill Government hath this commendation and character above all other truths that Christ himselfe suffered to the death for it and sealed it with his blood For it may be observed from the story
is I have not declined them but encountered yea sought them out where their strength was greatest where their Arguments were hardest and their exceptions most probable so no man may decline or dissemble the strength of my Arguments Inferences Authorities Answers and Replies nor thinke it enough to lift up an Axe against the uttermost branches when he ought to strike at the root Thirdly if there be any acrimony let it be in a reall and rationall conviction not in the manner of expression In which also I aske no other measure to my selfe than I have given to others T is but in vaine for a man to help the bluntnesse of reason with the sharpnesse of passion for thereby he loseth more than he gaineth with intelligent Readers the simpler sort may peradventure esteem those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those despicable nothings to be something but then they are delu ded not edified Therefore let not a man cast sorth a flood of passionate words when his Arguments are like broken cisternes which can hold no water If any Replyer there be of the Erastian party who will confine himselfe within these Rules and Conditions as I doe not challenge him so if God spare me life and liberty I will not refuse him But if any shall so reply as to prevaricate and doe contrary to these just and reasonable demands I must to his greater shame call him to the Orders and make his tergiversation to appeare I shall detaine thee good Reader no longer The Lord guide thee and all his people in waies of truth and peace holinesse and righteousnesse and grant that this Controversie may I trust it shall have a happy end to the glory of God to the embracing and exalting of Iesus Christ in his Kingly Office to the ordering of his House according to His owne will to the keeping pure of the Ordinances to the advancing of Holinesse and shaming of prophanesse and finally to the peace quiet wel-being comfort and happinesse of the Churches of Christ. These things without thoughts of provoking any either publike or private person the searcher of hearts knoweth to be desired and intended by him who is Thine to please thee for thy good to edification GEO. GILLESPIE THE CONTENTS The first Booke Of the Jewish Church Government CHAP. I. That if the Erastians could prove what they alledge concerning the Iewish Church Government yet in that particular the Iewish Church could not be a president to the Christian. THe Jewish Church a patterne to us in such things as were not typicall or temporall If it could be proved that the Jewes had no supreme Sanhodrin but one and it such as had the power of civill Magistracy yet there are foure reasons for which that could be no president to the Christian Church Where the constitution manner of proceedings and power of the Sanhedrin ure touched Of their Synagoga Magna what it was That the Priests had great power and authority not onely in occasionall Synods but in the civill Sanhedrin it selfe CHAP. II. That the Iewish Church was formally distinct from the Iewish State or Commonwealth WE are content that the Erastians appeale to the Jewish government Seven distinctions between the Jewish Church and the Jewish State Of the proselytes of righteousnesse and that they were imbodied into the Jewish Church not into the Jewish State CHAP. III. That the Iewes had an ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin and Government distinct from the civill DIvers Authors cited for the ecclesiastcal Sanhedrin of the Jews The first Institution thereof Exo. 24. That the choosing calling forth of these 70 Elders is not coincident with the choosing of the 70 Elders mentioned Num. 11. nor yet with the choosing of Judges Exod. 18. The institution of two coordinate Governments cleared from Deut. 17. A distinct Ecclesiasticall government setled by David 1 Chro. 23. and 26. The same distinction of Civill and Church government revived by Iehoshaphat 2 Chro. 19. That Text vindicated Two distinct Courts one Ecclesiasticall another Civill proved from Ierem. 26. Another argument for an Ecclesiasticall Senate from Ierem. 18. 18. Who meant by the wise men of the Jewes Another argument from Ezech. 7. 26. Another from 2 Kings 6. 32. and Ezech. 8. 1. Another from Psal. 107. 32. Another from Zech. 7. 1 2 3. That Ezech. 13. 9. seemeth to hold forth an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin That the Councell of the chiefe Priests Elders and Scribes so often mentioned in the Gospel and in the Acts of the Apostles was an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin and not a civill Court of Justice as Erastus and M. Prynne suppose which is at length proved That the civill Sanhedrin which had power of life and death did remove from Hierusalem 40 yeeres before the destruction of the Temple and City and consequently neere three yeeres before the death of Christ. The great objection that neither the Talmud nor Talmudicall Writers doe distinguish a civill and an ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin answered Finally those who are not convinced that there was a distinct ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jewes may yet by other Mediums be convinced that there was a distinct ecclesiasticall Government among the Jewes as namely the Priests judgement of cleannesse or uncleannesse and so of admitting or shutting out CHAP. IV. That there was an Ecclesiasticall Excommunication among the Iewes and what it was FIfteen witnesses brought for the Ecclesiasticall excommunication among the Jewes all of them learned in the Jewish antiquities Of the 24 causes of the Jewish excommunication which were lookt upon formally qua scandals not qua injuries Of the three degrees of their excommunication Niddui Cherem and Shammata The manner and form of their Excommunication sheweth that it was a solemne Ecclesiasticall censure Formula anathematis The excommunication of the Cuthites The excommunication among the Jewes was a publique and judicial act and that a private or extrajudicial excommunication was voyd if not ratified by the Court The effects of the Jewish excommunication That such as were excommunicated by the greater excommunication were not admitted to come to the Temple He that was excommunicated with the lesser excommunication was permitted to come yet not as other Israelites but as one publiquely bearing his shame The end of their excommunication was spirituall CHAP. V. Of the cutting of from among the people off God frequently mentioned in the Law THe sence of the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 scanned That the commination of cutting off a man from his people or from the Congregation of Israel is neither meant of eternall death nor of dying without children nor of capitall punishment from the hand of the Magistrate nor yet of cutting off by the immediate hand of God for some secret sinne Reasons brought against all these That Excommunication was meant by that cutting off proved by six reasons CHAP. VI. Of the casting out of the Synagogue THe casting out of the Synagogue is understood by Interpretâ—rs and others to be an excommunication from the Church assemblies and
these two things 1. It is the opinion of divers who hold two Sanhedrins among the Jewes one Civill and another Ecclesiasticall that in causes and occasions of a mixed nature which did concerne both Church and State both did consult conclude and decree in a joynt way and by agreement together Now Ezra 10. the Princes Elders Priests and Levites were assembled together upon an extraordinary cause which conjuncture and concurrence of the Civill and the Ecclesiasticall power might occasion the denouncing of a double punishment upon the contumacious forfeiture and excommunication But 2. The objection made doth rather confirme me that Excommunication is intended in that place For this forfeiture was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a making sacred or dedicating to an holy use as I have shewed out of Iosephus The originall word translated forfeited is more properly translated devoted which is the word put in the margin of our bookes The Greek saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 anathemstizabitur which is the best rendring of the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was not therefore that which we call forfeiture of a mans substance Intellige saith Grotius ita ut Deo sacra fiat And so the excommunication of a man and the devoting of his substance as holy to the Lord were joyned together and the substance had not been anathematized if the man had not been anathematized I doe not say that Excommunication ex natura rei doth inferre and draw after it the devoting of a mans estate as holy to the Lord. No Excommunication can not hurt a man in his worldly estate further than the Civill Magistrate and the Law of the Land appointeth And there was Excommunication in the Apostolical Churches where there was no Christian Magistrate to adde a Civill mulct But the devoting of the substance of Excommunicated persons Ezra 10. as it had the authority of the Princes and Rulers for it so what extraordinary warrants or instinct there was upon that extraordinary exigence we can not tell Finally M. Selden de Jure nat Gentium lib. 4. cap. 9. p. 523. agreeth with Lud. Capellus that the separation from the Congregation Ezra 10. 8. plane ipsum est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fieri it is the very same with casting out of the Synagogue which confuteth further that which M. Prynne holds that the casting out of the Synagogue was not warranted by Gods word but was onely a humane invention I know some have drawne another argument for the Jewish Excommunication from Nehem. 13. 25. I contended with them and cursed them id est anathematizavi excommunicavi saith C. a lapide upon the place So Tirinus upon the same place Mariana expounds it anathema dixi Aben Ezra understands it of two kinds of Excommunication Niddui and Cherem For my part I lay no weight upon this unlesse you understand the cursing or malediction to be an act of the Ecclesiasticall power onely authorised or countenanced by the Magistrate Which the words may well beare for neither is it easily credible that Nehemiah did with his owne hand smite those men and plucke off their hayre but that by his authority he tooke care to have it done by civill Officers as the cursing by Ecclesiasticall Officers The Dutch annotations leane this way telling us that Nehemiah did expresse his zeale against them as persons that deserved to be banned or cut off from the people of God Another Text proving the Jewish Excommunication is Luke 6. 22. When they shall separate you and shall reproach you and â—…ast out your name as evill It was the most misapplied censure in the world in respect of the persons thus cast out but yet it proves the Jewish custome of casting out such as they thought wicked and obstinate persons This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beda upon the place understandeth of casting out of the Synagogue Separent Synagoga depellant c. yet it is a more generall and comprehensive word then the casting out of the Synagogue It comprehendeth all the three degrees of the Jewish Excommunication as Grotius expounds the place Which agreeth with Munsterus Dictionar Trilingue where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the onely Greeke word given both for the three Hebrew words Niddui Cherem and Shammata and for the Latine Excommunicatio Wherefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place is extermino excommunico repudio which is one of the usuall significations of the word given by Stephanus and by Scapula It is a word frequently used in the Canons of the most ancient Councels to expresse such a separation as was a Church-censure and namely suspension from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper For by the ancient Canons of the Councels such offences as were punished in a Minister by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is deposition were punished in one of the people by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is segregation or sequestration Zonaras upon the 13 th Canon of the eighth generall Councell observeth a double 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used in the ancient Church â—ne was a totall separation or casting out of the Church which is usually called Excommunication another was a suspension or sequestration from the Sacrament onely Of which I am to speak more afterward in the third Booke I hold now at the Text in hand which may be thus read according to the sence and letter both when they shall excommunicate you c. Howbeit the other reading when they shall separate you holds forth the same thing which I speake of separate from what our Translators supply from their company but from what company of theirs not from their civill company onely but from their sacred or Church assemblies and from religious fellowship it being a Church-censure and a part of Ecclesiasticall discipline in which sence as this word frequently occurreth in the Greeke fathers and ancient Canons when they speake of Church discipline so doubtlesse it must be taken in this place 1. Because as Grotius tels us that which made the Jewes the rather to separate men in this manner from their society was the want of the Civill coercive power of Magistracy which sometime they had And I have proved before that the civill Sanhedrin which had power of criminall and capitall judgements did remove from Ierusalem and cease to execute such judgement forty yeeres before the destruction of the Temple 2. Because in all other places of the new Testament where the same word is used it never signifieth a bare separation from civill company but either a conscientious and religious separation by which Church members did intend to keep themselves pure from such as did walke or were conceived to walke disorderly and scandalously Acts 19. 9. 2 Cor. 6. 17. Gal. 2. 13. or Gods separating between the godly and the wicked Matth 13. 49. 25. 32. or the setting apart of men to the ministery of the Gospell Acts 13. 2. Rom. 1. 1. Gal. 1. 15. Thirdly a Civill separation is for a Civill injury but this separation
your selves in any of these things Of the shedding of bloud defile not therefore the Land wherein ye dwell Wherefore this word uncleannesse or defilement is said of three sorts of things first of a mans qualities and of his transgressions of the Commandements whether theoricall or practicall that is which concerne either Doctrine or his conversation Secondly of externall filthinesse and defilements c. Thirdly of these imaginary things that is the touching or carrying upon the shoulders some uncleane thing c. Adde hereunto the observation of Drusius de tribus sect Judaeor lib. 2. num 82. 83. 84. The Pharisees did account sinners and prophane persons to be uncleane and thought themselves polluted by the company of such persons for which reason also they used to wash when they came from the mercate Though there was a superstition in this Ceremony yet the opinion that prophane persons are uncleane persons and to be avoided for uncleannesse had come from the purest antiquities of the Jewes even from Moses and the Prophets Since therefore both in the old Testament phrase and in the usuall language of the Jewes themselves a scandalous prophane person was called an unclean person it is to me more then probable that where I read none which was uncleane in any thing should enter in it is meant of those that were morally uncleane by a scandalous wicked conversation no lesse yea much more than of those that were onely ceremonially uncleane 3. Especially considering that the Sanctuary was prophaned and polluted by the morall uncleannesse of sinne and by prophane persons their entring into it as is manifest from Lev. 20. 3. Eze. 23. 39. How can it then be imagined that those Priests whose charge it was to keepe back those that were uncleane in any thing would admit and receive such as were not onely unclean persons in the language of Scripture and of the Jewes themselves but were also by expresse Scriptures declared to be defilers or polluters of the Sanctuary 4. It is said of the high Priest Lev 16. 16. and he shall make atonement for the holy place because of the uncleannesse of the children of Israel and because of their transgressions in all their sins or from their uncleannesse and from their transgressions as the Chaldee and the LXX have it the sence is the same and it sheweth that the holy place was made uncleane by the transgressions and sinnes of the children of Israel which uncleannesse of transgression if it were visible publik and notorious then the Priests had failed in admitting such to the holy place 12. Object Throughout the old Testament we read onely of temporall punishments as burning hanging stoning fines stripes and the like but never of Excommunication or any Church censure Neither did the Jewes know the distinction of Lawes Ecclesiasticall and Lawes civill causes Ecclesiasticall and causes civill for the Church of the Jewes was thâ—ir Common-Wealth and their Common-Wealth was their Church and the Government of Church and State among them was one and the same Their civill Lawyers were also Expositors or Doctors of the Law of God Ans. That in the Jewish Church there was an Ecclesiasticall censure or punishment distinct from the civill I have proved in this preceeding booke both from Scripture and from the Jewish antiquities And if there were no more but the sequestration or separation from the Temple or from the passeover for such legall uncleannesse as did not separat a man from his house nor from all company of men even that alone proves a kinde of censure distinct from all civill punishment neither did it belong to the Magistrate or civill Judge but to the Priests to examine judge and determine concerning cleannesse or uncleannesse and consequently concerning admission to or separation from the Temple Passeover and sacrifices That the Jewish Church and the Jewish State were formally distinct see before Chap. 2. Where it hath beene observed that some Proselytes had the full priviledges of the Jewish Church though none of them had the full priviledges of the Jewish common-wealth The like I have read of the Spaniards who admit the Moores or inhabitants of Morisco to turne Christians and receive them into Ecclesiasticall Membership and Communion but by no meanes into their civill liberties That the causes of Excommunication among them were lookt upon as scandalls and not as civill inâ—uries see Chap. 4. This onely I adde that More Nevochim part 2. Chap. 40. doth distinguish civill Lawes from sacred Lawes even among the people of God making the scope of the civill Lawes to be the good safety and prosperity of the Common-wealth the Sacred or Divine Lawes to concerne properly Religion and mens soules He that will compare the civill Lawes and panall Statutes of the Jewes mentioned in Baba Kama with their ceremoniall Lawes concerning the holy Ordinances of God and who should have communion therein who not cannot but looke upon their Church and 〈◊〉 Lawes as formally distinct from their State and civill Lawes Again he that will consider who were the viri synagogae magnae the men of the great synagogue and what their power and acts were as Dr. Buxtorf describeth the same in his Tyberiâ—…t Cap. 10 11. and their authoritative determinations concerning the right writing reading and expounding of the holy Scripture c. must needs acknowledge that it was Senatus ecclesiasticus magnus as Buxtorf cals it and that such power and acts were incompetent to the civill Magistrate As for their Doctors of Law and Scribes they were of the sons of Aaron yet some way diversified in their administrations Scaliger in elench Trihaeres Nic. Serar cap. 11. distinguisheth between the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the former were the wisemen or chief of the Scribes who did interpret the Law and declare the sence of it the latter did attend civill forensicall matters Drusius de tribus sect Jud. lib. 2. cap. 13. noteth from Luke 11. 45. 46. that there was some distinction between the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 between the Scribes and the Lawyers for when Christ had spoken of the Scribes and Pharises then answered one of the Lawyers and said unto him Master thus saying thou reproachest us also And he said Wo unto you also ye Lawyers This will be more plaine by that other distinction observed by Lud. de dieu in Mat. 22. 35. and diverse others between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 between the Scribes of the Law of God who did interpret the Law such as Ezra the Priest and the Scribes of the people who were Actuarii publici publick Notaries or Clerks Whence it appeareth that the Offices of Scribes and Lawyers although the persons themselves were of the Tribe of Levi were so ordered as that civill and sacred affaires might not be confounded Yea the Scriveners or Notaries were of two sorts for besides those which did attend
Gualther or because no man hath parity or equality of honour with Christ So Martyr and Hunnius The English annotations say that Christ is the Head of every man in as much as he is the first begotten among many brtheren Which best agreeth with my second answer But for taking off all these and for preventing of other objections that one distinction will suffice which I first gave in examining Mr. Colemans Sermon In the Mediator Iesus Christ there is 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dignity excellency honour glory splendor 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his mighty power by which he is able to do in heaven and earth whatsoever he will 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his Kingdom and Kingly-office or government Which three as they are distinguished in God Thine is the Kingdom and the power and the glory Why not in the Mediator also In the first two respects Christ as Mediator is over all things and so over all men and so over all Magistrates and all they in subjection to him But in the third respect the relation is onely between Christ and his Church as between King and Kingdom So that the thing in difference is that which Mr. Hussey hath not proved namely that Christ as Mediator doth not onely excell all things in glory and exercise a supreme power and providence over all things for his own glory and his Churches good neither of which is denied but that he also is as Mediator King Head and Governor of the Universe and hath not onely the government of his Church but all Civil government put in his hand When Mr. Hussey pag. 28. saith that I denyed pag. 43. what this distinction yeeldeth namely that Christ as Mediator exerciseth acts of divine power in the behalf and for the good of his Church it is a calumny for that which I denied pag. 43. was concerning the Kingdom not the power my words were these But as Mediator he is onely the Churches King Head and Governour and hath no other Kingdom Yea himsef pag. 26. speaking to these words of mine noteth that I did not say that as Mediator he hath no such power How commeth it to passe that he chargeth me with the denying of that which himself but two pages before had observed that I denie it not Well but pag. 43 he desires from me a further clearing of my distinction Kingdom power and glory and that I will shew from Scripture how it agreeth to Christ. I shall obey his desire though it was before easie to be understood if he had been willing enough to understand Solomon did excell all the Kings of the earth in wisedom riches glory and honour 2 Chron. 1. 12. and herein he was a type of Christ Psal. 89. 27. I will make him my first born higher then the Kings of the earth But as Solomon was onely King of Israel and was not by office or authority of Government a Catholique King over all the Kingdomes of the World nor all other Kings Solomons Vicegerents or Deputies So Iesus Christ as Mediator is onely the Churches King and is not King or Governour of the whole World nor Civil Magistrates his Vicegerents though he excell them all in dignity glory and honour Again David did subdue by power diverse States Provinces and Kingdoms and make them tributary But was David King of the Philistines and King of the Moabites and King of the Syrians and King of the Edomites because he smote them and subdued them 2. Sam. 8. Nay it is added in that very place vers 15. And David reigned over all Israel and David executed justice and judgement unto all his people And this is one argument to prove that those subdued and tributrary Territories were not properly under the government of Israel because Israel was not bound to extirpate Idolaters out of those lands but onely out of the holy land See Maimonides de Idolol cap. 7. sect 1. with the annotation of Dionysius Vossius So Christ who was set upon the throne of David doth as Mediator put forth his divine and irresistible power in subduing all his Churches enemies according to that Psal. 2 9. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron thou shalt dash them in peeces like a Potters vessel Rev. 17. 14. The Lamb shall overcome them for he is Lord of lords and King of kings But this vis major this restraining subduing power makes not Christ as Mediator to be King and Governour not onely of his Church but of the whole World beside Yea the power of Christ is over all things as well as all persons over all beasts fowles and fishes Heb. 2. 7. 8. compared with Psal. 8. 7. 8. Yea his power is over divells meant by things under the earth Phil. 2. 10. Wherefore it cannot be said that Christ as Mediator is King Head and Governour of all those whom he excelleth in glory or whom he hath under his power to do with them what he will It is a strange mistake when Mr Hussey pag. 43. objecteth against this distinction that a Kingdom without power and glory is a nominall empty thing Surely there may be a Kingly right and authority to governe where there is little either power or glory But this is nothing to my distinction which doth not suppose a Kingdom without power and glory nor yet power and glory without a Kingdom but onely that the Kingdom and Government is not to be extended to all those whom the King excelleth in glory for then one King that hath but little glory shall be subject to a King that hath much glory or over whom the King exerciseth acts of power for then the King shall be King to his and his Kingdomes enemies I verily beleeve that this distinction rightly apprehended will discover the great mistakes of that supposed universall Kingdom of Christ as Mediator reigning over all things and the Civil Magistrate as his Vicegerent CHAP. VI. Whether Jesus Christ as Mediator and head of the Church hath laced the Christian Magistrate to hold and execute his Office under and fo him as his Vicegerent The Arguments for the 〈◊〉 discussed MR. Hussey is very angry at my distinctions and arguments which I brought against Mr. Colâ—…mans fourth rule insomuch that in his Reply to me he spendeth very near two parts of three upon this matter from pag. 16. to 44. having past over sicco ped much of what I had said of other points in difference Come now therefore and let us try his strength in this great point He holds that Christ as Mediator hath placed the Christian Magistrate under him and as his Vicegerent and hath given him commission to govern the Church which if he or any man can prove from the Word of God it will go far in the decision of the Erastian controversie though this is not all which is incumbent to the Erastians to prove for as I first replied to Mr. Colemans fourth rule the Question is whether there be not some other government
Classical and Synodical Assemblies and to give a kind of Papal power to the Magistrate yet in this particular he argueth strongly for us and not against us Secondly Where is that Christian Magistracy which hath suppressed or punished all such offences as did fâ—ll under Ecclesiastical cognizance and censure in the Primitive and Apostolick Churches Or where is that Christian Magistrate that will yet undertake to punish all those offences and scandals which were censured in the Apostolick Churches Till some such instance be given this exception against Church-discipline and censures under a Christian Magistrate hath not so much as colour enough Aliae sunt leges Caesarum aliâ—…e Christi aliud Papinianus aliud Paulus noster praecipit saith Hierome in Epitaph Fabiâ—…lae Caesars Lawes and Christs Lawes are not the same but different Papinianus commands one thing Paul another thing Chrysostome Homil. 12. in 1. Epist. ad Cor. tells us that the best and wisest Law-givers had appointed no punishment for fornication for consuming and trifling away of time with playing at dice for gluttony and drunkennesse for Stage-plaies and lascivious whorish gestures therein Is there not some cause to apply all this and much more of this kind even to Christian Law givers and Magistrates Put the case that he who is called a brother as the Apostle speaks that is a member of the visible Church be found grossely ignorant of the Principles of Religion and so far from growing in knowledge that he loseth the knowledge of the Scriptures and of the truth of God which he had for this hath been diverse times observed through neglect of the means or if he be known to neglect ordinaâ—lly prayer in and with his Family and to continue in that offence after admonition or if he live in known or scandalous malice and envie and refuse to be reconciled with his neighbour or if he be a known lyar and dissembler or if by his words and actions he do scandalously and manifestly shew himself covetous drowned in sensuality ambitious proud or if he give a foul scandal by filthy and obscene speeches by lascivious obscene whorish-like gestures or actions where the act it self of adultery or fornication cannot be proved I suppose that for these and such like scandals which are causes deserving not onely the Elderships enquiry and admonition but suspension from the Lords Table the Christian Magistrate neither doth nor by the civil or municipal Laws is bound to arraign and punish all such as are guilty thereof Thirdly whereas Arch-bishop Whitgift Answ. to the Admon pag. 114. did alledge that the Church may not be governed under a Christian Magistrate as it may under a Tyrant which he brings as an exception against ruling Elders and Elderships while he could not denie but such there were in the Primitive Church Mr. Cartwrigh in his Reply pag. 140. answereth that if these Elders under a Tyrant had medled with any office of a Magistrate then there had been some cause why a godly Magistrate being in the Church that office should cease but since they did onely assist the Pastor in matters Ecclesiastical there is no distinction between times of persecution and times of peace as touching the office of Elders The like say I of Church-censures and discipline If the Government of the Church by Presbyteries and Synods if suspension and excommunication in the Apostles times had been an usurping of any thing belonging to the Magistrate then there had been some reason to lay aside all Church-censures and Ecclesiastical Government when the Magistrate turned Christian and willing to do his duty But if not then the civil and Church-government may still remain distinct even where the State is Christian. Fourthly Every Institution or Ordinance of Christ must continue as a perpetual obligation unlesse we can find in the Word that Christ hath given us a dispensation or taken off the obligation and set a period to the Ordinance that it shall continue so long and no longer I mean every Ordinance of Christ must be perpetual which we cannot prove from the Word to be but temporal or extraordinary Now in the Word Christ hath not appointed the governing the Church and correcting scandals to be onely under a Tyrant and to cease under a Christian Magistrate neither is there any such thing held forth in Scripture which yet our opposites must shew if they will make good what they say But contrariwise what Christ delivered to the Apostles and they to the Churches is to be kept and continued till our Lord come again 1 Cor. 11. 23. 26. 1 Tim. 6. 14. and he himself saith Rev. 2. 24. 25. That which ye have already hold fast till I come These things were not spoken to the Apostles to Timothy to the Churches of that time personally for they were not to live till Christs comming again but the charge was given to them in name of and with respect unto all the Ministery and Churches of Christ. Fifthly This exception made against Church-censures under a Christian Magistrate supposeth that such censures will make an interfering and clashing between the civil and Ecclesiastical power But there is no cause for that fear these powers being so hugely differenced in their efficient causes matters formes ends effects objects adjuncts correlations and ultimate terminations as I have made it to appear in the particulars Chap. 4. Sixthly The Churches liberty and power is not to be infringed diminished nor taken away but preserved maintained enlarged and augmented under a Christian Magistrate Were it not a sad case if there should be cause to say that the Churches of Christ have not so much liberty under a Christian Magistrate to keep themselves and the Ordinances from pollution as they had under Pagan and Infidel Magistrates Seventhly Why may not Christian Church-government consist with Christian Magistracy as well as the Jewish Church government did consist with the Jewish Magistracy being of the same Religion Or if we please to look to later Presidents who can be ignorant that civil government and Church-discipline have rather strengthened then destroyed each other not onely in France where the Magistracy is not Protestant but in Scotland in the Low-Countries in Geneva and else-where Eightly We have covenanted to endeavour a Reformation of Church-Government and discipline according to the word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches Now both the Word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches leadeth us to a Church-government distinct from civil Government and the example of the best Reformed Churches doth undeniably lead us to a Church-discipline even where he Magistrate is Christian neither doth the word make any exception of Christian States but contrariwise chargeth us to keep the commandement and Ordinances till Christ come again Ninthly The Magistrate hath other work to do and such as will take up the whole man and if he should take upon him the whole burthen of Church-Government the enquiring into examining and correcting of all
better hit the meaning that the offender is to be esteemed as an Heathen man and a Publiean by those who did before admonish him but were despised that is by the Church whose admonitions being despised they ought to cast out him who had despised them 5. And how can it be supposed that Christ would have one and the same person to be as a Heathen man and a Publican to one member of the Church and yet not to be as ◠Heathen man and a Publican but as a brother received in fellowship by the whole Church Sure this were a repugnancy between the judgement of the whole Church and the judgement of one member of the Church and two things which are repugnant can not be both of them agreeable to the will of Christ. CHAP. III. A further demonstration that these words Let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a Publican are not meant of avoyding Civill but Religious or Church-fellowship I Hope I have already made it to appeare that to draw Excommunication from Matth. 18. is not to extract water out of flint as M r Prynne supposeth but that it commeth as liquidè from the Text as water out of the fountaine Wherein I am the more confirmed because M r Prynnes exposition of these words Let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a Publican can not stand for he takes the sence to be no more but this keepe not any civill fellowship or company with such a one Now that this can not be our Saviours meaning I prove thus 1. If a private man shall thus at his owne hand withdraw and separate from an offending brother as from an Heathen man and a Publican what order peace or good government can there be either in Church or State And all the odium cast upon Excommunication as contrary to the spirituall priviledges of Christians will fall more heavy upon his owne way which brings any man be he Prince Parliament-man Pastor or whoever he be under so much slavery to the lust of any private person that he may be by that person and by ten thousand persons more in case of so many civill injuries not amended after complaint to the Magistrate esteemed avoyded and abhorred as an Heathen man and a Publican So that in the issue it may fall out that any man how eminent or deserving soever he be in Church or State may be looked upon as a Heathen and a Publican by ten thousand of the people before ever he be so judged by any Judicature For instance put case that a Minister be judicially convict to have wronged his parishioners in the matter of small tythes and they conceive him to persevere in the same injury must or may each of them flee from him as from an Heathen and a Publican Put case a whole company thinke themselves wronged in pay or otherwise by their Captaine or a whole Regiment by their Colonell and after complaint made finde themselves not repaired are they therefore free to avoyd all civill company with the Captaine or Colonell and to flee from them as from Heathens and Publicans And what if both the Lord Major of London and many godly Ministers who have eate at his Table should accuse Mr. Prynne of a calumny because of that passage in his Booke pag. 12. where he saith of Anabaptists Separatists Independents Presbyters or Divines Neither of which make any conscience of not repairing to the Lord Majors or any other publique City feast where they are sure of good fare because they were certaine there to meet and eate with some covetous or other scandalous persons with whom St. Paul probibtes them no not to eate If I say the Lord Major should accuse M r Prynne for slandering him and his house with the company of scandalous persons and if many godly conscientious Ministers should accuse him for aspersing them as having more love to good fare then conscience of avoyding to eate with scandalous persons And if after sentence past against M r Prynne he should still continue impenitent and not confesse his fault in this particular Will he allow the Lord Major and all the godly Ministers who have eaten at the Lord Majors table to avoyd M r Prynne as an Heathen and a Publican Let hm take heed whether his principles will lead him 2. M r Prynne saith pag. 4. that Let him be to thee as an Heathen and a Publican is interpreted by 1 Cor. 5. 10 11 12. 2 Thess. 3. 14. and elsewhere by Paul Now that place of the Corinthians which he citeth is meant of Excommunication as shall be proved in due time And vers 12. cited by himselfe makes it plaine that a judiciall act not a private mans withdrawing onely is meant for that verse speaks twice of judging an Apostolicall judgeing and an Ecclesiasticall judging And the best interpreters expound 2 Thess. 3. 14. of Church censures It s not the case of private civill injucies which the Apostle there speaks of but the case of publique scandall If any man be disobedient to the Apostolicall Epistle note that man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 put a marke upon him that is let him be publiquely censured Let him be separated from you saith the Syriak and then have no company with him and all this that he may be ashamed which must needs be by some publique censure or blacke mark put upon him 3. Let him be to thee as an Heathen if it be meant of keeping no civil company he must shew us that the Jews of old were and Christians under the new Testament are forbidden to keepe civill company with Heathens and those that are without the Church He goeth about to prove that the phrase is taken from the practice of the Jewes in that age pag. 4. But how doth he prove it He citeth some places to prove that the Israelites might not marry with the Canaanites but he doth not prove that they might not keep civill company with any of the Heathens There was no such favour nor fellowship permitted between the Israelites and the Canaanites as between the Israelites and other Gentiles who came among them from other Lands as Tostatus noteth in Matth. 26. quaest 43. The reason was because God had destinat the Canaanites to utter destruction and that the whole Land of Canaan should be given to the children of Israel Onely some few by speciall dispensation were spared as the Gibeonites because Ioshua and the Princes had sworne unto them and Rahab with her kindred because she saved the spies But such extraordinary cases excepted the Israelites ought not to permit any of the Canaanites to live nor receive them though they had been willing to be circumcised as Tostatus there thinketh However that great distance and alienation in point of fellowship between the Israelites and the Canaanites was not qua Heathens but qua Canaanites otherwise the children of Israel had been obliged to root out other Nations as well as the Canaanites Yea
not entice him to Idolatry and that a Jew also was permitted to be Physitian to a Gentile for which purpose they alledged the example of Moses who as their Tradition told them did practice medicine in Egypt Furthermore when Master Prynne understands nothing by those words Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a Publican but avoid civill fellowship and keep no familiar company with him and expounds it also by 1 Cor. 5. 11. with such a one not to eat which he still conceives to be onely meant of avoiding civill fellowship and by 2. Io. 10. receive him not into thy house He is twice out both because the Jewes did keep civill company with Heathens which hath been proved and also because if we beleive the Jewish writters concerning the customes of their Nation the Rabbies or wise men among them did not keep familiar fellowship nor civill company with the Plebeians of the Jewes themselves they were forbidden to eat and drink with or among the Plebeians Maimen de fundam legis cap. 5. Sect. 13. neither might they converse in the paths nor come into the houses of the Plebeians Ibid. Sect. 14. Gul. Vorstius in his annot pag. 73. addeth a passage in Misua that a wise man might neither lodge with a Plebeian nor receive a Plebeian to lodge with him Neverthelesse a wise man was permitted to converse not onely civilly but frequently with an Heathen man for which see Master Selden de Jure nat Gent. lib. 6. cap. 10. quoniam nihil mali ex Gentilium consuetudine viro scientiori imâ—…inere censebant So that in Master Prynâ—… sence all the Plebeians of the Jewes themselves were as Heathens and Publicans or civilly excommunicated by their wise men Wherefore we must needs distinguish a two fold communion or fellowship among the Jewes one civill another Ecclesiasticall It was the shutting out from the Ecclesiasticall communion of the Jewes which Christ alludes to Mat. 18. for beside the distinct notions of the Jewish Church and the Jew State of which before Is. Abrabanel de capitc fidei cap. 6. speaking of certaine fundamentall Articles which the Jewish Church did beleive saith they were intended to be Articles of Judaisme so that he that should beleive these should be in the communion of Israel and Ib. cap. 3. speaking of an Article concerning the coming of the Messiah he moves a doubt about it because Rabbi Hillell who denieth it was not excluded from the communion of the Law for the Gemaâ—…a gives him the Title of Rabbi When he comes to the solution of this doubt cap. 14. he cleares Rabbi Hillell as not denying that Article But all this intimateth that for heresy there was a shutting out from Ecclesiasticall communion Or that an hereticall apostat Jew was unto them as an Heathen man and therefore they were permitted to take usury as from strangers or Heathens so from an apostat Jew quia fratris nomen exuerat saith Master Selden de Jure nat Gent. lib. 6 c. 10. In Tzemach David edit Hen. Uorst pag. 67. it is said that the chief of the Hereticks were Tzadok and Baythos who denying rewards and punishments after this life exiverunte communione vel caetu Israelis they went out from the Ecclesiasticall communion of Israel This is good reason to say of a sonne of Israel if he be a sonne of Belial let him be to thee as an Heathen that is esteeme him as prophane and as lost as an Heathen have no more Church communion with him then with an Heathen And by this time I suppose it doth fully appeare to the intelligent Reader that some uncircumcised Heathens were admitted in to the civill fellowship and some Israelites continued not in the Ecclesiasticall fellowship of ihe Jewes which overturneth the whole strength of M r Prynnes answer to our argument from Matth. 18 But once more for I have thought good to insist the longer upon this point because much dependeth upon it Let him be to thee as an Heathen doth forbid Ecclesiaâ—icall communion not civill company except secondarily as a consequent of Excommunication for spirituall respects and ends as I shall shew anon but it is not meant of abstaining from meere civil company fellowship because the Jews were permitted to keep civil company and fellowship with Heathens even any civill company which did not encroach upon Religion or had appearance of an ensnarement into Idolatry and in that respect as participating of Religious fellowship became unlawfull This is the point I have been proving and which I will yet further prove out of Maim mides de Idolalotria cap 9. That one Chapter is sufficient to 〈◊〉 the present question Thus it begins Three daies before the feasts or holydaies of Heathens that worship Idols we are forbidden to buy from them or to sell unto them any durable thing to take or give any thing in lend to take or make payment of that which was given in lend upon writ or pledge but what was given in lend upon words onely it is lawfull to exact because this seemeth to be taken out of their hands It is also lawfull to sell unto them that which can not last as green herbs or anything sodden and that ever untill their holy day You see it was lawfull among the Jewes to buy and sell borrow and lend to make contracts with Heathens yea with Idolatrous Heathens onely in some not in all things there was a restraint upon them and that but three daies before the Heathen sestivities Then follows Sect. 2. This hath place in the land of the Israelites but in the other lands it is not forbidden except upon their holy day If any man transgresse by having trade or commerce with them during that space of three daies it is lawfull though to use the ware but if any man trade with them upon their holyday the things are forbidden to be used It is unlawfull also to send a gift to an Heathen man upon his holy day unlesse it be known that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nâ—…t 〈◊〉 the worship of Idols neither serâ—…eth them But if somâ—… 〈◊〉 mâ—…n upon his Holyday send a gift to an Israelite let him not take it from him 〈◊〉 it be suspected that hâ—… will be offended Neverthelessâ—… he shall not use it untill it be known that the Heathen man doth not worship Idols nor esteem them to be Gods Observe 1. that the things mentioned in the first Section though unlawfull to the â—ewes in their own Land three daies before the Heathâ—nish 〈◊〉 yet they held them not unlawfull in other Lands 2. They held it lawfll for a Jew to send a gift to an Heathen man or to receive a gift from him so that it were not upon the Heathenish festivity 3. Yea in some cases it was permitted to a Jew to send a gift to an Heathen man upon the very Heathen festivity to wit if he knew that Heathen man to be no worshipper of Idols as likewise to receive a
of his Passion this was the onely point of his accusation which was confessed and avouched by himselfe was most aggravated prosecuted and driven home by the Iewes was prevalent with Pilate as the cause of condemning him to die and was mentioned also in the superscription upon his crosse And although in reference to God and in respect of satisfaction to the Divine justice for our sinnes his death was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a price of redemption yet in reference to men who did persecute accuse and condemne him his death was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Martyrs Testimony to seale such a truth This Kingly Office of Iesus Christ as well as his Propheticall is administred and exercised not onely inwardly and invisibly by the working of his Spirit in the soules of particular persons but outwardly also and visibly in the Church as a visible politicall ministeriall body in which he hath appointed his own proper Officers Ambassadours Courts Laws Ordinances Censures and all these administrations to be in his own name as the onely King and Head of the Church This was the thing which Herod and Pilate did and many Princes Potentates and States doe looke upon with so much feare and jealousie as another Government co-ordinate with the civill But what was darke upon the one side to them hath been light upon the other side to those servants of Iesus Christ who have stood contended and sometime suffered much for the Ordinance of Church-Government and Discipline which they looked upon as a part of Christs Kingdome So Bucer So Parker So M. Welseh my countreyman of precious memory who suffered much for the same truth and was ready to seale it with his blood Beside divers others who might be named especially learned Didoclavius in his Altare Damascenum Cap. 1. and throughout I am not ignorant that some have an evill eye upon all government in a Nation distinct from civill Magistracy and if it were in their power they would have all Anti-Erastians and so consequently both Presbyterians and Independents lookt upon as guilty of Treason at least as violaters of and encroachers upon the rights and priviledges of Magistracy in respect of a distinct Ecclesiasticall government And indeed it is no new thing for the most faithfull Ministers of Iesus Christ to be reproached and accused as guilty of Treason which was not onely the lot of M. Calderwood and as hath been now shewed of M. Welsch and those that suffered with him but of M. Knox before them as likewise of many Martyrs and confessors and of the Apostles themselves Yet if we will judge righteous judgement and weigh things in a just ballance we doe not rob the Magistrate of that which is his by giving unto Christ that which is Christs We desire to hold up the honour and greatnesse the power and authority of Magistracy against Papists Anabaptists and all others that despise dominion and speake evill of dignities We doe not compare as Innocentius did the civill and the ecclesiasticall powers to the two great lights that to the Moone this to the Sunne We hold it is proper to Kings Princes and Magistrates to be called Lords and Dominators over their Subjects whom they governe civilly but it is proper to Christ onely to be called Lord and Master in the Spirituall government of the Church and all others that beare office therein ought not to usurpe Dominion therein nor be called Lords but onely Ministers Disciples and Servants We acknowledge and affirme that Magistracy and civill Government in Empires Kingdomes Dominions and Cities is an Ordinance of God for his owne glory and for the great good of mankind so that whoever are enemies to Magistracy they are enemies to mankind and to the revealed will of God That such persons as are placed in authority are to be beloved honoured feared and holden in a most reverend estimation because they are the Lieutenants of God in whose seat God himselfe doth sit and judge We teach that not onely they are appointed for civill policy but also for maintenance of the true Religion and for suppressing of Idolatry and superstition whatsoever We confesse that such as resist the supreame power doing that thing which appertaineth to his charge doe resist Gods Ordinance and therefore cannot be guiltlesse And further we affirme that whosoever deny unto them their ayd counsell and comfort whilest the Princes and Rulers vigilantly travell in execution of their Office that the same men deny their help support and counsell to God who by the presence of his Lieutenant doth crave it of them We know and believe that though we be free we ought wholly in a true faith holily to submit our selves to the Magistrate both with our body and with all our goods and endeavour of mind also to performe faithfulnesse and the oath which we made to him so far forth as his government is not evidently repugnant to him for whose sake we doe reverence the Magistrate That we ought to yeeld unto Kings and other Magistrates in their owne stations feare honour tribute and custome whether they be good men or evill as likewise to obey them in that which is not contrary to the Word of God It being alwaies provided that in things pertaining to our soules and consciences we obey God onely and his holy Word We believe that God hath delivered the Sword into the hands of the Magistrates to wit that offences may be repressed not onely those which are committed against the second Table but also against the first We doe agree and avouch that all men of what dignity condition or state soever they be ought to be subject to their lawfull Magistrates and pay unto them Subsidies and Tributes and obey them in all things which are not repugnant to the word of God Also they must poure out their prayers for them that God would vouchsafe to direct them in all their actions and that we may lead a peaceable and quiet life under them with all godlinesse and honesty We teach that it doth belong to the authority and duty of the Magistrate to forbid and if need be to punish such sinnes as are committed against the ten Commandements or the Law naturall as likewise to adde unto the Law naturall some other lawes defining the circumstances of the naturall Law and to keepe and maintaine the same by punishing the transgressors We hold that the lawes of the Realme may punish Christian men with death for heynous and grievous offences And that it is lawfull for Christian men at the command of the Magistrate to beare Arme and to serve in just warres All these things we doe sincerely really constantly faithfully and cheerfully yeeld unto and assert in behalfe of the civill Magistrate So that the cause which I now take in hand doth not depresse but exalt doth not weaken but strengthen Magistracy I doe not plead against
the power of the Sword when I plead for the power of the Keys These two are most distinct they ought not to be confounded neither need they to clash or interfeere between themselves The controversie is not about taking from the Magistrate what is his but about giving to Christ that which is his We hold a reciprocall subordination of persons but a coordination of powers As the Ministers and others of the Ecclesiastical estate are subject to the Magistrate civill so ought the person of the Magistrate be subject to the Church Spiritually and in Ecclesiasticall government And the exercise of both these jurisdictions cannot stand in one person ordinarily Againe b The Magistrate neither ought to preach minister the Sacraments nor execute the censures of the Church nor yet prescribe any rule how it should be done but command the Ministers to observe the rule commanded in the Word and punish the transgressors by civill meanes The Ministers exerce not the civill Jurisdiction but teach the Magistrate how it should be exercised according to the word The Laws and Statutes of Geneva doe at once ratifie the Ecclesiasticall Presbyteriall power of Iurisdiction or censure and withall appoint that Ministers shall not take upon them any civill jurisdiction but where there shall be need of compulsion or civill punishments that this be done by the Magistrate Yea under a Popish Magistrate as in France and even under the Turke himselfe many Churches doe enjoy not onely the Word and Sacraments but a free Church government and Discipline within themselves rectio disciplinae libera which is thought no prejudice to the civill government they that governe the Churches having no dominion nor share of Magistracy Vide D. Chytraei orat de statu Ecclesiarum in Graecia c. I know well that there are other horrid calumnies and mis-representations of Presbyteriall Government besides that of encroaching upon Magistracy but they are as false as they are foule And although we goe upon this disadvantage which Demosthenes being loadened with a heavy charge and grievous aspersions by Aeschines did complaine of that though by right both parties should be heard yet the generality of men doe with pleasure hearken to reproaches and calumnies but take little or no pleasure to heare mens clearing of themselves or their cause and that his adversary had chosen that which was more pleasant leaving to him that which was more tedious Neverthelesse I must needs expect from all such as are conscionable and faithfull in this Cause and Covenant that their eares shall not be open to calumnies and shut upon more favourable informations And however let the worst be said which malice it selfe can devise it shall be no small comfort to me that our Lord and Master hath said Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you and shal say all manner of evill against you falsely for my names sake I know also that a Government and Discipline in the Church the thing which I now undertake to plead for is a very displeasing thing to those that would faine enjoy liberty either of pernicious errors or grosse prophannesse But as Maimonides saith well we must not judge of the easinesse or heavinesse of a Law according to the affections and lust of any evill man being rash in judgement and given to the worst vices but according to the understanding of one who is most perfect among men like unto whom according to the Law all others ought to be More Nevochim part 2. Cap. 39. No marvell that the licentious hate that way wherein they shall finde themselves hemmed in if not hedged up with thornes And that they may the more flatter themselves in their sinfull licentiousnesse they imagine that Christs yoke is easie and his burthen light to the flesh as well as to the Spirit to carnall as well as to spirituall men For my part if I have learned Christ aright I hold it for a sure principle that in so farre as a man is spirituall and regenerate in as farre his flesh is under a yoake and in so farre as he is unregenerate in as farre his flesh is sine jugo without a yoke The healing of the spirit is not without the smiting of the flesh When I speake of this Divine Ordinance of Church Government my meaning is not to allow muchlesse to animate any in the too severe and over strict exercise of Ecclesiasticall discipline and censures It was observed by Hierome as one of the errors of the Montanists Illi ad omne pene delictum Ecclesiae obserant fores They shut the Church doore that is they excommunicate and shut out of the Church almost at every offence I confesse the greater part are more apt to faile in the defect then in the excesse and are like to come too short rather than to goe too farre Yet a failing there may be and hath been both waies The best things whether in Church or State have been actually abused and may be so againe through the error and corruption of men The holy Scripture it selfe is abused to the greatest mischiefes in the world though in its owne nature it serves for the greatest good in the world The abuse of a thing which is necessary and especially of a divine Ordinance whether such abuse be feared or felt ought not may not prejudice the thing it selfe My purpose and endeavour shall be wherein I beseech the Lord to help my infirmities to own the thing to disowne the abuses of the thing to point out the path of Christs Ordinance without allowing either rigour against such as ought to be tenderly dealt with or too much lenity towards such as must be saved with feare and pulled out of the fire or at all any aberration to the right or left hand I have had much adoe to gaine so many â—…orae subâ—…isivae from the works of my publique calling as might suffice for this worke I confesse it hath cost me much paines and I thinke I may say without presumption he that will goe about solidly to answer it will finde it no easie matter Subitane lucubrations will not doe it But if any man shall by unanswerable contrary reasons or evidenees discover error or mistake in any of my principles let truth have the victory let God have the glory Onely this favour I may say this justice I shall protest for First that my principles and conclusions may be rightly apprehended and that I may not be charged with any absurd dangerous or odious assertion unlesse my own words be faithfully cited from which that assertion shall be gathered yea also without concealing my explanations qualifications or restrictions if any such there be Which rule to my best observation I have not transgressed in reference to the Opposites Secondly that as I have not dealt with their Nauci but with their Nucleus I have not scratched at their shell but taken out their kernell such as it
of Kings and Lord of Lords How all power in Heaven and in Earth is said to be given to him That the Governments set in the Church 1 Cor. 12. 28. are not civill Magistrates fully proved Ephes. 1. 21 22 23. and Colos. 2. 10. vindicated CHAP. VII Arguments for the negative of that Question formerly propounded THe lawfull authority of the Heathen Magistrates vindicated It can not be shewed from Scripture that Christ as Mediator hath given any Commission of Vice-gerentship to the Christian Magistrate That the worke of the Ministery is done in the name and authority of Jesus Christ the worke of Magistracy not so The power of Magistracy or civill Government was not given to Christ as Mediator shewed from Luke 12. 14. Iohn â—8 36. Luke 17. 20 21. Magistracy founded in the Law of nature and Nations The Scripture holds forth the same origination of Heathen Magistracy and of Christian Magistracy CHAP. VIII Of the power and priviledge of the Magistrate in things and causes Ecclesiasticall what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not and what it is THat no administration formally and properly Ecclesiasticall and namely the dispencing of Church censures doth belong unto the Magistrate nor may according to the Word of God be assumed and exercised by him proved by six Arguments That Christ hath not made the Magistrate head of the Church to receive appeales from all Ecclesiasticall Assembles There are other sufficient remedies against abuses or Mal-administration in Church-Government Reasons against such appeales to the Magistrate The Arguments to the contrary from the Examples of Ierenâ—…y and of Paul discussed Of the collaterality and coordination of the Civill and Ecclesiasticall powers What is the power and right of the Magistrate in things and causes Ecclesiasticall cleared first generally next more particularly by five distinctions 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 belong to the civill power but non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. The Magistrate may imperare that which he may not elicere 3. Distinguish the directive power from the coercive power 4. The Magistrates power is cumulative not privative 5. He may doe in extraordinary cases that which he ought not to doe ordinarily A caution concerning the Arbitrary power of Magistrates in things Ecclesiasticall CHAP. IX That by the Word of God there ought to be another Government besides Magistracy or civill Government namely an Ecclesiasticall Government properly so called in the hands of Church-officers THe Question stated and the Affirmative proved by one and twenty Scripturall Arguments Who meant by the Elders that rule well 1 Tim. 5. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 names of government The words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb 13. 7 17. examined Of receiving an accusation against an Elder Of rejecting an Hereticke Of the excommunication of the Incestuous Corinthian and the sence of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of the subjection of the spirits of the Prophets to the Prophets The Angels of the Churches why reproved for having false Teachers in the Church Note that man 2 Thess. 3. 14. proved to be Church-censure Of the Ruler Rom. 12. 8. and Governments 1 Cor. 12. 28. A patterne in the Jewish Church for a distinct Ecclesiasticall government What meant by cutting off Gal. 5. 12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly what Of the Ministeriall power to revenge all disobedience 2 Cor. 10. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 2. 8. what Of the visible administration of the Kingdome of Christ by his Laws Courts Censures The Arguments for Excommunication from Matth. 18. and 1 Cor. 5. briefly vindicated That Elders are rulers of the flock 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a name of Government Ministers why called Sâ—…ewards of the Mysteries of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a name of government Church-Government exercised by the Synod of the Apostles and Elders Acts 15. CHAP. X. Some objections made against Ecclesiasticall Government and Discipline answered Mr Husseys objection doth stricke as much against Paul as against us The fallacy of comparing Government with the word preached in point of efficacy Foure ends or uses of Church-government That two coordinate Governments are not inconsistent The objection that Ministers have other worke to doe answered The feare of an ambitious ensnarement in the Ministery so much objected is no good Argument against Church-government M. Husseys motion concerning Schooles of Divinity examined Church Government is no immunity to Church-officers from Censure Though the Erastian principles are sufficiently overthrown by asserting from Scripture the may be of Church-government yet our Arguments prove a must be or an Institution Six Arguments added which conclude this point CHAP. XI The necessity of a distinct Church-government under Christian as well as under Heathen Magistrates THis acknowledged by Christian Emperours of old Grotius for us in this particular Christian Magistracy hath never yet punished all such offences as are Ecclesiastically censurable Presbyteries in the primitive times did not exercise any power which did belong of right to the Magistrate No warrant from the word that the Ordinance of a distinct Church government was onely for Churches under persecution but contrariwise the Churches are charged to keep till the comming of Christ the commandement then delivered No just ground for the feare of the interfeering of the civill and of the Ecclesiasticall power The Churches liberties enlarged not diminished under Christian Magistrats The Covenant against this exception of the Erastians The Christian Magistrate if he should take upon him the whole burthen of the corrective part of Church-government could not give an account to God of it The Erastian principles doe involve the Magistrate into the Prelaticall guiltinesse The reasons and grounds mentioned in Scripture upon which Church-censures were dispenced in the Primiâ—ive Churches are no other then concerne the Churches under Christian Magistrâ—tes The end of Church-censures neither intended nor attained by the administration of Christian Magistracy The power of binding and loosing not temporary They who restrict a distinct Church-government to Churches under Heathen or persecuting Magistrats give a mighty advantage to Socinians and Anabaptists Gualther and Master Prynne for us in this Question APPENDIX A Collection of some testimonies out of a Declaration of King Iames the Helvetian Bohemian Augustane French and Dutch confessions the Ecclesiasticall Discipline of the reformed Churches in France Harmonia Synodorum Belgicarum the Irish Articles a Book of Melanchton and another of L. Humfredus The third Booke Of Excommunication from the Church AND Of Suspension from the Lords Table CHAP. I. An opening of the true state of the question and of Master Prynnes many mistakes and mis-representations of our Principles A Transition from Church-government in generall to Excommunication and Suspension in particular The present controversie ten waies mis-stated by M. Prynne That which was publiquely depending between the Parliament and Assembly did rather concerne the practicall conclusion it selfe then the Mediums to prove it The strength of the Assemblies proofes
Gisb. Vâ—etius Gul. Vorstius Hen. Vorstius Gerâ—ardus Uossius Dionysius Vossius Ursinus Z ZAncâ—ius Zepperus Zonâ—ras Zâ—inglius Aarons Rod blossoming OR The Divine Ordinance of Church-government VINDICATED The first Booke Of the Jewish Church-government CHAP. I. That if the Erastians could prove what they alledge concerning the Iewish Church Government yet in that particular the Iewish Church could not be a president to the Christian. OBserving that very much of Erastus his strength and much of his followers their confidence lieâ—h in the old Testament and Jewish Church which as they averre knew no such distinction as Civill Government and Church Government Civill Justice and Church Discipline I have thought good first of all to remove that great stumbling-block that our way may afterward lie fair and plain before us I doe heartily acknowledge that what we finde to have been an Ordinance or an approved practice in the Jewish Church ought to be a rule and patterne to us such things onely excepted which were typicall or temporall that is for which there were speciall reasons proper to that infancy of the Church and not common to us Now if our opposites could prove that the Jewish Church was nothing but the Jewish State and that the Jewish Church-government was nothing but the Jewish State-government and that the Jewes had never any supreame Sanhedrin but one onely and that civil and such as had the temporall coercive power of Magistracy which they will never be able to prove yet there are divers conâ—iderable reasons for which that could be no president to us First Casaubon exerc 13. anno 31. num 10. proves out of Maimonides that the Sanhedrin was to be made up if possible wholly of Priests and Levites and that if so many Priests and Levites could not be found as were fit to be of the Sanhedrin in that case some were assumed out of other Tribes Howbeit I hold not this to be agreeable to the first institution of the Sanhedrin But thus much is certaine that Priests and Levites were members of the Jewish Sanhedrin and had an authoritative decisive suffrage in making decrees and inflicting punishments as well as other members of the Sanhedrin Philo the Jew de vita Mosis pag. 530. saith that he who was found gathering sticks upon the Sabbath was brought ad principem sacerdotum consistorium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to the Prince or chiefe Ruler meaning Moses together with whom the Priests did sit and judge in the Sanhedrin Jehosaphat did set of the Levites of the Priests and of the chiefe of the Fathers of Israel for the judgement of the Lord c. 2 Chro. 19. 8. Secondly the people of Israel had Gods own Judiciall Law given by Moses for their civill Law and the Priests and Levites in stead of civill Lawyers Thirdly the Sanhedrin did punish no man unlesse admonition had been first given to him for his amendment Maimon de fundam legis cap. 5. sect 6. yea saith Gul. Vorstius upon the place though a man had killed his parents the Sanhedrin did not punish him unlesse he were first admonished and when witnesses were examined seven questions were propounded to them one of which was whether they had admonished the offender as the Talmud it self tels us ad tit Sanhedrin cap. 5. sect 1. Fourthly the Sanhedrin respondebat de Jure did interpret the Law of God and determine controversies concerning the sence and intent thereof Deut. 17. 8 9 10 11. and it was on this manner as the Ierusalem Talmud in Sanhedrin cap. 10. sect 2. records There were there in Ierusalem three assemblies of Iudges one sitting at the entry to the mountaine of the Sanctuary another sitting at the doore of the Court the third sitting in the Conelave made of cut stone First addresse was made to that which sate at the ascent of the mountaine of the Sanctuary then the Elder who came to represent the cause which was too hard for the Courts of the Cities said on â—…his manner I have drawne this sence from the holy Scripture my fellows have drawn that sence I have taught thus my fâ—…llows so and so If they had learned what is to be determined in that cause they did communicate it unto them If not they went forward together to the Iudges sitting at the doore of the Court by whom they were instructed if they after the laying forth of the difficulty knew what resolution to give Otherwise all of them jointly had recourse to the great Sanhedrin For from it doth the Law go forth unto all Israel It is added in Exc. Gemar Sanhed cap. 10. sect 1. that the Sanhedrin did sit in that roome of cut stone which was in the Temple from the morning to the evening daily sacrifice The Sanhedrin did judge cases of Idolatry apostasie false Prophets c. Talm. Hieros in Sanhed cap. 1. sect 5. Now all this being unquestionably true of the Jewish Sanhedrin if we should suppose that they had no supreme Sanhedrin but that which had the power of civill Magistracy then I aske where is that Christian State which was or is or ought to be moulded according to this patterne Must Ministers have vote in Parliament Must they be civill Lawyers must all criminall and capitall Judgements be according to the Judiciall Law of Moses and none otherwise Must there be no civill punishment without previous admonition of the offender Must Parliaments sit as it were in the Temple of God and interpret Scripture which sence is true and which false and determine controversies of faith and cases of conscience and judge of all false doctrines yet all this must be if there be a paralell made with the Jewish Sanhedrin I know some divines hold that the Judiciall Law of Moses so far as concerneth the punishments of sins against the morall â—aw Idolatry blasphemy Sabbath-breaking adultery theft c. ought to be a rule to the Christian Magistrate and for my part I wish more respect were had to it and that it were more consulted with This by the way I am here only shewing what must follow if the Jewish Government be taken for a prâ—sident without making a disâ—inction of Civil Church government Surely the consequences will be such as I am sure our opposites will never admit of and some of which namely concerning the civill places or power of Ministers and concerning the Magistrates authority to interpret Scripture ought not to be admitted Certainly if it should be granted that the Jewes had but one Sanhedrin yet there was such an intermixture â—of Civill and Ecclesiasticall both persons and proceedings that there must be a partition made of that power which the Jewish Sanhedrin did exercise which taken whole and entire together can neither sute to our Civill nor to our Ecclesiasticall Courts Nay while the Erastians appeale to the Jewish Sanhedrin suppose it now to be but one they doe thereby ingage themselves to grant unto Church officers a share at
allowed not onely to worship God apart by themselves but also to come into the Church and Congregation of Israel and to be called by the name of Jewes neverthelesse they were resâ—rained and secluded from Dignities Magistracies and preferments in the Jewish Republique and from divers marriages which were free to the Israelites Even as strangers initiated and associated into the Church of Rome have not therefore the priviledge of Roman Citizens Thus M. Selden who hath thereby made it manifest that there was a disâ—iuction of the Jewish Church and Jewish State because those Proselytes being imbodied into the Jewish Church as Church members and having a right to communicate in the holy Ordinances among the rest of the people of God yet were not properly members of the Jewish State nor admitted to Civill priviledges Whence it is also that the names of Jewes and Proselytes were used distinctly Acts 2. 10. CHAP. III. That the Iewes had an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin and Government distinct from the Civill I Come to the second point that there was an Ecclesiasticall government and an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jews This distinction of the two Sanhedrins the Civill and the Ecclesiasticall is maintained by Zepperus de polit eccles l. 3. cap. 7. Iunius in Deut. 17. Piscator ibid. Wolphius in 2. Reg. 23. Gerhard Harm de pass cap. 8. Gâ—…dwin Moses and Aaron lib. 5. cap. 1. Bucerus de gubern eccl pag. 61 62. Walaeus Tom. 2. pag. 9. Pelargus in Deut. 17. Sopingius ad bonam fidem Sibrandi pag. 261. et seq The Dutch Annotations on Deut. 17. 2 Chron. 19. Bertramus de polit Jud. cap. 11. Apâ—…llonii jus Majest part 1. p. 374. Strigelius in 2. Paralip cap. 19. The professours of Groning Vide Judicium facult Theol. academiae Groninganae apud Cabeljav def potest Eccl. pag. 54. I remember Raynolds in the Conference with Hart is of the same opinion Also M. Paget in his defence of Church government pag. 41. Besides divers others I shall onely adde the Testimony of Constantinus L'Empereur a man singularly well acquainted with the Jewish antiquities who hath expressed himselfe concerning this point both in his Annotations upon Bertram pag. 389. and Annot. in Cod. Middoth pag. 187 188. The latter of these two passages you have here in the Margin expressing not only his opinion but the ground of it And it is no obscure footstep of the Ecclefiasticall Sanhedrin which is cited out of Elias by D. Buxtorf in his Lexicon Chald. Talmud Rabbin p. 1514. The first institution of an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin appeareth to me to be held forth Exod. 24. 1. where God saith to Moses Come up unto the Lord thou and Aaron Nadâ—… and Abihu and seventy of the Elders of Israel It is a controversie among Interpreters who those seventy Elders were Tostatus maketh it cleare that they were not the seventy Elders chosen for the government of the Common-wealth Num 11. Nor yet the Judges chosen by the advice of Iethro Exod. 18. Nor yet any other Judges which had before time Judged the people These three negatives Willet upon the place holdeth with Tostatus Not the first for this was done at Mount Sinai shortly after their comming out of Egypt But on the twenty day of the second moneth in the second yeere they tooke their journey from Sinai to the Wildernesse of Paran Num. 10. 11 12. and there pitched at Hibroth-hattaavath Num. 33. 16. where the seventy Elders were chosen to relieve Moses of the burthen of Government So that this election of seventy Exod. 24. was before that election of seventy Num 11. Not the second for this election of seventy Exod. 24. was before that election of Judges by Iethros advice Exod. 18. Iethro himselfe not having come to Moses till the end of the first yeere or the beginning of the second yeere after the comming out of Egypt and not before the giving of the Law which Tostatus proves by this argunent The Law was given the third day after they came to Sinai but it was impossible that Iethro should in the space of three daies heare that Moses and the people of Israel were in the wildernesse of Sinai and come there unto them that Moses should goe forth and meet him and receive him and entertaine him that Iethro should observe the manner of Moses his government in litigious judgement from morning till evening and give counsell to rectifie it that Moses should take course to helpe it how could all this be done in those three daies which were also appointed for sanctifying the people against the receiving of the Law Therefore he concludeth that the story of Iethro Exod. 18. is an anticipation Lastly he saith the seventy Elders mentioned Exod. 24. could not be Judges who did judge the people before Iethro came because Iethro did observe the whole burthen of government did lie upon Moses alone and there were no other Judges Now it is to be observed that the seventy Elders chosen and called Exod. 24. were also invested with authority in judging controversies wherein Aaron or Hur were to preside vers 14. They are joyned with Aaron Nadad and Abihu and are called up as a Representative of the whole Church when God was making a Covenant with his people T is after the Judiciall lawes Exod. 21. 22. 23. and that 24 Chapter is a transition to the ceremoniall lawes concerning the worship of God and structure of the Tabernacle which are to follow Neither had the seventy Elders of which now I speake any share of the Supreme civill Government to judge hard Civill causes and to receive appeals concerning those things from the inferiour Judges for all this did still lie upon Moses alone Num. 11. 14. Furthermore they saw the glory of the Lord and were admitted to a sacred banquet and to eat of the Sacrifices in his presence Exod. 24. 5 10 11. and were thereby confirmed in their calling All which laid together may seem to amount to no lesse then a solemne interesting and investing of them into an Ecclesiasticall authority The next proofe for the Ecclesiasticall Sanhedâ—in shall be taken from Deut. 17. 8 9 10 11 12. where observe 1. T is agreed upon both by Jewish and Christian Expositors that this place holds forth a supreme civill Court of Judges and the authority of the civill Sanhedrin is mainly grounded on this very Text. Now if this Text hold forth a superior civill Jurisdiction as is universally acknowledged it holds forth also a superior Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction distinct from the Civill For the Text carrieth the authority and sentence of the Priests as high as the authority and sentence of the Judges and that in a disjunctive way as two powers not one and each of them binding respectively and in its proper sphere 2. The Hebrew Doctors tell us of three kinds of causes which being found difficult were transmitted from the inferiour Courts to those at Ierusalem 1.
3. 14. Not eat with them 1 Cor. 5. 11. Nor bid them God speed 2 Epist. John vers 10. 11. 6. That since there must be a withdrawing from a brother that walketh disorderly and scandalously it s more agreeable to the glory of God and to the Churches peace that this be done by a publick authoritative Ecclesiastical judgement and sentence than wholly and solely to trust it to the piety and prudence of each particular Christian to esteem as heathens and publicans whom and when and for what he shall think good and accordingly to withdraw and separate from them 7. That there is a distinction between Magistracy and Ministery even Iure Divino That the civil Magistrate hath not power to abolish or continue the Ministery in abstracto at his pleasure nor yet to make or unmake Ministers in concreto that is to ordain or depose Ministers as he thinks fit 8. As the Offices are distinct so is the power Magistrates may do what Ministers may not doe and Ministers may doe what Magistrates may not do 9. It is Iuris Communis a principle of common equity and naturall reason that the directive Judgement in any matter doth chiefly belong to such as by their profession and vocation are devoted and set apart to the study and knowledge of such matters and in that respect supposed to be ablest and fittest to give Judgement thereof A consultation of Physitians is called for when the Magistrate desires to know the nature symptomes or cure of some dangerous disease A consultation of Lawyers in Legal questions A Councell of War in military expeditions If the Magistrate be in a ship at Sea he takes not on him the directive part of Navigation which belongs to the master with the mates and pilot Neither doth the master of the ship if it come to a Sea-fight take on him the directive part in the fighting which belongs to the Captain And so in all other cases Artifici in sua arte credendum Wherefore though the Judgement of Christian prudence and discretion belongs to every Christian and to the Magistrate in his Station and though the Magistrate may be and sometime is learned in the Scriptures and well acquainted with the principles of true Divinity yet ut plurimum and ordinarily especially in a rightly Reformed and well constituted Church Ministers are to be supposed to be fittest and ablest to give a directive Judgement in things and causes Spiritual and Ecclesiastical with whom also other ruling Church Officers do assist and joyne who are more experimentally and practically they ought also and diverse times are more Theoretically acquainted with the right way and rules of Church-government and censures then the civil Magistrate when he is no ruling Elder in the Church which is but accidentall can be rationally or ordinarily supposed to be 10. There is some power of Governement in the Church given to the Ministery by Christ else why are they said to be set over us in the Lord and called Rulers and Governours as we shall see afterwards CHAP. III. What the Erastians yeeld unto Vs and what We yeeld unto them FOr better stating of the controversie We shall first of all take notice of such particulars as are the Opposites concessions to us or our concessions to them Their concessions are these 1. That the Christian Magistrate in ordering and disposing of Ecclesiastical causes and matters of Religion is tyed to keep close to the Rule of the Word of God and that as he may not assume an Arbitrary Government of the State so far lesse of the Church 2. That Church-Officers may exercise Church-government and authority in matters of Religion where the Magistrate doth not professe and defend the true Religion In such a case two Governments are allowed to stand together one civil another Ecclesiastical This Erastus granteth as it were by constraint and it seems by way of compliance with the Divines of Zurik who hold excommunication by Church-Officers under an infidel Magistrate and that Iure Divino to move them to comply the more with him in other particulars 3. That the abuse of Church-governement is no good argument against the thing it self There being no authority so good so necessary in Church or State but by reason of their corruptions who manage it may be abused to tyranny and opression These are Mr. Prinnes words Vindic. of the 4. Questions pag. 2. 4. That some Jurisdiction belongs to Presbyteries by Divine Right Mr. Prynne in his Epistle Dedicatory before the vindication of his four questions saith that his scope is not to take from our new Presbyteries all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction due by Divine Right to them but to confine it within certain definite limits to prevent all exorbitant abuses of it 5. That the Christian Magistrate ought not may not preach the Word nor minister the Sacraments Mr. Coleman in his Brotherly examination re-examined pag. 14. I never had it in my thoughts that the Parliament had power of dispensing the Word and Sacraments Then so far there is a distinction of Magistracy and Ministery Iure Divino Yet in this he did not so well agree with Erastus 6. That the ministery is Iure Divino and Ministers have their power and authority of preaching the Word derived to them from Christ not from the Magistrate So Mr. Hussey in his Epistle to my self We preach the Word with all authority from Christ derived to us by those of our Brethren that were in Commission before us Magistrates may drive away false Teachers but not the Preachers of the Gospel but at their utmost peril 7. They admit and allow of Presbyteries so that they doe not exercise Government and Jurisdiction Erast. lib. 4. cap. 1. Our Concessions to our Opposites are these 1. That all are not to be admitted promiscuously either to be governours or members in the Ecclesiastical Republick that is in a visible political Church None are to governe nor to be abmitted members of Presbyteries or Synods except such as both for abilities and conversation are qualified according to that which the Apostle Paul requireth a Bishop or Elder to be Scandalous or prophane Church-Officers are the worst of dogs and swine and to be first cast out And as all are not to governe so all are not to be governed Ecclesiastically but onely Church-Members 1 Cor. 5. 12. Therefore what hath been objected concerning many both Pastors and People in England who are still branches of the old stock doth not strike against what we hold All are not sit for a Church-government Therefore those that are fit shall not have a Church-Government So they must argue Or thus a Popish people are not fit to be governed Presbyterially and Episcopal Ministers are not fit to governe therefore the rest of the Nation shall want a Government 2. Presbyteriall Government is not despotical but ministerial it is not a Dominion but a Service We are not Lords over Gods heritage 1 Pet. 5.
whole Diocesse consisting it may be of some hundreds of Congregations holding that the Ministers of particular Congregations did preach the Word and minister the Sacraments in his name by vertue of authority and order from him and because he could not act by himself in every Congregation The Presbyteriall Government acknowledgeth no Pastorall charge of preaching the Word and ministring the Sacraments to more Congregations then one and doth acknowledge the Pastors of particular Churches being lawfully called to have power and authority for preaching the Word and ministring the Sacraments in the name of Christ and not in the name of the Presbyterie 5. The Prelates as they denyed the power and authority of Pastors so they utterly denyed the very offices of ruling Elders and Deacons for taking more especiall care of the poor in particular Congregations 6. They did not acknowledge Congregationall Elderships nor any power of discipline in particular Congregations which the Presbyteriall Government doth 7. They intruded Pastors oft times against the consent of the Congregation and reclamante Ecclesiâ which the Presbyteriall Government doth not 8. They ordained Ministers without any particular charge which the Presbyterial Government doth not 9 In Synods they did not allow any but the Clergie alone as they kept up the name to have decisive suffrage The Presbyterial Government gives decisive voices to ruling Elders as well as to Pastors 10. The Prelates declined to be accountable to and censurable by either Chapters Diocesan or Nationall Synods In Presbyteriall Government all in whatsoever Ecclesiasticall administration are called to an account in Presbyteries Provinciall and Nationall Assemblies respectively and none are exempted from Synodicall censures in case of scandall and obstinacy 11. The Prelates power was not meerly Ecclesiasticall they were Lords of Parliament they held Civil places in the State which the Presbyterial Government condemneth 12. The Prelats were not chosen by the Church Presbyters are 13. The Prelates did presume to make Lawes binding the Conscience even in things indifferent and did persecute imprison fine depose excommunicate men for certain Rites and Ceremonies acknowledged by themselves to be indifferent setting aside the will and authority of the Law makers This the Presbyteriall Government abhorreth 14. They did excommunicate for money matters for trifles Which the Presbyteriall Government condemneth 15. The Prelates did not allow men to examine by the Judgement of Christian and private discretion their Decrees and Canons so as to search the Scriptures and look at the Warrants but would needs have men think it enough to know the things to be commanded by them that are in place and power Presbyteriall Government doth not lord it over mens consciences but admitteth yea commendeth the searching of the Scriptures whether these things which it holds forth be not so and doth not presse mens Consciences with Sic volo sic jubeo but desireth they may doe in faith what they do 16. The Prelates held up pluralities non-residencies c. Which the Presbyteriall Government doth not 17. As many of the Prelates did themselves neglect to preach the Gospel so they kept up in diverse places a reading non-preaching Ministery Which the Presbyteriall Goverment suffereth not 18. They opened the door of the Ministery to diverse scandalous Arminianized and popishly affected men and locked the door upon many worthy to be admitted The Presbyteriall Government herein is as contrary to theirs as theirs was to the right 19. Their Official Courts Commissaries c. did serve themselves Hâ—ires to the sons of Eli Nay but thou shalt give it me now and if not I will take it by force The Presbyterial Government 〈◊〉 such proceedings 20. The Prelates and their High-Commission Court did assume potâ—…statem utriusque gladij the power both of the Temporall and Civil Sword The Presbyteriall Government medleth with no Civil nor Temporall punishments I do not intend to enumerate all the differences between the Papal and Prelatical Government on the one side and the Presbyterial Government on the other side in this point of unlimitednesse or arbitrarynesse These differences which I have given may serve for a consciencious caution to intelligent and moderate men to beware of such odiouâ— and unjust comparisons as have been used by some and among others by Mr. Salâ—…marsh in his Parallel between the Prelacy and Presbyterie Which as it cannot strike against us nor any of the Reformed Churches who acknowledge no such Presbyterie as he describeth and in some particulars striketh at the Ordinance of Parliament as namely in point of the Directory so he that hath a mind to a Recrimination might with more truth lay diverse of those imputations upon those whom I beleeve he is most unwilling they should be laid upon In the third place The Presbyterian Government is more limited and lesse arbitrary than the Independent Government of single Congregations which exempting themselves from the Presbyterial subordination and from being accountable to and censurable by Classes or Synods must needs be supposed to exercise a much more unlimited or arbitrary power than the Presbyterial Churches do especially when this shall be compared and laid together with one of their three grand Principles which disclaimeth the binding of themselves for the future unto their present judgement and practice and avoucheth the keeping of this reserve to alter and retract See their Apologetical narration pag. 10 11. By which it appeareth that their way will not suffer them to be so far moulded into an Uniformity or bounded within certain particular rules I say not with others but even among themselves as the Presbyterian way will adâ—it of Finally The Presbyterial Government hath no such liberty nor arbitrarinesse as Civil or Military Government hath there being in all civil or temporal affairs a great deal of latitude 〈◊〉 to those who manage the same so that they command nor act nothing against the Word of God But Presbyterial Government is tyed up to the rules of Scripture in all such particulars as are properly spiritual and proper to the Church Though in other particular occasional circumstances of times places accommodations and the like the same light of nature and reason guideth both Church and State yet in things properly Spiritual and Ecclesiastical there is not near somuch latitude left to the Presbytery as there is in civil affairs to the Magistrate And thus I have made good what I said That Presbyterial Government is the most limited and least arbitrary Government of any other All which Vindication and clearing of the Presbyterial Government doth overthrow as to this Point Master Hussey's Observation pag. 9. of the irregularity and arbitrarinesse of Church-government And so much of my fourth Concâ—ssion The fifth shall be this 'T is far from our meaning that the Christian Magistrate should not meddle with matters of Religion or things and causes Ecclesiastical and that he is to take care of the Common-wealth but not of the Church Certainly there is much power and Authority which
by the Word of God and by the Confessions of Faith of the Reformed Churches doth belong to the Christian Magistrate in matters of Religion Which I do but now touch by the way so far as is necessary to wipe off the aspersion cast upon Presbyterial Government The particulars I refer to Chapter 8. Our sixth Concession is That in extraordinary cases when Church-government doth degenerate into tyranny ambition and avarice and they who have the managing of the Ecclesiastical power make defection and fall into manifest Heresy Impiety or Injustice as under Popery and Prelacy it was for the most part then and in such cases which we pray and hope we shall never see again the Christian Magistrate may and ought to do diverse things in and for Religion and interpose his Authority diverse wayes so as doth not properly belong to his cognizance decision and administration ordinarily and in a Reformed and well constituted Church For extraordinary diseases must have extraordinary remedies More of this before A seventh Concession is this The Civil Sanction added to Church-government and Discipline is a free and voluntary Act of the Magistrate That is Church-government doth not ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 necessitate the Magistrate to aid assist or corroborate the same by adding the strength of a Law But the Magistrate is free in this to do or not to do to do more or to do lesse as he will answer to God and his conscience it is a cumulative Act of favour done by the Magistrate My meaning is not that it is free to the Magistrate in genere moris but in genere entis The Magistrate ought to adde the Civil Sanction hic nunc or he ought not to do it It is either a duty or a sin it is not indifferent But my meaning is The Magistrate is free herein from all coaction yea from all necessity and obligation other then ariseth from the Word of God binding his conscience There is no power on Earth Civil or Spiritual to constrain him The Magistrate himself is his own Judge on Earth how far he is to do any cumulative Act of favour to the Church Which takes off that calumny that Presbyterial Government doth force or compel the conscience of the Magistrate I pray God we may never have cause to state the Question otherwise I mean concerning the Magistrate his forbidding what Christ hath commanded or commanding what Christ hath forbidden in which case we must serve Christ and our consciences rather then obey Laws contrary to the Word of God and our Covenant whereas in the other case of the Magistrate his not adding of the Civil Sanction we may both serve Christ and do it without the least appearance of disobedience to the Magistrate Eighthly We grant that Pastors and Elders whether they be considered distributively or collectively in Presbyteries and Synods being Subjects and Members of the Common-wealth ought to be subject and obedient in the Lord to the Magistrate and to the Law of the Land and as in all other duties so in Civil subjection and obedience they ought to be ensamples to the Flock and their trespasses against Law are punishable as much yea more then the trespasses of other Subjects Of this also before Ninthly If the Magistrate be offended at the sentence given or censure inflicted by a Presbytery or a Synod they ought to be ready in all humility and respect to give him an account and reason of such their proceedings and by all means to endeavour the satisfaction of the Magistrate his conscience or otherwise to be warned and rectified if themselves have erred CHAP. IV. Of the agreements and differences between the nature of the Civil and of the Ecclesiastical Powers or Governments HAving now observed what our opposites yeeld to us or we to them I shall for further unfolding of what I plead for or against adde here the chief agreements and differences between the Civil and Ecclesiastical powers so far as I apprehend them They both agree in these things 1. They are both from God both the Magistrate and the Minister is authorized from God both are the Ministers of God and shall give account of their administrations to God 2. Both are tyed to observe the Law and Commandments of God and both have certain directions from the Word of God to guide them in their administration 3. Both Civil Magistrates and Church Officers are Fathers and ought to be honoured and obeyed according to the fifth Commandment Utrumque scilicet dominium saith Luther Tom. 1. fol. 139. both Governments the Civil and the Ecclesiastical do pertain to that Commandment 4 Both Magistracy and Ministery are appointed for the glory of God as Supreme and for the good of men as the subordinate end 5. They are both of them mutually aiding and auxiliary each to other Magistracy strengthens the Ministery and the Ministery strengthens Magistracy 6. They agree in their general kinde they are both Powers and Governments 7. Both of them require singular qualifications eminent gifts and endowments and of both it holds true Quis ad haec idoneus 8. Both of them have degrees of censures and correction according to the degrees of offences 9. Neither the one nor the other may give out sentence against one who is not convict or whose offence is not proved 10. Both of them have a certain kind of Jurisdiction in foro exteriori For though the Ecclesiastical power be spiritual and exercised about such things as belong to the inward man onely yet as Dr. Rivet upon the Decalogue pag. 260. 261. saith truly there is a two-fold power of external jurisdiction which is exercised in foro exteriori one by Church-Censures Excommunication lesser and greater which is not committed to the Magistrate but to Church-Officers Another which is Civil and coercive and that is the Magistrates But Mr. Coleman told us he was perswaded it will trouble the whole World to bound Ecclesiastical and Civil Jurisdiction the one from the other Maledicis pag. 7. Well I have given ten agreements I will now give ten differences The difference between them is great they differ in their causes effects objects adjuncts correlations executions and ultimate terminations 1. In the efficient cause The King of Nations hath instituted the Civil power The King of Saints hath instituted the Ecclesiastical power I mean the most high God possessor of Heaven and Earth who exerciseth Soverainty over the workmanship of his own hands and so over all mankind hath instituted Magistrates to be in his stead as gods upon Earth But Iesus Christ as Mediator and King of the Church whom his Father hath set upon his holy Hill of Zion Psal. 2. 6. to reigne over the House of Jacob for ever Luke 1. 33. who hath the key of the House of David laid upon his shoulder Isa. 22. 22. hath instituted an Ecclesiastical power and goverment in the hands of Church-Officers whom in his name he sendeth forth 2. In the matter Magistracy or Civil
judge such causes But this Christ himself plainly denyeth Let us hear Mr. Husseys answer pag. 24. It is the very same with that which Azorius Instit. mor. part 2. lib. 4. cap. 19. pleading for the Popes Temporall Dominion answereth concerning the point now in hand It doth not follow that because Christ was not a Iudge actu exercito therefore the originall right of Government was not in him And this Objection may be answered thus Christ doth not say he was not a Iudge but who made me a Iudge how dost thou know that I am a Iudge And thus Christ in the time of his humiliation did often hide the manifestation of his power What greater violence could be offered to the Text For the Verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 constituit is purposely used to deny the power or right as well as the exercise and proveth that he was not a Judge actu signato having no such power nor authority given him it is the same phrase which is used Act. 7. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who made thee a Ruler and a Judge Moses was then beginning to do the part of a Ruler and a Judge actu exercito but they refuse him as having no warrant power nor authority Act. 6. 3. the Apostles bid choose seven Deacons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom we may appoint say they over this businesse Tit. 1. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and ordain Elders in every City yet neither can that of the Deacons nor this of the Elders be understood otherwise then of the right power and authority given them See the like Heb. 7. 28. Luk. 12. 42. Matth. 24. 47. The scope therefore of Christs answer was this as Aretius upon the place non debeo aliena munia invadere I ought not to invade such Offices as belong to others not to me Some of the Jesuits as forward as they are to defend the Temporal Power of the Pope as Christs Vicar on earth yet cannot shut their eies against the light of this Text who made me a Judge or a divider over you But they are forced to acknowledge that Christ denies that he had any right or authority to be a civil Judge For how can he who is authorized to be a Judge say Who made me a Judge The fifth Argument I take from Iohn 18. 36. My Kingdom is not of this World The great jealousie and fear which both Herod and Pilate had of Christ was that they understood he was a King Christ clears himself in this point his Kingdom was such as they needed not be afraid of for though it be in the World it is not of the World though it be here it is not from hence it is heterogeneous to Temporal monarchy and civil Government Mr. Hussey pag. 24. tells us he knows not how those Governments that should be executed by Church-Officers should savour lesse of the World then the civil Government For this I remit him to those many and great differences which I have shewed between the civil and the Ecclesiastical Power In the mean while my argument stands in force For if all civil Government were put in Christs hand as he is Mediator and he to depute and substitute others whom he will under him then what is there in that answer of his to Pilate which could convincingly answer those mistakes and misapprehensions of the nature of his Kingdom That which is now taught by Master Hussey is the very thing which Herod and Pilate were afraid of but Christ denyeth that which they were afraid of and vers 36. is an answer to the Question asked vers 33. Art thou the King of the Jews My Kingdom is not of this World saith he To the same sence as Grotius upon the place noteth out of Eusebius Christs kinsmen when they were asked concerning his Kingdome did answer to Domitian that his Kingdom was not worldly but heavenly Sixthly I prove the point from Luke 17. 20 21. And when he was demanded of the Pharisees when the Kingdom of God should come he answered them and said The Kingdom of God commeth not with observation Neither shall they say loe here or lo there For behold the Kingdom of God is within you By the Kingdom of God is meant in this place the kingdom of the Messiah as Interpreters do unanimously agree Both Iohn Baptist and Chrst himself had preached that the Kingdom of God was at hand and the Jews themselves were in expectation of the Messiah to make them free from the Roman yoke and to restore a temporal or earthly monarchy to Israel Hereupon they aske when this Kingdom should come His answer is The Kingdom of God commeth not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with observation or outward shew and pomp but it is within you it is spiritual it belongs to the inward man But if the Magistrate be Christs Vicegerent and hold his office of and under Christ as Mediator and if Christ as Mediator reigne in through and by the Magistrate then the Kingdom of the Messiah doth come with observation and pomp with a crown a scepter a sword and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with princely splendor riches triumph such as the Pharisees then and the Jews now do expect which saith Grotius is the thing that Christ here denieth For all the outward pomp observation splendor majesty power and authority which a Vicegerent hath doth principally redound unto his Master and Soveraign So that by our opposites principles the Kingdom of Christ must come with observation because the dominion of the Magistrate whom they hold to be his Vicegerent commeth with observation Seventhly That Government and authority which hath a foundation in the law of nature and Nations yea might and should have had place and been of use though man had not sinned cannot be held of and under and managed for Christ as he is Mediator But Magistracy or civil Government hath a foundation in the law of Nature and Nations yea might and should have had place and been of use though man had not sinned Ergo. The reason of the proposition is because the law of nature and nations and the law which was written in mans heart in his first creation doth not flow from Christ as Mediator but from God as Creator neither can it be said that Christ as Mediator ruleth and governeth all nations by the law of nature and nations or that Christ should have reigned as Mediator though man had not sinned The Assumption is proved by Gerhard loc com Tom. 6. pag. 459. 460. 474 In the state of innocency there had been no such use of Magistracy as now there is for there had been no evil doers to be punished no unruly persons to be restrained yet as the wife had been subject to the husband and the son to the Father so no doubt there had been an union of diverse families under one head man being naturally 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Aristotle calls him he is for society and
are for impenitent contumacious offenders but the Magistrate doth and must punish offenders when the course of Justice and law so requireth whether they appear penitent or impenitent Fourthly The Magistrates power of punishing offenders is bounded by the law of the land What then shall become of such scandalls as are not crimes punishable by the law of the land such as obscene rotten talking adulterous and vile behaviour or the most scandalous conversing and companying together though the crime of adultery cannot be proved by witnesses living in known malice and envie refusing to be reconciled and thereupon lying off it may be for a long time from the Sacrament and the like which are not proper to be taken notice of by the civil Judge So that in this case either there must be Church-censures and discipline exercised by Church-officers or the Magistrate must go beyond his limits Or lastly Scandalls shall spread in the Church and no remedy against them Far be it from the thoughts of Christian Magistrates that scandalls of this kind shall be tolerated to the dishonour of God the laying of the stumbling blocks of bad examples before others and to the violation and pollution of the Ordinances of Jesus Christ who hath commanded to keep his ordinances pure A second Argument may be this In the old Testament God did not command the Magistrates but the Priests to put a difference betwixt the prophane and the holy the unclean and the clean Levit. 10. 10. Ezech. 22. 26. Ezech. 44. 23 24. Deut. 21. 5. 2 Chron. 23. 18 19. And in the new Testament the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven are given to the Ministers of the Church Matth. 16. 19. and 18. 18. Iohn 20. 23. but no where to the civil Magistrate It belongeth to Church-officers to censure false doctrine Revel 2. 2. 14. 15. to decide controversies Acts 16. 4. and to examine and censure scandalls Ezech. 44 23 24. which is a Prophecy concerning the ministery of the New Testament And Elders judge an Elder 1 Tim. 5. 19. or any other Church-member 1 Cor. 5. 12. Thirdly The Scripture holdeth forth the civil and Ecclesiastical power as most distinct insomuch that it condemneth the Spiritualizing of the civil Power aswell as the Secularizing of the Ecclesiastical power State Papacy aswell as Papal-State Church-officers may not take the civil sword nor judg civil causes Luke 12. 13 14 and 22. 25. Matth. 26. 52. 2 Cor. 10. 4. 2 Tim. 2. 4. So Uzzah might not touch the Ark nor Saul offer burnt offerings nor Uzziah burn incense I wish we may not have cause to revive the proverb which was used in Ambrose his time That Emperors did more covet the Priesthood then the Priests did covet the Empire Shall it be a sin to Church-officers to exercise any act of civil government and shal it be no sin to the civil Magistrate to ingrosse the whole and sole power of Church-Government Are not the two powers formally and specifically distinct Of which before Chap. 4. It is to be well noted that Maccovius and Vedelius who ascribe a sort of Papal power to the civil Magistrate to the great scandall of the Reformed Church do notwithstanding acknowledge that Christ hath appointed Church discipline and censures and the same to be dispenced by Church-officers onely And that the Magistrate as he may not preach the Word and administer the Sacraments So he may not exercise Church-discipline nor inslict spiritual censures such as excommunication Though Erastus pag. 175. hath not spared to say that the Magistrate may in the New Testament though he might not in the old exercise the ministeriall function if he can have so much leisure from his other employments Fourthly The power of Church discipline is intrinsecall to the Church that is both they who censure and they who are censured must be of the Church 1 Cor. 5. 12. 13. They must be of one and the same Corporation the one must not be in the body and the other out of the body But if this power were in the Magistrate it were extrinsecall to the Church For the Magistrate quatenus a Magistrate is not so much as a Church-member far lesse can the magistrate as magistrate have jurisdiction over Church-members as Church members even as the minister as minister is not a member of the Common-wealth or State far lesse can he as minister exercise jurisdiction over the Subjects as Subjects The Christian magistrate in England is not a member of the Church as a magistrate but as a Christian. And the minister of Jesus Christ in England is not subject to the magistrate as he is a minister of Christ but as he is a member of the Common-wealth of England He was both a learned man and a great Royallist in Scotland who held that all Kings Infidel as well as Christian have equal authority and jurisdiction in the Church though all be not alike qualified or able to exercise it Io. Wemius de Reg. primat pag. 123. Let our opposites loose this knot among themselves for they are not of one opinion about it Fifthly Church-officers might and did freely and by themselves dispence Church-censures under Pagan and unbeleeving magistrates as is by all confessed Now the Church ought not to be in a worse condition under the Christian magistrate then under an Infidel for the power of the Christian magistrate is cumulative not privative to the Church He is a Nursing Father Isa. 49. 23. not a Step-Father He is keeper defender and guardian of both Tables but neither Judge nor Interpreter of Scripture Sixthly I shall shut up this Argumentation with a convincing dilemma The Assemblies of Church-officers being to exercise discipline and censure offences which is supposed and must be granted in regard of the Ordinances of Parliament either they have power to do this Iure proprio and virtute officii or onely Iure devoluto and virtute delegationis such authority being derived from the magistrate If the former I have what I would If the latter then it followeth 1. That where Presbyteries and Synods do exercise spirituall Jurisdiction not by any power derived from or dependant upon the civil Magistrate but in the name and authority of Iesus Christ and by the power received from him as in Scotland France the Low-Countries c. there all Ecclesiastical censures such as deposition of Ministers and Excommunication of scandalous and obstinate persons have been are and shall be void null and of no effect Even as when the Prelaticall party did hold that the power of ordination and jurisdiction pertaineth onely to Prelats or such as are delegate with commission and authority from them thereupon they were so put to it by the Arguments of the Anti-Episcopall party that they were forced to say that Presbyters ordained by Presbyters in other Reformed Churches are no Presbyters and their excommunication was no excommunication 2. It will follow that the Magistrate himself may excommunicate for nemo potest aliis
Graecians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was the same thing which Comitia to the Latines Therefore such Assemblies had a judicial power and their suffrages were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 firm and ratified Sentences Secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commeth from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence also cometh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dominion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to rule or to have a dominion It was long ago observed by Dionysius Areopagita de divinis nominibus cap. 12. where after he hath put into the description of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dominion that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 true and unshaken firmenesse he addes this reason 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which Balthasar Corderius rendereth thus Quâ—…propter dominatio Graeâ—…è à 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 derivato nomine idem est quod firmatio firmamentum firmum ac firmans seu ratificans Pachimeres in his Paraphrase addeth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it signifieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath its name from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So then it is not every confirming certifying or making sure a thing but when a thing is made sure or firm with fulnesse of authority and power The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is therefore rightly rendred by Stephanus Scapula and Pasor not onely firmamentum rata fides but auctoritas plena full authority Thirdly the same Apostle calls a ratified Testament which ratification is by a legal and judicial authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gal. 3. 15. Fourthly the opposite Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth anctoritate privâ—… omni imperio spolio irritum reddo As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 noteth a privation of authority so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a giving of authority or ratification The sixteenth Argument to prove a distinct Church-Government is this The visible political ministerial Church is the Kingdom of Jesus Christ and he is the Head King Judge and Law-giver thereof Isa. 9. 6. Isa. 22. 21 22. Psal. 2. 6. Luk. 1. 33. 1 Cor. 15. 24 Eph. 1. 21m 22 23. Dare any say that the Lord Jesus shall not governe the Church of England and reigne over the same Luk. 19. 14 27. Must he not be received both as Lord and as Christ Acts 2. 36. Now in the administration and government of a Kingdom these three things are necessarily required 1. Lawes 2. Officers Ministers Judges Courts 3. Censures and punishments of offences Which three being universally necessary in every Kingdom can 〈◊〉 of all be supposed to be wanting in the Church and Kingdom oâ— Jesus Christ who hath been more faithfull in the execution oâ— his Kingly office and hath provided better for the Government of his Church then ever any King or State in this world did for a Civil Government I adde the Lawes Judicatories and censures in the Kingdom of Christ must be spiritual and Beclâ—siastical because his Kingdom is not of this world and his servants cannot take the sword Iohn 18. 36. Neither are the weapons of our warfarre carnal but yet mighty through God and in readinesse to revenge all disobedience 2 Cor. 10. 4. 6. I do not see what can be answerd to this Argument except any do so far deny the Kingly office of Jesus Christ as to say that the Church Political or Ministerial is not his Kingdom but onely the Church Mystical that is as he ruleth over our soules by his Word and Spirit To which purpose Mr. Hussey in his plea pag. 33. denyeth that the visible Church can be called the Body of Christ or he their Head and tells us that the government which Christ hath over the faithful is truely spiritual and of this Kingdom faith he he hath indeed no Officers but his Spirit I reply 1. The Scripture is plain that a visible ministeriall Church is the body of Christ Rom. 12. 4 5. 1 Cor. 10. 16. 17. 1 Cor. 12. 12. to 28. If we admit of a visible Church and visible Saints we must also admit of a visible body and a visible Kingdom of Christ. 2. The Political Ministerial Church were a body without a head The Analogie of a political head as well as of a natural head agreeth to Christ the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and he hath an influence upon the Church potestative as well as effective 3. He 〈◊〉 his Propheâ—icall office not onely in teaching us inwardly by his Spirit but in teaching the Church outwardly by his servants the Ministers of his Word Now iâ— he be a Prophet to the visible ministerial Church he is also a King to the same for his offices cannot be divided his Scholars are his Subjects and whosoever receive him as a Prophet must also receive him as a King Yea let us hear Mr. Hussey himself pag. 17. The Kingdom of Christ is 〈◊〉 ample as his Prophecy c. the Doctrine which they must teach commands noâ—… commands have alwaies power and authority 〈◊〉 So that either he must say that Christ gives no commands to the visible Church or confesse that the visible Church is the visible Kingdom of Christ. 4 That the Kingdom of Christ comprehendeth the Government and discipline of the Church I prove from Mattâ—… â—16 28. There be some standing here which shall not tastâ—… of death till they see the Son of man comming in his Kingdom Where first of all note Christ hath not onely an invisible but a visible Kingdom Next this visible Kingdom is not meant of his comming again in glory to judge the quick and the dead for all that were then hearing Christ have tasted of death and yet Christ is not come to judgement Nor is it meant of Christs tranfiguration mentioned Matth. 17. for that was six dayes after Matth. 17. 1. and if he meant that he would not have said so emphatically there be some here that shall not taste of death c. intimating what was to come to passe not after some daies but after some yeares as if he had said this age or generation shall not passe away till these things be fulfilled Neither is that transfiguration any where called the Kingdom of God nor can it be properly so called Nor lastly is the Kingdom of God in that place meant onely of the preaching of the Gospel for so they had seen Christ comming in his Kingdom Luk. 10. 9. 11. Nor is it meant of Christs working of miracles for so likewise they had seen his Kingdom Matth. 12. 28. Melius ergo Beda Gregorius quorum sententiam nostri sequuntur per illud Regnum Christi intelligunt constitutionem Ecclesiarum post Christi ascensum saith Tossanus upon the place Some of those to whom he spoke at that time lived to see Christ reigne in the gathering and governing of Churches Gregor Hom 32. in Evang. Et quia nonnulli ex discipâ—…lis usque adâ—…o in corpore victuri erant ut Ecclesiam Dei constructam conspicerenâ—… contra mundi hujus glorium erectam
have suffered in his person or estate all the punishment which he ought to suffer so that he hath now made a civil atonement as I may call it for his offence and the Christian Magistrate hath no further to charge him with Suppose also that he is by such corporal or civil punishments as by a bit and bridle over-awed and restrained from committing again the like extâ—rnal acts Notwithstanding he hath not the least signe of true repentance and godly sorrow for his former foul and scandalous sins and he is known to be not an accuser but an excuser of himself for those faults and scandals Such a one comes and desires to receive the Sacrament Must his poenal satisfaction to the Christian Magistrate be a sufficient poenitential satisfaction to the Church Here is a rock which the Erâ—…stians dash upon unlesse they admit of a distinct Ecclesiastical Judgement concerning the signes of repentance in a scandalous sinner according to which as these signes shall appear or not appear he is to be admitted or not admitted to the Sacrament Twelfthly the power of binding and loosing is not a temporary but a perpetual power that is appointed by Christ to continue in his Church alwaies unto the end Now this power is given onely to Church-officers and Christ hath not given the keyes of discipline and the power of binding and loosing of which else-where to the Magistrate nay not to the Christian Magistrate more then to the Infidel Magistrate Let the least hint be found in Scripture where Christ hath given any such power to the Christian Magistrate and I yeeld the cause Thirteenthly The new Testament holdeth out as little of the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments under a ChriÌ„stian Magistrate as it doth of a Church-government under a Christian Magistrate Shall this therefore strengthen the Socinian Tenent That Baptisme is not a perpetual Ordinance in the Church and that we are not obliged by that commission which the Apostles had to baptize God forbid Fourteenthly The German Anabaptists required an expresse warrant or example in the New Testament of a Christian Magistrate or of the sword and wars in a Christian State yet this hath been thought no good Argument against Magistracy and wars among Christians I cannot pretermit a passage of Gualther who may seem to be opposite to me in this present Question Even he in his Homily upon Iohn 9. 22. after he hath spoken of Excommunication in the Jewish Church and in the Apostolick Churches he addeth And this day also there is need of Ecclesiastical discipline which being instituted in the Reformed Churches ought to be diligently kept lest the indulgence of Magistrates which reignes almost every where should render the Doctrine of the Gospel suspected among those that are without and that themselves also may be contained in their office and may not think that any thing they will is lawful to them in the Church But after all this let me put Mr. Hussey and other Erastians in mind that if they do acknowledge that Jesus Christ hath instituted or commanded that there be a Church Government and power of censures distinct from the Civil Government when the Magistrate is Heathenish or Idolatrous let them speak it out and let us agree so far Otherwise if they do not agree in this it is but a blind for them to make use of this distinction that where the Magistrate is Christian there is no necessity of a distinct Church-Government I conclude with a passage of Mr. Prynne in his twelve considerable serious Questions touching Church-Government The ninth of those Questions runs thus Whether the Independents challenge of the Presbyterians to shew them any National Church professing Christ in our Saviours or the Apostles daies before any one Nation totally converted to the Christian Faith or any general open profession made of it by the Princes Magistrates and major part of any Nation Kingdom Republick who were then all generally Pagans and Persecutors of the Gospel not then universally imbraced be not a most irrational unjust demand Sure if this hold against the Independents it will hold as strongly yea more strongly against the Erastians to prove their demand to be most irrational and unjust while they challenge us to shew them in the New-Testament a distinct Church-Government under a Christian Magistrate or where the State was Christian though themselves know Magistrates and States were then generally Pagan and not Christian Yea there was in those daies much more of a national Church then of a Christian Magistrate An Appendix to the second Book containing a Collection of some Testimonies not cited before And first a Testimony of King Iames in a Declaration of his penned with his own hand signed and delivered to the Commissioners of the Church of Scotland at Linlithgow December 7. Anno 1585. I For my part shall never neither my posterity ought ever cite summon or apprehend any Pastor or preacher for matters of Doctrine in Religion Salvation Heresies or true Interpretation of the Scripture but according to my first act which confirmeth the liberty of preaching the Word ministration of the Sacraments I avouch the same to be a matter meer Ecclesiastical and altogether impertinent to my calling Therefore never shall I nor ever ought they I mean my posterity acclaim any power or Iurisdiction in the foresaids His Majesties meaning was that he ought not to do this in prima instantiâ that is before the person be accused convict or judged in any Ecclesiastical Court. which was the Question at that time occasioned by Mr. Andrew Melvill his Case Afterward in the same Declaration it followeth thus Christ saying Dic Ecclesiae and one onely man stealing that dint in a quiet hole the Act of Parliament reduceth the sentence for informality and nullity of processe not as Iudges whether the Excommunication was grounded on good and just causes or not but as witnesses that it was unformally proceeded against the warrant of Gods Word example of all Reformed Kiâ—ks and your owne particular custome in this Countrey A little after I mind not to cut off any liberty granted by God to his Kirk I acclaim not to my self to be judge of Doctrine in Religion salvation heresies or true Interpretation of Scripture And after My Intention is not to meddle with Excommunication neither acclaim I to my self or my Heires power in any thing that is meer Ecclesiastical and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor with any thing that Gods Word hath simply devolved in the hands of his Kirk And to conclude I confesse and acknowledge Christ Iesus to be Head and Law-giver to the same And what soever persons do attribute to themselves as Head of the Kirk and not as Member to suspend or alter any thing that the Word of God hath onely remitted to them that man I say committeth manifest Idolatry and sinneth against the Father in not trusting the Words of his Son against the Son in not obeying him and taking
suspendetur Si suspensus post iter atas admonitiones nullum poenitentiae signum dederit ad Excommunicationem procedet Ecclesia Melchior Adamus de vitis Germanorum Theologorum Pag. 342. CUmque sub id tempus Anno 1545. Fredericus Elector Palatinus qui Ludovico successerat de Ecclesiarum agitaret Reformatione composuit Melanchthon cum evocato venire integrum non esset scriptum de reformandis Ecclesiis cujus Synopsin aliquot regulis comprehendit quas addimus Vera salutaris gubernatio Ecclesiae Christi praecipuè in his sex Membris consistit PRimum In vera pura Doctrina quam Deus Ecclesiae suae patefecit tradidit doceri mandavit Secundo In legitime usu Sacramentorum Tertio In conservatione Ministerii Evangelici obedientiae erga Pastores Ecclesiarum sicut Deus vult postulat conservari Ministerium Evangelii servat ipse sua potentiâ presentiâ Quarto In conservatione honestae pia Disciplinae retinendae per judicia Ecclesiastica seu jurisdictionem Ecclesiasticam Quinto In conservandis studiis necessariae doctrinae Scholis Sexto Ad haec opus est defensione corporali facultatibus ad personas quae sunt in efficiis necessariis alendas The Irish Articles of Religion Art 58. NEither do we give unto him the Supreme Magistrate hereby the administration of the Word and Sacraments or the power of the keyes And Art 69. But particular and visible Churches consisting of those who make profession of the Faith of Christ and live under the outward means of Salvation be many in number wherein the more or lesse sincerely according to Christs Institution the Word of God is taught the Sacraments are administred and the authority of the keyes is used the more or lesse pure are such Churches to be accounted Laurentius Humfredus de Religionis conservatione Reformatione vera Ad Nobilitatem Clerum Populum Anglicanum PAg. 23. Nec satis mirari possum nec satis dolere cum intellgam in his locis repudiari disciplinam Ecclesiasticam vel nullam esse vel nimis laxam vel non satis vigilanter administratam in quibus tamen alioqui Religionis sincera efâ—igies cernitur quasi Evangelium esse possit ubi non vivitur Evangelicè aut quasi Christus laeto carnali voluptuario delectetur Evangelio c. At in Ecclesia manere debet censura jurisdictio non minus quam gladius in Repub. Pag. 25. Sit ergo haec prima Reformationis perfectae ratio nostri ac peccatorum recognitio emendatio Deinde severior adsit in Ecclesia castigatio animadversio ut illa laxit as remissio frnaeetur quo minus levius deinceps peccetur FINIS THE THIRD BOOKE OF Excommunication from the CHURCH AND Of Suspension from the LORDS TABLE CHAP. I. An opening of the true state of the question and of Master Prynnes many mistakes and mis-representations of our Principles HAving now by the light of Scripture and other helps asserted a Church-government distinct from civill Magistracy both in the Old and New Testament the last part of my present undertaking shall be to vindicate the particular Ordinances of Excommunication and Suspension called by the Schoolmen Excommunicatio major minor Of which also I have before spoken divers things occasionally for I have asserted an Excommunication and Suspension in the Jewish Church Booke 1. Chap. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12. The nature grounds reasons uses and ends whereof were not proper to the Old Testament but such as concerne the Christian Church I have also brought arguments Booke 2. Chap. 9 10. which conclude not onely Church-government but Excommunication And so much of my worke is done Neverthelesse there is more to doe M r Prynne first in his foure grand Quaeres and thereafter in his Vindication of the same hath argued much both against the Suspension from the Sacrament of a person not Excommunicated and wholly cast out of the Church and against some of the most pregnant Scripturall proofes for Excommunication it selfe In his Vindication he hath branched forth the controversie into ten points of difference Two of these viz. the fifth concerning suspension from the Sacrament of the Passeover and the ninth concerning casting out of the Synagogue I have discussed before in the first Book Where I have also examined other assertions of his concerning the Jewish Sanhedrin Temple confession of sinne The other points of difference not handled before I am as the Lord will help me now to speak to The first point of difference is whether in those foure Quaeres of his he stated the Controversie aright He is offended that I in a Sermon of mine before the honourable House of Commons charged the Questionist with mistakes and that I did not take notice of the question concerning suspension from the Sacrament as he stated it Vindic. pag. 3. I had reason because he had mis-stated it and since it pleased him to interpose in a matter depending between the Honourable houses of Parliament and the Reverend Assembly of Divines and to publish a paper plainly reflecting upon a Petition of the Assembly I hope he can not think either the Assembly or me tied to his stating of the question If he will meddle with the businesse of the Assembly he must speak to it as it is And that it may now appeare how just cause I had to charge his Queres with mistakes of the state of the question which he still mistaketh I shall endeavour a more particular and full discovery of these his mistakes And first that which was desired by the Assembly was that such a rule may be established by authority of Parliament as may keep off all scandalous and notorious sinners from the Sacrament The question was not what Texts of Scripture doe warrant this thing It did not concerne me to debate whether the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament quoted by him prove suspension from the Lords Table The controversie was of the practicall conclusion and of establishing such a rule as may keep off scandalous persons from the Sacrament If the thing be done if the conclusion be consented to there is the greater liberty for men to abound in their own sence concerning the mediums to prove it Secondly and if he would needs debate what Texts of Scripture doe prove the thing and what precept or president in Scripture doth warrant it me thinks he had done better to have informed himselfe on what Scripturall proofs the Reverend Assembly had grounded the suspension of scandalous sinners from the Sacrament though not yet cast out of the Church The proofes from Scripture voted in the Assembly were these Because the Ordinance it selfe must not be prophaned And because we are charged to withdraw from those who walk disorderly And because of the great sinne and danger both to him that comes unworthily and also to the whole Church The Scriptures from which the Assembly did prove all
out of the Church And for his antiquity he hath given here no small wound to the Reputation of his skill in Antiquities Which will more fully appear Chap. 17. Meane while how can any that hath read Tertullian or Cyprian not know that some failings and falls in time of persecution and other smaller offences were not punished by excommunication but by suspension from the Sacrament till after publike Declaration of Repentance and confession of the offence the offender was admitted to the Sacrament And for the places he citeth I find in Tertullians Book de poenitentia much of that Exomologesis and publike Declaration of Repentance but that all scandalous persons brought under Church-censures were wholly cast out of the Church I find not In the 39 Chapter of his Apologetick there is no such thing as is alledged but the contrary plainly intimated concerning severall degrees of Ecclesiasticall Discipline and that if any mans offence was so great as to deserve excommunication then he was excommunicate and wholly cast out of the Church And as in the Antient Churches there were and in the reformed Churches there now are different degrees of censures according to the different degrees of offences so in the Jewish Church the like may be observed both concerning Ceremoniall uncleannesse and morall offences Touching the former that Law Num. 5. 2. command the children of Israel that they put out of the Camp every Leper and every one that hath an issue and whosoever is desiled by the dead hath been understood by the Jewish Doctors respectivè that is that the Leper was put out of all the three Camps the Camp of Israel the Camp of the Levites and the Camp of divine Majesty which was the Tabernacle he that had an issue might be in the Camp of Israel but was put out of the other two He that was defiled by the dead was onely restrained from the Camp of divine Majesty for which also see before Book 1. Châ—…p 10. And touching morall offences there were severall Steps and degrees in the Jewish excommunication as Master Selden hath observed from the Talmudists for first a man was separate from the Congregation for 30 dayes and if thereafter he was found obstinate he was separate for other 30 dayes and if after 60 dayes he did not repent then they passed from the lesser excommunication to the greater that is from Niddui and Shammatha as he thinketh to Cherem or Anathema The Author of the Quaeries while he argueth in that first Quaere against the suspending from the Sacrament of a person not excommunicated nor whollâ— cast out of the Church closeth in this particular with them of the Separation which I beleeve he did it not intend to doe for they in one of their Letters in answer to the second Letter of Fr. Junius written to them where they bring eleven Exceptions against the Dutch Churches one of these Exceptions was that they use a new censure of Suspension which Christ hath not appointed They doe hold Excommunication to be an Ordinance of Christ but doe reject the distinction of Suspension and Excommunication as Master Prynne doth Tenthly the true state of the present Question is not whether the Parliament should establish the power of suspending scandalous persons from the Sacrament as Iure divino nay let Divines assert that and satisfie peoples consciences in it but let the Parliament speak in an authoritative and legislative way in adding their civill sanction Nor whether there ought to be any suspension from the Sacrament of scandalous persons not yet excommunicated and cast out of the Church and that the Elder-ship should doe it for the Ordinance of Parliament hath so farre satisfied the desires of the Reverend Assembly and of the generality of godly people that there is to be a suspension of scandalous persons not excommunicated from the Sacrament and power is granted to the Eldership to suspend from the Sacrament for such scandals as are enumerate in the Ordinances of Octob. 20. 1645. and March 14. 1645. Which Ordinances doe appoint that All Persons Or any Person that shall commit such or such an offence shall be by the Eldership suspended from the Sacrament upon confession of the party or upon the Testimony of two credible witnesses So that in truth the stream of Master Prynnes exceptions runneth against that which is agreed and resolved upon in Parliament and his arguments if they prove any thing must necessarily conclude against that power already granted by Parliament to Elder-ships And now if he will speak to that point which is in present publike agitation he must lay aside his Querees and his Vindication thereof and write another Book to prove that the Assembly and other godly ministers and people ought to rest satisfied in point of conscience with the power granted to Elderships to suspend from the Sacrament in the enumerate cases and that there is not the like reason to keep off scandalous persons from the Sacrament for other scandalls beside these enumerate in the Ordinance of Parliament Nay and he must confine himself within a nearower circle then so for the Parliament hath been pleased to think of some course for new emergent cases that the door may not be shut for the future upon the Remonstrances of Elderships concerning cases not expressed I know the Gentleman is free to choose his own Theme to treat of and he may handle what cases of Conscience he shall think fit for the Churches edification But since he professeth in the Conclusion of his foure Questions and in the Preface before his Vindication and in divers other passages that his scope is to expedite a regular settlement of Church Discipline without such a power of suspending the scandalous as is now desired to be setled in the new Elderships and manifestly reflecteth upon one of the Assemblies Petitions concerning that businesse as hath been said yea the first words of his Queres tell us he spoke to the point in present publike agitation the case standing thus I must put him in mind under favour that he hath not been a little out of the way nor a little wide from the mark And if the Question were which of these Tenents Master Prynnes or ours concerning Suspension doth best agree with the mind of the Parliament let us heare their own Ordinance dated March 14. 1645. the words are these yet were the fundamentalls and substantiall parts of that Government long since setled in persons by and over whom it was to be exercised and the nature extent and respective subordination of their power was limitted and defined onely concerning the administration of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper how all such persons as were guilty of notorious and scandalous Offences might be suspended from it some difficulty arising not so much in the Matter it self as in the Manner how it should be done and who should be the Judges of the Offence The Lords and Commons having it alwayes in their purpose and
guilty Ergo he that harboureth a knowne Traytor is not guilty Eighthly for he hath given his seventh already he tels us that the Minister onely 〈◊〉 the Sacrament and the unworthy receiving is the receivers own personall act and sinne alone Answ 1. He begges againe and againe what is in Queâ—ion 2. There is an unworthy giving as well as an unworthy receiving The unworthy giving is a sinâ—ull act of the Minister which makes him also accessary to the sinne of unworthy receiving and so partake of other mens â—innes The ninth concerning Christs giving of the Sacrament to Iudas is answered before The tenth I have also answered before in his fourth conclusion The Minister is a sweet savour of Christ as well in those that perish by the Sacrament as in those that are benefited by it with this proviso that he hath done his duty as a faithfull Steward and that he hath not given that which is holy to dogs else God shall require it at his hands Finally he argueth from 1 Cor. 11. 29. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh not condemnation but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 judgement meaning some temporall judgement to himselfe not to the Minister or Communicants Answ. 1. Whatever be meant by judgement in this place certainly it is a punishment of sinne and such a thing as proceedeth from Gods displeasure and it is as certaine that unworthy receiving maketh a person lyable to a greater judgement then that which is temporall 2. If to himselfe be restrictive and exclusive in the case of close hypocrites such as are by Church-officers judging according to outward appearance admitted to the Sacrament yet how will it be made to appeare that the Apostle meant those words as restrictive and exclusive in the case of scandalous and knowne unworthy communicants 3. Such a scandalous person doth indeed eate and drink judgement to himselfe but this can neither in whole nor in part excuse but rather greatly aggravate the sinne of the Minister for when a wicked man dieth in his iniquity yet his blood God will require at the hands of the unfaithfull Minister who did strengthen his hands in his sinne CHAP. XII Whether the Sacrament of the Lords Supper be a converting or regenerating Ordinance I Had in answer to Mr. Prynns third Quaere given this reason why prophane and scandalous persons are to be kept off from the Sacrament and yet not from hearing the Word because the word is not onely a confirming and comforting but a converting Ordinance and is a mean appointed of God to turn sinners from darknes to light and from the power of Sathan to God Whereas the Sacrament is not a converting but a confirming and sealing Ordinance which is not given to the Church for the conversion of Sinners but for the Communion of Saints It is not appointed to put a man in the state of grace but to seal unto a man that interest in Christ and in the Covenant of Grace which he already hath Mr. Prynne doth with much eagernesse contradict me in this and argue at length the contrary Which is the marrow and fatnesse if there be any in his debate concerning the eighth point of difference Whereby he doth not onely contradict me but himself too as shall appear yea and joyn not onely with the more rigid Lutherans but with the Papists themselves against the Writers of the Reformed Churches For the very same thing which is controverted between him and me is controverted between Papists and Protestants The Papists hold that the Sacraments are instrumentalâ— to confer give or work grace yea ex opere operato as the School-men speak Our Divines hold that the Sacraments are appointed of God and delivered to the Church as sealing Ordinances not to give but to testifie what is given not to make but confirm Saints And they do not onely oppose the Papists opus operatum but they simply deny this instrumentality of the Sacraments that they are appointed of God for working or giving grace where it is not This is so well known to all who have studied the Sacramentarian controversies that I should not need to prove it Yet that none may doubt of it take here some few insteed of many testimonies Calvin holds plainly against the Papists that the Sacraments do not give any grace but do declare and shew what God hath given He clearâ— it in that chapter thus the Sacraments are like seals appended to writs which of themselves are nothing if the paper or parchment to which they are appended be blank Again they are like pillars to a house which cannot be a foundation but a strengthening of a house that hath a foundation We are built upon the Word the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Again Sacraments are to us from God that which messengers are which bring good newes from men they declare what is but do not so much as instrumentally make it to be These are Calvins similes Bâ—…llinger confuteth the Popish doctrine concerning the Sacraments conferring of grace by this principle that the Saints are justified and sanctified before they are sealed and confirmed by the Sacraments Ursinus speaks so fully and plainly for us that none can say more He distinguisheth between the Word and Sacraments as between converting and confirming Ordinances and argueth that the Sacraments do not confer grace because we receive not the thing by receiving the signe but we get the signe because it is supposed we have the thing Yea he speaks of it as a principle known to children Wolfangus Musculus in his common places saith thus Who seeth not what manner of persons we must be when we approach to this mystical Table of the Lord to wit not such as do therein first of all seek the fruition of the body and blood of the Lord as if we were yet destitute thereof but such as being already before partakers thereof by faith do desire to corroborate more and more in our hearts the grace once received by the Sacramental communication of the body and blood of the Lord and by the remembrance of his death and to give thanks to our Redeâ—…mer Martin Bucer upon Matth. 18. 17. puts this difference between the Word preached and the Lords Supper that the Word may be preached to the unconverted but the Lords Supper may not be given to any who by their lives do declare that they are out of communion with Jesus Christ. Which is the very point now in controversie Festus Honnius Disp. 43. Thes. 3. confuting the Popish opinion of the Sacraments working or giving grace brings this reason against it They that receive the Sacraments have this grace before they receive them neither are any to be admitted to the Sacraments who may be justly supposed not to be justified and sanctified Aretius Coment in Mark 14. loc 3. observeth Qui admissi sint ad istam Coenam discipuli solum Who were admitted to that eucharistical