in many fundamentalls both in Doctrine Worship Government which made them like unto the Israelites under the Apostacy of Jezabel the generallity being carryed away by the Corruption of the times but a Remnant reserved through grace which bowed not the knee to Baal 3. Since the Beginning of the Reformation many of the Church-members by the power of the Gospel reformed to a new estate of visible Saints and the fundamentall corruptions in Doctrine and worship were purged away and both of them so renued as that the presence and power of Christ was discerned in the face of the Ordinances And for the Government though it give not being but wel-being to Churches yet it hath also been growing more and more into better order unto this day In so much that Protestant Churches have renounced fellowship with Antichrist and his Churches and have separated from them in Doctrine Worship and Government which if it reach not to a new-churching yet it is a renuall of their Church estate and a new moulding of them into a more holy way of Administration of Church-Ordinances so that now they stand as Churches gathered out of the world both of Antichristians and of Pagans The Israelites after their Returne from under the Apostacy of Jezabel did neither solemnely unchurch themselves of their former corrupt estate nor Inchurch themselves into a better new estate but being called to Repentance by the Kings Proclamation and their hearts being bored of God to submit themselves thereto though they fell short of a full Purification yet they were received to the Lords Supper the Passeover together with their Brethren of the purer Church of Judah 2 Chro. 30.18,19,20 The 2d. Querie Presupposing then the Prerbyterian Congregations to be true Churches Whether hence It will not cleerely follow that the Ministers called by them being otherwise men of Ministeriall gifts are true Ministers and the Sacraments administred by them are true Seales of the Covenant of Grace The 3d. Querie Neverthelesse Whether may it not be justly doubted that the estate of both Churches is sinfully defective The Presbyterian partly in their Materialls in case the Members diverse of them be not professed Saints but either ignorant or scandalous and apparently carnall and worldly partly in their Government by the Presbyters of other Churches which way of Government though it had place in sundry Cases in the Nationall Church of the old Testament yea and in the New Testament might be practised for a time by the Apostles themselves who were Oecumeniall Governours of all Christian Churches yet the same was never delegated nor commended to the Pastors and Teachers of particular Congregations The Congregationall likewise how can they be excused in case there be any such as doe admit all manner of Sects into their Covenant and Communion and will not allow the Civill Magistrates to proceed to the Censure of seducing Hereticks and prophane Blasphemers The 4. Querie For the Healing of which defects were it not much to be wished that the Members of Presbyterian Churches did once publickly professe their Faith and Repentance before their partaking of the Lords Table as John Baptists Disciples did before their Baptisme and as Members of Congregationall Churches doe before their Admission that so None such as were ignorant or scandalous might be admitted to the Lords Table till they were duely approved to be Men of knowledge sound in the Faith and blamelesse in conversation And further also whether would it not much conduce to a more full and cleere acceptance of their Administrations If their Elders in the Classis did put forth no Authoritative Act touching the Members of other Churches but consultative onely nor touching their owne but upon hearing the advice of Fellow Elders in difficult cases to proceede each one with the Cognizance and Consent of his owne Church at home respectively The 5. Querie For want or Neglect hereof Though the Members of Presbyterian Churches should discerne some Defects in the Order and Government of their Churches yet whether may they suddenly breake off Communion with them till they have convinced them of their Defects and duely and patiently waited for their Reformation It may seeme No For if we must take a more delatory course for the healing of a private Brother in a way of brotherly love with much meekness and patience how much more ought we so to walke towards an whole Church The 6. Querie Such a Brother though as yet remaining a Member of a Presbyterian Church yet sensible of the Defects of his owne Church and being otherwise knowne to be fit why may he not lawfully and without scruple be received to partake at the Lords Table as occasion serveth in a Congregationall Church For such an one is both a Member of a true Church and cleansed from the defects of his owne Church The 7. Querie Yea suppose a godly Christian doe continue Presbyterian in his Judgement and yet doe approve also of a Congregationall way and is desirous to joyne in Covenant with a Congregationall Church whether may he not in due order be lawfully admitted and continued a Member of a Congregationall Church Yea further Notwithstanding the different state and way of Presbyterian and Congregationall Churches and the Defects which the one or the other may observe or surmize either in other yet even whilest they so stand and walke whether may not the Members of either without just offence mutually Communicate one with another as occasion shall be offered at the Lords Table The Affirmative seemeth probable For as Error in Judgement about Discipline is not an Heresie against the Foundation of Christian Religion And the Apostle instructeth Christian Churches to receive the Christian Jewes into their Church-fellowship who yeâ— dissented from them about the observation of Leviticall Rites which were as much discrepant from the Truth of the Gospel in the Order of worship as these other be in Order of Government Besides God accepteth cleanness of heart in his faithfull servants in their approaches to his Table though there be defects in full cleansing according to the Order of the Sanctuary 2 Chron. 30.18,19,20 The 8. Querie If a godly Minister called to Office by a People professing Godliness whether under Episcopacy or Presbytery and afterward repenting of any knowne sinne in his way shall be desirous of a more pure Reformation whether may not his godly people acknowledge his Ministeriall Calling without sinne Why not For he had the Essence of a lawfull Calling before in the free choice of his godly People and in his owne free acceptance of them and of their Call Nevertheless if any of his godly People should stumble at his former Calling whether may not a more select Company and body of the People renue their Call of him and there to accept the Concurrence and Consent of the rest of the Congregation And whether may not he also doe well instead of stiff standing upon the validiy of his former Calling to condescend to renue his
is commended for laying the force of his command upon those under his power in matters of Religion Gen. 18 19. And if he had been considered as a Master yet less would not be granted that way to a Ruler of a Common-wealth than of a Family but rather more Job as a civil Ruler as a King in an Army of persons under his command did not leave each of them to chose out their own way of Religion or justice but he chose it he determinatively set it down for them I sate as King in an Army I chose out their way c. Job 29.25 The King of Ninivey with his Princes did not barely commend that duty of fasting and prayer to his people as very convenient to be attended yet leaving them to their liberty to omit the same but he positively commands the same that the wrath of God might be prevented 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jonah 3.7 The word is used for a coercive command or decree Ezra 4.21 6.11 Dan. 3.10,11 29. 6.7,8,9 13. and the act of the civil Authority of Ninivey having so much influence into the people act Jonah 3.5,6 7. verses compared is implicitely commended by Christ in his commendation of the repentance of the men of Ninevey and so of the King and Princes of Ninevey whose hearts were so thorowly touched as to improve their authority to further that civil work of Ninevy's repentance The examples of Moses Joshua David Solomon Asa Jehosaphat Hezekiah Josiah Nehemiah c. are obvious to every ordinary eye which looks into the Scripture Object They of old were Types therefore their examples are not now of force for our imitation Answ We suppose the Objection intends not by Type and exemplar for imitation as Type in a generall sense is used 1 Cor. 10.6 compared with 11. for this were to overthrow the scope of the Objectors but rather it meaneth a Type strictly taken namely that they in that exercise of their power did but shaddow out Christs Kingly power but of this the opposites give onely a barren assertion without proof and that will not carry it But we shall answer it more particularly 1 Then such may as well say those Rulers did shaddow out Christ in the exercise of their power in matters of the second Table and therefore are not therein imitable which none will affirme Solomon typed out Christ in subduing of enemies relieving the opressed procuring the peace of the state Psal 72. Must not Princes therefore doe the like 2 Those that make that Objection they use to put it thus The Kings of Israel were such Types but such an one was not Abraham nor Job nor Nehemiah who by a Coercive Law injoined the sanctifying of the Sabbath Neh. 13. nor the King of Ninevey nor was that wicked King of Israel Ahab a type of Christ which should have put that blaspheming Benhadad to death whence that sharpe reproof of him for not doing it 1 Kings 20. To say nothing of Darius Nebuchadnezzars Decrees this way which are recorded in way of commendation thereof Ezra 6. and Dan. 3.29 3 Solomon himselfe who if any were types of Christ therein he was setteth it downe by direction of the Spirit as a morall duty of each King indefinitely that howsoever de facto many doe otherwise yet de jure he scattereth away all evill with his eye Prov. 20.8 meaning all publick evil which cometh within his ken as a King or publick person whether the evill be against the first or second Table unlesse any make exception and say that either there are no sins against the first Table coming under the Magistrates view or though they doe yet they are not evil 4 It was a stated doctrine in the time of Job who by the most judicious is thought to live before Moses and it is attested and approved by the Holy Ghost that sins against the first Table as Idolatry was iniquity to be punished by the Judges Job 31.26,27,28 as well as sins against the second Table as Adultery ibid. vers 9. and 11. Object Those Rulers of old did thus as Members of the Nationall Church of the Jewes the same persons being Members of Church and Common-wealth but it is not alwayes so now Answ 1 Then at least where Magistrates are Members of Churches they may in these dayes exercise such power 2 Though they were Members both of Church and State yet they were to put forth their Coercive power civilly not as Members of the Church but of the State else it had been to confound Church and State yea to make God which directed to it to be the author of that confusion 3 They were to punish such to whom they stood in no Church relation at all but meerly Civil for sins against the first Table Hence Ahab was blamed for not punishing Benhadad blaspheming God as if a God of the Hils but not of the valleys Hence Nehemiah's resolution to punish even any of those strangers which should prophane the Sabbath chap. 13. 4 Job and those Judges mentioned in his time as bound to punish Idolatry were no Members of the Jewish Church Object If you make the example of the Princes of Israel acting Coercively in matters of Religion for Magistrates imitation why doe not you make the Levites a pattern also to Ministers now to act as they did civilly in civil censures Answ 1 It 's not clear that the Levites d d act any further than by counsel or at most by some generall consent to that which the Princes were formally to Act. 2 If the Levites did act in matters of the State by a peculiar liberty it doth not follow that this can invalidate the Rulers power then acting in matters of Religion as if by a peculiar liberty also unlesse the Objection could be bottomed on the proportion betwixt the Levites then and the Rulers then Thus that as the Levites which by speciall liberty proper to those times and so not imitable now did intermeddle in matters peculiar to Magistrates so the Magistrates then did intermeddle in matters peculiar to the Priests by a liberty proper to those times and this would be crosse to expresse Text 2 Chron. 26.16 where Vzzias medling with Priestly matters of offering Incense is made a transgression against the Lord for which he was afterward ruined 3 We make the Levites intermedling juditially in Civil matters therefore not imitable because what they are supposed to doe that way was by a liberty peculiar to that time but we make the example of the civil Rulers acting their Coercive power in matters of Religion imitable because not peculiar to the Jewish Church as appears in that what power they that way exercised the same in substance did Job and other Judges in his time by Divine direction and approbation put forth yea the judiciall act of Nebuchadnezzar in punishing Ahab and Zedekiah with death not for their Adultery onely a sin against the second Table but for their false
matters of Religion Let us now in the next place consider at the object of this coercive power of the Magistrate which in the state of the question we call the outward man the things wh ch the civill Magistrate as such doth command or forbid he commandeth or forbiddeth with immediate respect to the outward man The Magistrate as a Magistrate looketh immediately at the externall acts of the body and not at the internall acts of the soule it s his property as a civill Ruler to attend onely the duties and sinnes which appeare in the walke of the outward man Thus Calvin Beza Chemnitius Gerard and other Protestant Divines generally Quest Hereby also other objections receive answer as first Must Magistrates punish any man for being of a corrupt judgement or barely for an errour in his judgement or for having a corrupt heare and sundry lusts in it Answ We say no because whilst he keepeth his opinion to himselfe and whilest his lusts are confined within his breast he is to be left to the sword of the Spirit and to the Word of God thereby onely to be convinced the Magistrates power onely extending to the outward man but if either his mentall errours or hearts lust breake out into open expression and view and become scandalous and spreading then they become breaches of rules by the outward man yea tend to infringe that outward godly peace of which he is to be a preserver and so in both respects he is to deale with the same Object 2. Must a Magistrate command men to believe with all their heart to repent and mortifie their sins and lusts Answ We say no because these appertaine to the inward man and soule of man to attend so farre as they are inward but if we speake of any outward profession of these so farre he may command as to professe the faith by comming to heare the Word and to repent by publick fasting and prayer And if Princes have no power in such externall things then have they no power instrumentally to remove the wrath of God from their Kingdomes by generall humiliations Briefly now of the manner and means of the exercise of this power included in that phrase civilly we say not ecclesiastically as if he might put forth his power in a Church way by Church-weapons or censures but civilly or in a civill way or by civill censures or punishments Whence also other objections are answered as that the weapons of our warfare are not carnall but spirituall and that Paul sheweth a way of redressing all offences 1 Cor. 5.5 2 Tim. 2.25 and Faith comes by hearing and not by whipping when these places rather intend and shew a Church way of healing Church offences and doe no more exclude a Politicall way of healing offences in a Christian Common-wealth than an Economicall way of redressing disorders in the Family so the other place sheweth a spirituall means of drawing men to the Faith so that neither are pertinent to the case of the Civill power acting civilly nor doth this Assertion That the Magistrate is to be a terrour to all evill works applying the same to evill works forbidden in the first Table any more exclude the use of Church-discipline therein then it doth in matters of the second Table if applyed thereunto for the Church may proceed in her way to censure Ecclesiastically one and the same thing whether it be against the first or second Table which the Magistrate doth punish civilly The last thing to be explained in the state of the Question is touching the coercive power of the Magistrate namely Godly peace Now by Godly peace to which the Magistrate immediately looketh we mean a peaceable living as in all honesty so in godlines as the Apostle hath it 1 Tim. 2.1,2 So far as any matters of Religion coming under the Magistrates cognizance as a publick Officer in the Common-wealth doe either further or hinder such a peace of a Christian Common-wealth so far is he to put forth his coercive power accordingly Hereby also with reference to things before explained other Objections may receive answer as 1 Will you have Magistrates put forth their coercive power to the full in Lawes with Sanctions of punishments as that men shall pray in their Families so long or so oft or else suffer That a Minister in preaching if he exceed a just houre he must suffer and the like we say if either the matters be meerly circumstantiall or if they be matters of lesse moment and such as doe not of themselves any way infringe publick peace or that they are not pertinatiously tumultuously maintained to the disturbance of publick peace in all such like cases wherein the Civill Magistrate's end is not intrenched upon he may not exercise the coercive power of his Authority with sanction or execution of punishments 2 Will not this Thesis arme and stir up the Civill power in Old England against godly Orthodox ones of the Congregationall way or exasperate Civill power in New England against godly moderate and Orthodox Presbyterians if any such should desire their liberty here we conceive no except the civill disturbance of the more rigidly unpeaceably and corruptly minded be very great yet betwixt men godly and moderately minded on both sides the difference upon true and due search is found so small by judicious Orthodox godly and moderate Divines as that they may both stand together in peace and love if liberty should be desired by either sort here or there so exercising their liberty as the publick peace be not infringed The state of the Question in the explication thereof will rather quench then kindle any such coales against either If indeed persons professing either the Congregationall or Presbyteriall way will shelter or close either with other Blasphemous Hereticall or Schismaticall Tenents which tend to break the peace of the Congregationall way there where a Presbyteriall way is authorized to be the generall way of the Churches or the Presbyteriall way here where the Congregationall way is authorized to be the generall way of the Churches there they may be strained by the power of the Civil Magistrate as disturbers and breakers of godly peace the conservation whereof is the Civil Magistrates end and work unto which he is to attend Having thus cleared the state of the Question we shall now come to some Arguments from Scripture which confirme the Affirmative part of the question so stated and the Arguments are taken some from the old some from the New Testament Of the former sort there are three From the Old Testament Argum 1 1 In that it is evident that Rulers of old and those Rulers in the Common-wealth of Israel they are commended in Scripture for the exercise of such power in the matters of the first Table and therefore it is according to the mind of God that now civil Rulers do the like Abraham who was not an ordinary master of a family but a Prince among them Gen. 23.6 He
all will say they were all Ministers of God and bound to know and doe otherwise Nero is branded for a beastly person a Lyon in that he abused that Authority of his which of right should have beene improved for encouragement of Paul in his Ministry and doctrine to be a means to endeavoure to destroy and devoure him 2 Tim. 4.17 2 A second Argument is taken from 1 Tim. 2.1,2 We are to pray that we may have such Magistrates as may act Authoritatively in matters of Religion and piety as well as of righteousnesse and honesty therefore it is the mind of God that civil Magistrates should put forth their power in the one as well as in the other Object Yea but some have said If you now allow civil Rulers power in matters of Religion they will persecute us Answ The Apostle doth not answer pray therefore in these persecuting times of Romish Emperours that they may not meddle at all coercively in matters of Religion as being to usurpe power not belonging to them but rather pray that they may use this power which they have aright or as we may peaceably exercise acts of Religion as well as honesty nor doth he say pray that they may deale in matters of Religion negatively that is so as authoritatively to hinder any from disturbing any Christian in that which he taketh up for truth or piety or in any opinion which he may hold and yet be a godly man no more then he saith pray that they may deale so in matters of honesty as to hinder any from disturbance in any supposed course of honesty yea in any acts of dishonesty which may be incident to one that yet in the main is godly for that were to pray to be let alone in all ungodlinesse or dishonesty Nor doth he say pray that every one may live according to his Conscience or hold out any opinion Tenent or practice suiting with his conscience so it race not the foundation of godlinesse but pray for them that we may live in all godlines peaceably or that we may with quietnesse and encouragement so carry it as will stand with godlinesse it selfe yea with godlinesse in the highest degree of it or any part of it in all godlinesse A third Argument is taken from Isa 49.23 which though a Scripture of the Old yet respecting the dayes of the New Testament and the substance of the Argument stands thus It is the mind of God that civil Rulers in the dayes of the New Testament should Authoritatively act in spirituall things which are to the Church as milke therefore it 's his mind that in these dayes they should act Authoritatively in matters of Religion we say to act Authoritatively because to act as Fathers and Mothers and therefore not to act meerly alluringly as some say or in a generall way of countenance but coercively Fathers act fatherly in commanding in forbidding and in punishing as well as in kissing and giving good words in taking the rod as giving an Apple nor doth he say they should be Nurses as if they were to take upon them to act officially in Preaching or in administration whether of Church seales or of Church censures The nature of the similitude forbids it Nurse-fathers cannot give milk to the Child but Nurse-fathers and Nurse-mothers to take Authoritative care what milk either Church-Officers or any others yield forth to the Church to see that it be good and accordingly to reward and encourage it to look that it be not bad but coercively to restrain it at least from being milked forth to the Churches hurt Albeit if kept within the breast that bred it it is out of their cognizance nor is this spoken of Heathen Rulers as Pagans not Christians but of such which though as civil Rulers they command in matters of Religion or righteousnesse yea as Members of the Church they obey the Church stooping to its doctrine and discipline so they lick up the dust of the Churches feet 4 A fourth Argument is taken from Zech. 13.2,3,4,5,6 it is Prophecyed of as an approved act of the zealous Members of the purest Churches to be in the dayes of the Gospel to make use of the coercive power of the civil Magistrate in matters of doctrine a matter of Religion therefore it 's the mind of God that in these dayes such coercive power in matters of Religion should be exercised nor may any here restrain these words to Church-censures it being not the use of the Holy Ghost to expresse Church-censures greater and lesser by taking away the life wounds and works in the hands but rather proveth that power of civil Authority to inflict death in some cases of false doctrine and some other reproachfull corporal punishments in some cases of errors which are not of moment as the other Thus much for the Arguments proving the Position we shall briefly now take off two or three generall Objections and then come to a close of this Question The weapons of our warfare are not carnall but spirituall Therefore no such use now to the people of God of such carnall weapons as the penall Lawes or censures of Civil Magistrates in matters of Religion It 's the unhappinesse of the most of the Arguments in the late Pamphlets and Pleas for Liberty used against this Coercive power of the Magistrate in some cases which we plead for that if they be forcible they conclude universally even against that coercive power which our opposites allow to him in matters of the second Table and so far also of the first as in things against the light of nature and Law of Nations And of this we have a tast in this Argument for besides the mistake of applying this as if meant of other persons then of Church Officers contrary to the very scope of the Text the Argument concludeth against the use of Civil Magistrates power by Civil Rulers in matters of the second Table as well as of the first because spirituall weapons are as weighty to pull down strong holds against the second Table as well as against the first Of like nature is that Objection Christs Kingdome is not of this world this if of any force excluding wholly takes away the Magistrates power in both Tables Object 2. The Church hath sufficient power to reach her ends in curbing or curing offences in any matters of Religion therefore what need is there of such coercive power therein of the Civil Magistrate Answ 1. Suppose it were granted that therefore the Church as a Church stood not in need thereof yet the Church considered as a Civil Society stood in need thereof and so far the state of the question were yielded Or what if the Church had no need yet in respect of other subjects enjoying the light of the Gospel though not actually of the Church as persons not yet joyned to any Church or such as are actually cast out of the Church that power might be most needfull else they might vent things as well
against the light of nature as Law of Nations or deny things obstinately which are fundamentall albeit not against the light of nature or Law of Nations as for example that Jesus Christ is the Redeemer and onely Mediatour that the Scriptures are the word of God c. should yet not be restrained yea that were to suppose some under the shining of the Gospel left of the Lord in a lawlesse condition in respect of any Authority to restrain them in matters of Religion the Civil power may not meddle with them and Ecclesiasticall cannot as not being actually of the Church 2 The Church hath sufficient power to reach her ends in curbing and curing offences of the second Table yet none will thence conclude that therefore no need to the Church therein of the Coercive power of the Magistrate 3 The Church aimeth at restraint from infection of others as well as amending the parties themselves now supposing the Church casting out a person for obstinate holding of Hereticall Tenents yet the Church cannot now restraine him any further in any Ecclesiastical way but that he may now doe more mischiefe in spreading his Tenent then ever unlesse the Magistrate also exercise his Coercive power 4 The Church may in case by clamorous noise made in the Assembly or otherwise by faction be hindred from the exercise of its power to cencure and so although it have power enough to act yet it will need the Magistrates help to exercise that power unlesse we durst plead as some it seems doe that in this case the Elders may act by corporall force to redresse it as Phineas the Priest did in killing Zimri and Cozbi disturbing the Congregation on then humbling themselves before God but we say that was extraordinary as was the act of Samuel in cutting Agag in pieces of Elijah in putting Baals Priests to death and Peters act against the life of Ananias and Saphira nor would we plead the Priests example 2 Chron. 26. in thrusting out Vzziah out of the Temple or such like Arguments supposing that the Priests of old and the Levites might by a dispensation peculiar to those times be allowed more liberty of acting in matters of a Civil nature both in the great Synedrian and other where then any of us dare say is imitable by or allowable to Churches or Church Officers now Object Thirdly and lastly the tares are commanded to be let alone Mat. 13.29,30 Therefore what Authority hath the Magistrate to restraine or punish men now under the Gospel but rather to leave Christians to the liberty of their owne Consciences Answ This is a Parable and therefore to be taken in the scope and substance and not according to the circumstances thereof as Peter Martyr noteth in this case Now the scope of part of the Parable is not to be a direction unto us what we shall doe in point of exercise of any power with us but conteins simply a doctrine of providence what God will order to be the condition of his visible Church in this world and therefore to shew that Christ intended not any rule of precept of our duty in this sentence of the Parable vers 29 30. Nay let both grow together he doth not in his after exposition of the severall branches of the Parable insist at all on the branch mentioned to give any explication thereof and if it were any direction it must either look to Civil or Church power if to Civil power then since the tares are expresly interpreted to be the Children of the Devil and such as offend and doe iniquity and are as reprobates to be burned or damned vers 38. Then the worst wretches that live Murderers Buggerers Traytours c. must be all let alone in their sins and onely left to Christs Judgement at the last day And our opposites have least reason to stretch this Parable as respecting any restraint of the use of the Civil power when the very scope of it is not to tell us touching the state of the Civil Kingdome in this world but rather of the state of the Kingdome of God or the Ecclesiasticall part of the world the visible Church and if it look at any restraint of the use of power it striketh rather at the use of Church power but if it look at Church power then the Churches are not to censure Hereticks no not though obstinate contrary to Titus 3. No incestuous adulterous covetous Church-members contrary to 1 Cor. 5. And that the Parable never intended any abridgement of either powers in the just exercise thereof is evident in that it speaketh 1 Of such an extirpation of Offendours as is onely possible to Angels armed with Christs power and 2 Of an universal extirpation of all and every reprobate from among the company of the Elect neither of which hinders but that 1 To such particular offendours as may be rooted up by Civil and Church power without danger and hurt to godly ones as are obstinate seducers Hereticks and they may and ought so to be 2 Such particular Offendours which by their continuance amongst Gods people doe over-run and over-top them in such sort as they are hurt and endangered by them and they cannot grow and thrive spiritually by reason of them they may ought to be rooted out by both powers for if there be any force in the Parable in this way it is to shew that the tares are to be suffered in reference not to the hurt but to the good of the wheat so that which tends to the corrupting blasting and destruction of the wheat is therefore to be removed because hurtfull and pernicious to the wheat so that our opposites would gain nothing to their cause by pressing this Parable as directory that way to us but wee rather upon the reasons before going conceive it to be set down not as a direction or any Command of Christ enjoyning us thus or thus to doe but as a doctrinall instruction that God may and will in his providence suffer for a time mixtures of good and bad together elect and reprobate in his visible Church nor are we to fret or be discontented at his providence in it or to think that by any course wee can take it will be otherwise whilst and where ever we are in this world like to that speech of Paul 1 Cor. 5 10. Now in the close of all let it be considered whose doctrine doth most infringe true liberty of conscience those which would have every Christian left to the liberty of his owne conscience in matters of Religion which at least are not against the light of nature Law of Nations or those that maintaine the fore-named power of the Magistrate for suppose the Magistrate be a Christian he must be left to the liberty of his Conscience too as well as others Now if left to the Lesbian warping rule what if he in his own Conscience through temptation and errour be in most things a Papist which may stand with the Law