Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	apostle_n	church_n	prove_v	3,145	5	6.1841	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30650	A vindicaton of churches, commonly called Independent, or, A briefe answer to two books the one, intituled, Twelve considerable serious questions, touching church-government, the other, Independency examined, unmasked, refuted, &c. : both lately published by William Prinne ... / Henry Burton ...	Burton, Henry, 1578-1648.	1644 (1644)	Wing B6176; ESTC R20892	61,118	78

never so wicked But to your reasons First For else say you Paul and Barnabas being Apostles themselves might have decided that controversie at Antioch without sending to Ierusalem Answ. 1. By your favour brother Barnabas was not to speak properly an Apostle though an Apostolicall man 2. They argued with those Legalists at Antioch sufficiently to convince them but they comming from Judea and pretending the use of circumcision and Moses Law to be still in force in the Church at Jerusalem and the controversie being between two great parties the Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles hereupon the Church at Antioch thought it requisite for the fuller satisfaction to all parties to send Paul and Barnabas to the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem And 3. because Paul and Barnabas are thus sent doth it follow that they were not sufficient yea Paul alone as an Apostle infallibly guided by the holy Ghost to have decided the question at Antioch As no doubt sufficiently they did though not so satisfactorily to all And 4. that they are thus by the Church at Antioch sent to the Apostles and Church at Jerusalem here is a good example for the use of communion of Churches as in doubtfull cases to consult one with another 2. Else say you the Church at Antioch would have sent to none to resolve their doubts but to the Apostles onely and not to the Elders I answer In that they sent to the Elders also it shewes the respect that one Church should have to another 2. Those Elders were men endowed with the gifts of the holy Ghost 3. Though they had not infallibility as the Apostles had yet their assent to the determination was a witnesse-bearing to the truth thereof 3. Else say you Paul and Barnabas would have put the question to the Apostles onely not to the Elders and Church as well as to them vers. 4 5 6. This is answered in the former 4. Else the Apostles would not have called all the Elders and brethren to consult v. 6. when themselves might have done it alone I answer 1. Though the Apostles might have done it alone yet they would not but called together the Elders and Brethren yea and the whole Church at Jerusalem vers. 4 22. hereby to give a precedent to all Presbyters or Elders of Churches that in cases of difference arising they call the whole Church together for assistance and counsell therein 2. In so doing the Apostles diminished nothing of that Judicial power and authority which Christ left with them for deciding of controversies being infallibly guided by the holy Ghost while they thought it not fit to doe such things in a corner which concerned the whole Church 5. Peter and Iames say you would not have argued the case so largely and proved it by Arguments and Scriptures as they did one after another but have peremptorily resolved it without dispute had they sate and determined it by their extraordinary infallible power I answer This followes no more then the former For the Arguments they used with the conclusion were by the direction of the holy Ghost And 2. The holy Ghost is not so peremptory but will have his truths examined by the Scriptures as Acts 17. 11. The Bereans are commended by the holy Ghost for examining Pauls Sermon by the Scripture though hee were an Apostle and spake by the holy Ghost And 3. the Churches assent was taken in for a witnesse ex abundanti 6. The finall resolution say you Letters and Canons of this Synod had run onely in the Apostles names had they proceeded onely by their Apostolicall infallible authority and not in the names of the Elders and brethren too I answer There is as little reason in this as in all the rest of your reasons for then by this reason sundry of Pauls Epistles which were all dictated by the holy Ghost did not proceed from that infallibility of Spirit alone wherewith the Apostle was guided because we find others not Apostles joyned with him As 1 Cor. 1. 1. Paul called to be an Apostle of Iesus Christ and Softhenes a brother to the Church of God c. And 2 Cor. 1. 1. Paul an Apostle of Iesus Christ and Timothy a brother to the Church c. And Gal. 1. 1. Paul an Apostle c. and all the brethren that are with me to the Churche of Galatia c. So Phil. 1. 1. Col. 1. 1. 1 Thess. 1. 1. Paul and Sylvanus and Timotheus to the Church c. In all which places though there was but one Apostle guided with infallibility of the holy Ghost to write the Scriptures yet many brethren are joyned in the salutation of the Churches and yet Paul as Apostle did write those Epistles and not simply as a brother or fellow-servant with them of Jesus Christ Neither are those brethren so named accounted the Pen-men of the Scripture as Paul of right is Thus you see brother there was no necessity that either the Apostles names should be put alone because they only were guided by the Spirits infallibility or that the names of the Elders and Brethren should not be put without a necessary conclusion deduced thence that the Decree there was therefore binding as being the Decree of a Synod and so exemplary for all Parliaments Councels Synods to make the like binding Decrees But good brother for all your punctuall quotations of that Scripture you doe not all this while tell us which is the main of all that which we find in the 28. verse of that chapter IT SEEMED GOOD TO THE HOLY GHOST AND VS TO LAY VPON YOU NO GREATER BVRTHEN THEN THESE NECESSARY THINGS Now brother we chalenge you to shew us any Parliament Councell Synod ever since the Apostles that could or can say thus IT SEEMED GOOD TO THE HOLY GHOST AND VS to determine controversies of religion to make and impose Canons to bind all men c. Shew this to us at this time and we will obey But if you cannot as you never can never let any man presse upon us that Scripture that Synod which hath no parallel in the whole world and so is no precedent pattern for any Councell Synod Parliaments Let me conclude with a passage of the learned and famous Chamierus that grand Antagonist of Bellarmins Bellarmine upon the same Scripture you alledge Act. 15. as also our late Prelates have usually done would deduce the same conclusion that you doe for humane authority in binding mens consciences To which Chamierus thus answereth that this consequence holds not Quia non eadem sit authoritas Apostolorum reliquorum Ecclesiae Pastorum Because there is not the same authoritie of the Apostles and of other Pastors of the Church For with those the Holy Ghost was extraordinarily present so as what they propounded did simply proceed of God But other Pastors have no such extraordinary assistance of the Spirit and therefore their Decrees are not to be paralleld with the Apostles Decrees Which is a speciall difference

of arrogancy schisme c●ntumacy and lyable to such penalties as are due to these offences Good Brother be not so legall What if that resolution of an Assembly and that Generall Law for the confirmation of it be such as the conscience of godly people cannot without sinne submit thereunto Must they either violate their consciences or bee undone by your unavodable intolerable penalties as both to suffer in their good names for Arrogant contumatious Schismatick● yea and in their Consciences too under the guilt of these and to bee liable to I wot not what penalties besides and no waies to seeke an exemption from it Why good Brother if we should goe and live under the Turkish Government and could not in conscience turne Turkes in the Religion there by Law established yet there is a way to seeke an Exemption from it namely by becomming Tributary to that State as many Christians doe Good Brother let 's not have any of Dracoes Lawes executed upon Innocents And remember how not long agoe the Prelates served us we could not have the benefit of Law of Appeale no exemption from bloud letting and eare-cropping and pillorying c. And shall wee now turne worse persecutors of the Saints then the Prelates were Non ignara mali miseris succurrere disco saith that heathen Princesse But in the margent you put some places of Scripture to prove this But truly when I well view the places I find them not to answer to what you would seeme to prove by the Quotation The first is 1 Cor. 14. 32 33. For the Spirit of the Prophets is subiect to the Prophets And what of this Ergo the Spirit of all the Prophets in England must be subiect to the Prophets in the Assembly upon paine of being guiltie of Arrogancy Schisme Contumacy and liable to such penalties as are due to these offences O brother Prynne you must as well note as quote the place But let me note it for you The Apostle there speaks both to and of the Church of Corinth when assembled together in one place that the Prophets should observe order and give place each to other in Prophecying as the reason is rendered and not of any such Assembly of that sublime and supreame Authoritie or the onely Prophets to whom all other Prophets wheresoever dispersed must be subject Ver. 33. For God is not the Author of confusion but of peace as in all Churches of the Saints Which place also is no lesse wide from your purpose What Will there be no peace but all confusion unlesse all be subject to the Assembly upon such paine as before The Apostle speaks here of the Order to be observed in every Church as in all the Churches of the Saints The other places quoted by you are no lesse misapplyed Will they prove trow you blind obedience But come on brother if you will needs put us upon such hard exigents as to give us no quarter without present laying down our Armes and cause and so captivating our consciences to the Dictates and Decrees of men If you will make no covenant with us but upon this one onely condition that you might thrust out all our right eyes and if there bee no other remedy yet give us leave to capitulate with you about some terms of accomodation that wee may not altogether betray our consciences and liberties which our Redeemer Christ hath so dearly purchased for us And the first and main is this First brother make it cleare unto us that an Assembly of men learned pious what you will living in ages succeeding the Apostles have or ever had infallibility of judgement so as to say as Acts 15. 28. It pleased the holy Ghost and Us to make these Decrees that so wee may without further scruple of conscience submit and conforme thereunto But I say you must give us very good assurance and evidence hereof that they are infallibly guided by the holy Ghost that when they shall say It pleased the holy Ghost and Us we may safely believe them For when you can resolve us of their conclusions no further then as they conceive to bee consonant to the word of God Alas Sir you leave us in a Wood or Maze whence no extricating of our selves without Ariadnes thread Gods word to set us where wee were before For you knew what variety of conceits many men have Quot capita tot sententiae This is the first and main condition we stand upon and truly it were sufficient alone We might in a second rank but not equall to the former name a selfe-deniall and humble spirit c. You know the story of the Monkes of Bangor comming before Austin the first Archbishop of Canterbury whom they seeing to fit in his Pontificall Chaire and not rising up nor moving unto them they left him as a man no● sent of God And so if wee should behold men carrying themselves loftily over their brethren who are not of their Counsell we should be apt to suspect that Christs Spirit is not there because there is not the spirit of humility neither the Spirit of truth to be found A Cardinall in the Conclave at Viterbium after almost three yeares agitation about the election of a new Pope as many yeares as we have been about to set up a Reformation and the foundation not yet laid each Cardinall ambitiously a spiring to be the Pope one of them rose up and said Domine c. let us uncover the roose of this Chamber seeing the holy Ghost cannot get in unto us through so many tiles But this by the way And so enough of this question The third and fourth Questions I come now to your third and fourth question But lest my answers may prove too voluminous and so fastidious to everyday-newes Readers I shall in the rest contract my selfe And this I must doe by trussi●g up your questions within the list of a Syllogisme respectively For as I noted before all your questions are rather conclusive then interrogatory rather positive resolutions then unresolved questions The summe therefore of your third and fourth questions for this dependeth on that is reduced into this Syllogisme That which hath sufficient if not best warrant for it in the New Testament the examples of the Primitive Church c. most prevents heresies schismes injustice is to be received as a true and undoubted Church-Government and to be preferred before that which hath no such expresse warrant in Scripture no patterne for it in the Primitive or best reformed Churches c. But the Presbyteriall forme of Church-government if rightly ordered hath sufficient if not best warrant for it in the New Testament c. The Independent not so Therefore the former is to be preferred and received before the latter without any long debate The Answer Both your Propositions are lame and interfeere one against the other Sufficient if not best warrant will not prove so sufficient a warrant as if there be found a better

And so your Argument by crossing shins with it selfe falleth to ground Again your Presbyteriall government hath neither best nor any sufficient warrant as wee judge in the New Testament no nor any warrant at all in Gods word But the true forme of Church-government hath both sufficient and without comparison best warrant in the Scripture And in truth whereas you oppose presbyteriall and Independent as you call it one against the other let me tell you that that which you call Independent is the onely true originall and primitive Presbyteriall Which Presbytery is proper and peculiar to every particular Church of Christ● and is not a Presbytery collective of many Churches by way of jurisdiction one or many over each or of a Nationall Church as you terme it For neither of these can you find either in the New Testamens or in the Old In the old we read of one Church to wit that of the Nation of the Jewes But that whole Church was one intire congregation Act. 7. 38. they had one Church officer over all it is called the Tabernacle of the congregation in the singuler and they all assembled three times in the yeare at Jerusalem in the Temple where they offered Sacrifice and not else where So as the Church was a type of every particular Church of Christ under the New Testament as being both one intire Church and absolute subject to no other form of government but only that of the only Law-giver and Mediator Jesus Christ and no pattern of any such Nationall Church as you would have Every particular Church now consisting of visible Saints is under Christ as the onely Head King Governour Law-giver of it and so is subject to no other jurisdiction then that of Christ his Spirit his Word Were there none other particular Church in the world then one as that of Abrahams Family should it not be a compleat Church untill there were other Churches on whose jurisdiction it should depend though for ordinary Families they cannot have such a number as is requisite to make up a ministeriall body so are bound to unite to others for this end Wee hold communion and consociation of Churches for counsell in doubts and comfort in distresse but we deny any such combination of Churches as whereby the true liberty of every particular Church is taken away And this communion of Churches doth no lesse if not more prevent Heresies Schismes Injustice then your Presbyteriall Nor can you shew reason to the contrary And yet would you have our Churches more perfect then those of the Apostles own planting and gathering as to bee altogether exempted from Heresies Schismes Injustice Did not the Apostle tell the Church of Corinth There must bee Heresies eve among you that they which are approved may be made manifest And could those Primitive Churches after the Apostles preserve themselves from Heresics How soone did the whole world groane and wonder that it was become an Arian And this within the fourth Century after the birth of Christ when the Churches were governed by the Bishops and their Presbyteries And how soone did the Kingdome of the Beast mount up to such a height as it overtopt all the Westerne Churches and brought them under his dominion And for our truly and properly Presbyterian Churches your Independents to which you deny expresse warrant in Scripture the whole New Testament is both an expresse and ample witnesse on our side All those particular Churches which the Apostles planted were all of absolute authority amongst themselves respectively and equall one of the other You can shew unto us no rule or example to the contrary That in Act. 15. is a transcendent and stands alone not to be paralleld and therefore very impertinently objected by many before you as wee shall have occasion to shew afterwards And for pattern in the Primative Churches after the Apostles we are not curious to seeke it in the corrupt current of succeeding ages when we find it the pure fountaine It appeares say the Centurists Cent 1. 7 Tit●de consociatione Eccles. that the Government of Churches in the second hundreth yeare was almost popular every Church had equall power of ordaining or casting out if neede were those Ministers they had ord●ined with other things very materiall in that whole Title as also in the Title de Synodis privatis And for the best reformed Churches if in them we cannot finde that patterne so fully followed as the Scripture holds forth unto us wee cruve leave without prejudice to take it as wee finde it in the Word without the least variation And you may know● in the beginning of Protestant Reformation could they so clearly see in the dawning as wee may now in the meridian if we will but open our eyes The reformed Churches have taken up one or other of them upon the matter the maine things we contend for 1. The Church of Holland receive none to the Table nor have a vote as a member of that Church but such as first give satisfaction to the Elderships and then to the Congregation and 2. have a forme of covenant propounded by them Secondly the French Churches exercise excommunication in their particular congregations though with liberty of appeale And this was the governement of the Primitive Churches in the 2d hundreth yeare as appeares Cent. 2. c. 7. Tit. de Synodis but especially Tit. de consociatione Eccles. So as no long debate neede to be if but Christs word alone may take place without the necessary accommodation of humane Lawes Customes Manners of the people as you doe plead And lastly for appeales in case of Injustice you know brother that if injustice be done in any civill matter if redresse may not be had by the mediation of the Church whereof the parties are members then the Law is open there to appeale for justice And if it be about the Churches censure for some miscarriage of a member towards the Church or any member thereof if the censure bee unjust the party grieved may desire to have his cause heard by some other Churches who may accordingly deale with their Sister-church to require a brotherly account of the whole businesse as is the duty of all the Churches in such cases And if it be in matter of opinion here the appeale lies principally and in the first place to the Scripture as the supreme Judge and if the things be obscure too hard for that Church to resolve by the Scripture then to call in the helpe of other Churches for their best information And in summe brother there is no case can fall out in any Church which hath not as many helpes by a free communion of Churches wherein every Churches peculiar liberties and priviledges are preserved as they ought to be as any you can name to bee in your obligatory combination of Churches wherby the liberty of each Church is by cōmon consent sold over to others by which it ceaseth now to be a free Church

serve for Christ will not have his people to be wandring sheep when they may have a fold nor to be individua vaga when they may be reduced to order The ninth Interrogatory This Interrogatory lays a charge upon Independents for refusing to admit to the Lords Supper such as are not notoriously scandalous nor grossely ignorant but professe repentance c. which you say is a very uncharitable arrogant yea unchristian practise contrary to Christs own example in admitting Iudas to the Lords Supper Also to that of Paul 1 Cor. 11. you calling it also a transcendent straine of tyrannicall usurpation over soules and consciences and Gods Ordinances worse then our most domineering Lordly Prelates c. yea Lording over Christ himselfe and more then ever the Apostles did but onely by their extraordinary calling c. I answer in one word omitting your copious aggravations and sharp censures that we look further then to a generall profession and conversation namely to their faith in Christ that it be sound intire and whole and namely whether they hold him to be as the onely Prophet and High Priest so the onely Prince of his People the onely Lord and Lawgiver to every mans conscience and over every Congregation or Church of his Saints If they thus acknowledge not Christs kingly office as well as his other offices we doe not we dare not receive them And what have they to do with the seales that refuse by covenant to own Christ for their King As for Judas he received the sop not the supper for after the sop he went out * immediately saith John So as it appeares the other Evangelists relate some other passages by a hysteron proteron as is not unusuall in Scripture story And none of them saith that he received the Supper And suppose ●e did the Churches Censure had not yet past upon him onely John by a secret signe knew he was to be the traytor For that of the Apostle 1 Cor. 11. 28. that was a true Church though now disordered and the Apostle refers the redressing of their abuses to themselves The case is otherwise here so as all your accumulated calumniations fall to ground And concerning the Apostles extraordinary calling if we must expect the like calling we must not in the meane time admit of any either to Baptisme or to the Lords Supper neither should there be any gathering of Churches at all as some from hence doe gather Besides what shall the authority be that Luther gathered the Churches by and those that followed him and what lawfull gathering then have the Reformed Churches For your marginall note of Moses David Solomon about setling Religion by Gods own direction herein you come home to that I said before alledged against your unlimited law But in that you now restraine by their example all Church-government to the Civil Magistrates you must make it out by holding close to the rule that is To settle Religion by Gods own direction as you here confesse and not to elect erect a forme of Religion and Church-government such as they shall conceive sutable c. as before you told us And Moses David Solomon were all types of Christ who put an end to all such And while you there exclude the Priests from having any thing to doe in Reforming or advising What will the Assembly say to you But they may advise you will say But the Priests might do nothing but according to Gods prescript law no more then Moses David Solomon And if the Priests as you say had no ruling votes then by this reckoning what votes do you allow the Assembly-men in their mixt Committees with the members of Parliament or in the Assembly it selfe Reconcile these I pray you The tenth Interrogatory This Interrogatory questions or rather as all the rest concludes that that Text Mat. 18. 15 16 17. is not meant of any Ecclesiasticall censure as of Excommunication but onely of the civill Court of Justice Brother if you did speake hereas a Divine and not meerly as a lawyer you would not have against the judgment of most learned Divines ancient and modern and not Papists c. so interpreted this place And what speak I of Divines The Text it selfe is its own clearest Interpreter For it is immediatly added v. 18. Verily I say unto you whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall bee loosed in heaven Which is without controversie spoken of Church-censure or of the power of the Keyes in exercising Church-discipline as that Matth. 16. 19 is spoken of doctrine as the learned Calvin well observeth So as this very context cleareth the former to bee meant of Church-censure as it was among the Jewes You alledge on the contrary that learned Lawyer whom wee all honour for his learning Good brother I could wish that all this zeale of yours against Independents might not arise from any jealousie as if Church-censures should prejudicate or trench upon your pleadings at the Barre of civill justice Farre be it that we should have our motion beyond our own Spheare Content your self with your own Orb and we shall confine our selves to ours I dare warrant you Again to what purpose do you urge this interpretation of this Text against us Do not all the Presbyterians expound it so And if this Text which is made the great pillar of Presbyterian excommunication be taken off you leave no more to a Classis then we scil. to consult and advise And with this foot you have dashed all the milk you gave them The eleventh Interrogatory This Interrogatory is to perswadeus that in that Assembly or Evangelicall Synod as you call it Acts 15. the Apostles voted not as they were Apostles infallibly guided by the holy Ghost but rather as they were in their ordinary capacitie as Elders and chiefe members of it Whereupon producing your six reasons for it you peremptorily conclude that this is an undeniable scripture-Scripture-authority for the lawfulnesse use of Parliaments Councels Synods under the Gospel upon all like necessary occasions and for their power to determine controversies of Religion to make Canons in things necessary for the Churches peace and concernment maugre all evasions exceptions of Independents to elude it But let us examine your six reasons why the Apostles sate not as Apostles but as ordinary Elders c. Where first we lay this ground for the contrary scil. that they sate as Apostles because not ordinary Elders as Elders can say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us But the Apostles as Apostles might say so because in any doctrinall point they had the promise of the Spirit to bee led into all truth as upon whom the Church was to bee built Eph. 2. 20. Secondly if they sate as ordinary Elders then their decrees did no further bind then as they might appeare to agree with Scripture otherwise Elders as Elders may bind the conscience let the decree bee

without opposition and why not you and al● others So you O Brother I stand amazed But I go on Then againe the Scripture as it sets downe the qualifications of the members of this body so the forming of them in the body in the parts thereof more principall and lesse superiour and inferiour for order and well-being As Pastors and Teachers Teaching and Ruling Elders Helpes Governments Bishops and Deacons or by what other means soever they are diversified in Scripture And this is one uniforme forme of Government which Christ hath fixed in his Churches without any difference at all but secundum●magis minus as before as lesser Churches have fewer Officers greater moe So as brother if the old Wine be better old Presby●erie old unlordly Episc●p●cy surel the Independents do justly challenge it Which had you once truly tasted of you would never have desired to drink other The Lord remove that aguish humor * Vexatus f●bre recus●t ●ptima Your second Interrogatory is about the lawfull powe● of Civill Magistrates in all matters of Church-government wherein you tax some Independents for extraordinary eclipsing the same Some what some may say is one thing must therfore the Independent Church-government say it too You alledge for this a passage in the Answer of two of the brethren to A. S. for wch one of them is lately questioned but I hope he wil clear himself But the weight of this whole Interrogatory lies in your Marginall note where you peremptorily conclude That the chief Government and ordering of the Church and power of making Ecclesiasticall Lawes or Canons to bind it before the Law belonged to the Patriarks and others was not as they were Priests but Rulers and Fathers of their Families under the Law say you it belonged to Moses to the Kings of Iudah Israel and the morall Assemblies or Congregations of the Princes Nobles chiefe Captains Heads and Elders of the people Therefore under the Gospel by like reason and equity and because it is a part of Christs kingly not Priestly or Propheticall Office it must needs belong to Christian Princes Magistrates Parliaments to whom Christ hath delegated his kingly Office not to Ministers to whom he hath given onely his Propheticall or Priestly Authoritie not the Royall as the Scriptures at large relate nor yet to particular Congregations who are not Magistrates nor higher Powers invested with Christs royall Authoritie So you where you tell us many strange things but prove nothing But brother in such a weighty Argument as this your {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} will not serve the turne yea you here overthrow those Principles forementioned That Christ is the onely King so the onely Priest the onely Prophet of his Church which his three offices are incommunicable to any creature as they are proper and peculiar onely to him He is the onely King c. Now to be solus {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} The onely Potentate the King of Kings and Lord of Lords this is Christs Regall prerogative which is in communicable to any or to all the powers on earth It is no lesse incommunicable then his omnipotencie his omniscience his omnipresence and the rest of his incommunicable Attributes no lesse then his Mediatorship Those Patriarchs and Princes of Israel before the Law and under the Law from Adam to Christ never had this power or prerogative to make Ecclesiasticall Lawes or binding Canons no nor yet Moses no● Kings of Iudah Israel and Generall Assemblies Princes Nobles chiefe Captaines and Elders of the people as you muster them up together in your marginall note A seeming goodly Army indeed but so many shadowes of men for any such power they had as you would with your penfull of ink paint cut unto us And first for those before the Law was given in Sinai had they this power you speak of Cain and Abel brought their Sacrifices What Was it a * will-worship of their own election If so God had regarded Abels sacrifice no more then Cains How then Their Sacrifice was of Gods own appointment Adam had it from God and his children from him For as God revealed to Adam Christ so those Sacrifices types of Christ Whence the learned Interpreter Calvin saith Tenendum est c. We are to hold that the manner of sacrificing was not unadvisedly devised by them but delivered to them from God For seeing the Apostle res●●res the dignity of Abels sacrifice as attributed to faith it followes he offered it not without Gods commandement So as it could not have pleased God had it not been according to his commandement So Calvin Nor is all here expressed no doubt they had an Altar also whereon to offer for the sanctifying and accepting the offering which Altar was a type of Christ the true * Altar to whom Abels faith had respect Though we read not of Altar before Gen. 8. 28. We read also of difference of beasts clean unclean Gen. 7. By all which it is evident that God gave a law to Adam and his off-spring sutable to that in Mount Sinai for a rule of divine worship so also for Church-government And this further appeareth by the Law in Sinai afterwards where Moses is expresly charged to do all things both for worship and Church-government according to the patern shewed him in the Mount as before we noted And when the Temple was to be built God gave to David an exact patern of all things yea of every particular both in writing and by his Spirit not onely for worship but for the whole ministration about the Temple a type of Christs Church under the Gospell so as neither Moses nor Kings of Iudah had the least power to devise any other forme then that prescribed of God The keeping of the Passover once in the second month by Ezechiah was extraordinary upon a case of necessity And for the Kings of Israel will you equall them with the Kings of Judah Had they lawfull power as Jerobam to set up his two golden ●●lvs and so to change the form of worship Church-government When that King A●as set up his Damascen Altar was it by a Regall power invested in him from God So of other Kings of Juda good or bad they had no lawfull power at all to alter the form prescribed of God one jor And therefore brother you are wondred at that being a man of much reading and mightie parts you should utter such strange things ne quid dicam durius as these are and that so confidently when you neither doe nor ever can bring the least proofe yea or colour of what you affirm And therefore your inference upon such empty premises that therefore under the Gospel by like reason and equity it must needs belong to Christian Princes Magistrates Parliaments to whom Christ hath delegated his Kingly office c. is no consequence Whence I note two things 1. Like reason and

in binding of the conscience which hath it selfe for witnesse and God for the onely Iudge therefore when it hath any thing commanded of God it must needs stand bound Where inter caetera is to be noted That God is the onely Iudge and binder of the Conscience The great question in controversie at this day Obj. But you will here object That although as before you say of Priests a Councel or Synod have not this authority to make and impose binding decrees yet a Parliament hath and you deduce it from this Synod Act. 15. Answ. Now truly brother by your favour this doth no way hold proportion that that which you call a Synod as a patterne for binding Decrees should not qualifie a Synod of Divines with the like power and yet transmit it over to a Parliament for binding authority over the consciences of a whole Nation surely that Apostolike Assembly or Church meeting was neither a Parliament nor Diet nor Senate nor any such thing that you should build any such power of Parliaments upon it for the making of binding Decrees over the consciences of men Therefore good brother be not so peremptory but take in your top-sail too high to bear up against so stiffe a gale both of Scripture and Reason But I come to your twelfth and last Interrogatory The twelfth Interrogatory This Interrogatory is concerning the lawfull coercive power of Civil Magistrates in suppressing Heresies c. Or setters up of new forms of Ecclesiasticall Government c. For answer hereunto Wee do acknowledge and submit unto the lawfull coercive power of civill Magistrates according to the Scripture Rom. 13. But brother however you must distinguish between mens consciences and their practices The conscience simply considered in it self is for God the Lord of the conscience alone to judge as before But for a mans practices of which alone man can take cognizance of if they be against any of Gods Commandments of the first or second Table that appertains to the civill Magistrate to punish who is for this cause called Custos utriusque Tabulae The keeper of both Tables and therefore the Apostle saith Rom. 13. 3 4. For Rulers are not a terror to good WORKS but to the evill Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power DO that which is good and thou shalt have praise of the same for hee is the Minister of God to thee for good but if thou DO that which is evill be afraid for he beareth not the sword in vain for hee is the Minister of God a revenger to execute wrath upon him that DOTH evill So as we see here what is the object of Civill power to wit actions good or bad Not bare opinions not thoughts not conscience but actions And your self exempts the preaching of the Gospel and truth of God from being restrained by the civill Magistrate But now brother the time hath been and somewhere is and will be that the * truth of God hath been with-holden in unrighteousnesse and by the civill Magistrate punished with death being condemned for heresie And you see in these dayes great diversities of mens opinions and judgements one judging thus another so you think my way erroneous and I may do as much for you But do you or I DO that which is evill in actually breaking of any of Gods commandments or any just lawes of the land then we lie open to course of civill justice but so long as wee differ only in opinion which of us shall be punished first or which of us is in the error you write books I write against them yet sub judice lis est who shall be Judge you or I surely neither Among other things you would have the civill Magistrate to suppresse restrain imprison confine banish the setters up of new forms of Ecclesiasticall government without lawfull authority It may be you will involve me in the number But what if I prove that which you call a new form to be the old form and the lawfull authority of setting it up to be of Christ Must I therefore undergo all these your terrible censures because you so judge What if your judgement herein be altogether erroneous What punishment then is due to him that condemnes the innocent you may be a civill Judge one day remember then brother that if I come before you you meddle not with my conscience nor with mee for it If I shall offend any of your just lawes punish mee and spare not But if you should make a law like to that of the Jewes that who so shall confesse Christ to be the Son of God and the only Law-giver Lord King Governour over Consciences Churches and not man not Assemblies not Councels or Senates though after much Fasting Prayers Disputes as you say I confesse I shall be apt to transgresse that law but yet take you heed how you punish me for that trangression with an Ense recidendum or I wot not what club-law So ends your Book and so my Answer Now brother you have since published a third Book partly in answer to your first Answerer and partly touching Mr Joh. Goodwin I leave the parties interessed to acquit themselves Only your stating the Question in the conclusion of the Book I could not omit You sta●● it thus Whether a whole representative Church and State hath not as great or greater Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction over the whole Realm Churches with all the members then any one Independent Minister or Congregation challenge over their members Brother I answer if you can prove your Jurisdiction good we will easily grant it to be greater But if the Jurisdiction of the Churches you call Independent be good as having Christ for the founder and owner of it as we have cleerly proved then certainly it will prove the greater For magna est veritas praevalet for Christs kingdome shall stand up when all opposite earthly kingdomes like earthen vessels shall with his iron rod be dashed in pieces This for the Clause Another passage in the same Book is touching my person where you say That none of us three-brethren-Sufferers suffered for opposing Bishops legall authority or any Ceremonies by act of Parliament established Here brother give me leave to answer for my self First for all manner of Ceremonies of humane ordinance imposed upon the conscience in the worship of God I openly for the space almost of a twelvemoneth immediately before my troubles preached against them every Lords day out of Col. 2. from the 8th verse to the end of the Chapter so as when I was summoned into the High Commission Court the Articles read against mee were not only for my two Sermons Nov. 5th but also for those other Sermons against the Ceremonies so as this might challeng to be one ingredient in my censure in Star-Chamber and no lesse then a pillory matter And concerning my opposing of Bishops themselves not only their extravagancies for which I also was censured and suffered you may remember