Paraenesis and in my Corollarie in a letter of his written but a few weeks before he died where his judgement is wholly consonant to my opinion that all church-government is prudentiall arbitrary and taken up by consent for necessity of order and not for conscience Besides I have the testimony of a very reverend preacher in a famous church in Normandy in a letter of his to me wherein after he hath delivered his own judgement concerning the book he addeth that of one of his fellow-ministers in that church in these words One of my collegues who hath read your first book hath given this testimony of it That he is much satisfied upon the reading of it and that your opinion is so far from weakning our discipline that on the contrary it doth rather streng then it and places it upon its true and naturall bottom Geneva's excommunication had the greater influence upon the minds of the Non-conformists and Puritans in England for the respect they bare to Calvin more then to the Hierarchy metaphorphosed from Romish to English For whatever were the thoughts of some Romish Episcopall Doctors such as the English Hierarchy hath alwayes had the practise of all Bishops courts witnesseth that excommunication was but a law of the Land and of the opiscopall jurisdiction annexed to the Crown Excommunication was not much feared since Prince and subjects left off to be afraid of the Popes thunderbolts Wiclâ—ff begun first to pluck off â—ts vizard and to condemne both the abuse and the use of excommunication for the council of Constance recon'd up amongst his errours this tenet That it was a comfort to the faithfull church that excommunication and suspension and such like lying and feigned censures are not grounded on the law of Christ but are craftily devised by Antichrist But that it may appear that Wicliff held no other excommunication then that which is made in the Court of Heaven the 13. article objected to him as an errour clearly sheweth it Whoever leaves off preaching or hearing the word of God because of mans excommunication they are excommunicated and shall be so held in the day of judgement for betrayers of Christ and the 11. article saith that no man must excommunicate another except he knows him to be excommunicated by God In short whereas our brethren the Scots held that all jurisdiction of ecclesiasticall assemblies synods and presbyteries was derived from Jesus Christ the English people at least the magistrate who would never permit the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction to get up held no jurisdiction but such as was derived from him for even from King Edward the sixths time the soveraign Princes have been very shie of Bishops keeping any courts or calling synods but only in their name Our brethren the Scots had their excommunication from Geneva as well as the reformed churches of France only Andrew Melvin did mightily improve and heighten it But they and the Geneva churches have this disadvantage which those of France never had that these have two pleas for their discipline and excommunication The one is the necessity of a confederate discipline taken up by consent under a cross magistrate by which plea they may justify all the acts of their jurisdiction the other plea if the first prove not strong enough they have in common with all other reformed churches living under an orthodox magistrate and that plea is the discipline of Christ which as it is a second string to the bow of the reformed churches of France if the first should break so it is the only string and hold that the Dutch Scotish and Geneva churches must hold by so that if they cannot make good their jus Divinum of discipline and excommunication they have no plea at all for their jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate as the reformed churches of France have This book would swell too much if I should make it good as I have done in my Paraenesis and Corollarium that they have outgone all the reformed in the task of building an empire within the empire of another or in the endeavour to settle a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate having while they strive to run furthest from Popery gone so far about that they have joined issue with Popery in that particular I find three main causes why in Scotland more then in any other nation where religion was reformed from popery the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction hath highest lifted up its head The first is it was not so much any humour or designe of the godly people as opportunity that brought it in For reformation taking its beginning there not at the head but at the foot and in opposition to a persecuting magistrate it was not possible to settle the pure worship of God without a government and jurisdiction assumed within the jurisdiction and distinct from that of the magistrate They having had it some time under a Romish magistrate conceived it was to continue in the like manner under a reformed magistrate and so turned the nenessity of a confederate discipline taken up by consent as it was by the faithfull people of Iuda under a heathen magistrate and by the reformed churches of France under a Christian into a necessity of Divine ordinance which being much countenanced by the great ones of the land who rescued the soveraign magistrate from the Popish party and brought him up from his infancy in the reformed religion the same men who were assertors of the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction against the magistrate when he was no friend of theirs had a fair opportunity to keep it still up when the magistrate was their friend and in their power and possession who when he was grown up to years found the ecclesiasticall jurisdiction too deep rooted for him to master and overbalancing the power that by right as all other magistrates and Kings in the world he was to have over all causes matters and persons So that from that time when King Iames in his â—…per years came to understand that he was a King and no King till he came to be King of great Britain we read of nothing but clashings and conflicts betwixt church court Parliament and ecclesiasticall assembly it being impossible that two coordinate jurisdictions and of the same nature could stand together amongst one and the same people in the same countrey Another cause is that the members of Parliament specially the nobility and gentry being also members of ecclesiasticall judicatories and the ecclesiasticalls having over and above an addition of strength by all the ministers of the land who were not members of Parliament it could not otherwise fall out but that the jurisdiction assumed in churches presbyteries synods and assemblies should not only appear distinct from that of the magistrate but also be raised to a greater height A third reason is that the Kings of Scotland having never had that majesty power revenue and splendour that other Kings abroad had and yet the land full of nobility and gentry
him Here one may see as the law of God and the law of the King may stand together so the power of the magistrate may very well consist with the power right and liberty of a private church And the like he doth by many passages of Scripture which he urgeth namely Isa 49. v. 23. Kings shall be thy nursing fathers c. and Esa 60. 10. Revel 21. v. 24. the Kings of the earth shall bring their honour to the church and Rom. 13. 4. and 1 Pet. 2. 13. He addes since the Scripture speaks thus generally for thy good for the punishment of evil-doers and the praise of them that do well we must not distinguish where the Scripture doth not Now let us go to New-England where none will deny but a power and right of churches is maintained sutably to the sense of the dissenting brethren in old England and yet they ascribe no lesse to the magistrate in matters of religion then Mr. Burroughs Witnesse the result of a synod at Cambridge in new England published an 1646. They say magistrates must and may command matters of religion that are commanded in the Word and forbid things therein forbidden by the Word meaning the whole Word both in the new and old Testament In short they hold for substance what I said before of the two kinds of acts performed in every private church one looking immediately at the externall act of the body and the duties and sins which appear in the carriage of the outward man and this they say the magistrate looketh at and commandeth or forbiddeth in church and out of church see pag. 15. and therefore they say pag. 40. every church considered as a civil society needeth a coercive power They say further that this power is needfull in churches to curb the obstinate and restrain the spreading of errours Pag. 49. they invalid the example of Uzziah often alledged by the Romanists and the presbyterians though Mr. Gillespie as I remember never maketh use of it in his great book and say that this act of Azariah thrusting out Uzziah was an act of coercion and so of magistracy and a civil act which priests and Levites were allowed to do and which they made subservient to that command of God that none should burn incense but the sons of Aaron For I believe any officer under the soveraign magistrate might do the like in case this later should go about to violate a command of such a high nature for being an under-magistrate and invested with power of coercion he obeyeth the greater master and maketh use of his power to hinder a notable breach of Gods expresse command Having thus made good that there is a fair correspondency and concurrence of the right and power of private churches with the magistrates power over them I do not see but my principles and those of the dissenting brethren are very agreeable consonant in the main It may be a few of them will call that power in every particular church ecclesiasticall which I call a power of magistracy and they will call excommunication an act of the ecclesiasticall power which I conceive to be rather an effect of the power of magistracy settled in every particular church But the difference is not great since we both make that church-power call it what you will a power of jurisdiction and coercion which must needs be subordinace to the power of the magistrate since both are of the same kind and upon that account excommunication is a law of the power of coercion so of magistracy In short whereas some of them will say of all church-censures that they are the product of a positive divine power I say they are the result of a naturall civil power subservient to the divine power in the exercise of the first kind of acts of church-members as such sure Mr. Burroughs and the result of the synod in New-England come very near if not altogether to my sense For Mr. Burroughs pag. 27. maketh but two powers residing in a private church one of admonishing perswading desiring seeking to convince the other a power restraining This latter power I call a power of magistracy because by the first power men are not outwardly restrained nor rought to outward conformity and accordingly excommunication must needs be a product of that restraining power So that the difference is not at all reall but nominall I find in Musculus in his common-places concerning magistrates the same power of magistracy in churches The passage hath been alledged above there he saith that that power exercised in churches is notecclesiasticall but the power of the magistrate CHAPTER XXI That a church made up of many particular churches under one presbytery invested with a judiciall power over them is not of the institution of Christ. VVE are brought insensibly to know the nature of a Christian church instituted by Christ which as I said is a particular visible one meeting in one place to celebrate the same ordinances whereof mention is made 1 Cor. 11. v. 18. and chap. 14. v. 23. and Act. 13. v. 42. and 44. In this church the Lord Jesus Christ hath properly instituted the ministry for Christ hath not instituted a catholick visible church much lesse a nationall church under one presbytery but this appellation of church is like the word man which denotes a nature common to many singulars and yet is properly said of John or Peter For as many fountains are not a fountain and many schools are not a school and many families are not a family so many private churches are not properly a church We shall find below Amyraldus saying most truly and very pertinently to our argument that the appellation of church doth not properly belong either to the catholick visible church or to a nationall church such as are the English French Helvetian churches which are rather a knot or collection of churches then a church That such a church made up of many private churches under one presbytery is not of the institution of Christ nor ex necessitate praecepti but of the free pleasure of each private church who without any violation of the command of Christ may either remain single or aggregate it self to other churches under such a presbytery may be proved by severall arguments 1. I begin with the testimony of the Rev. Assembly in their humble advice who lay no greater stresse of necessity upon it then that it is lawfull and agreeable to the word of God that such a thing be 2. If the Lord Jesus Christ had instituted such a presbyterian church it were fit it should be told us what is a competent number of churches requisite to be under a presbytery whether only three or four or more it may be two thousand If so many why may not a hundred thousand churches be under one presbytery If so many why not all private orthodox churches that are dispersed through the world If a presbytery may be over all the catholick
quae aerem nostrum obtâ—nebrobant à nobis quam longissime fugat Non defuere quidem apud nos qui falsis rumoribus quos impuri quidam nebulones ad invidiam conslandam huc illuc disseminarunt 〈◊〉 sinistras parum aequas de Indâ—…endentibus opiniones conceperant Sed multi etiam extitere qui non passi sunt se eo usque abripâ— ut â—ndâ—cta causa calculo nigro notarent quos deinâ—eps post cognitâ—onem causae absolvi posse pro certo tenâ—bant Vtrâ—sque Paraenesim tuam in aptâ—ssimum remedâ—um praebes illis ut rubore aâ—…quo suffusi sese tandem in damnandis fratribus quorum vita inculpata doctrina sana nimiae credulitatis arguant his ut sibiipsis gratulentur quod ab omni temerario in fratres innocuos judicio sibi temperarint quos nunc veritatis certiores facti non tantum non anathemate feriendos diris devovendos sed etiam pro veris fratribus agnoscendos amore sincero amplexandos censeant Eo vel inviti adigentur quicunque Paraene sim tuam legent his duabus rationibus primo quia fratres nobis exhibet in omnibus quae fidem spectant nobiscum prorsus consentientes secundo quia ut mihi saltem videtur ita solide ita dextre quaestiones circa quas controversiae hodie agitatae versantur pertractat ut nullus dubitationi locus relinqui videatur fundamenta quibus huc usque superstructa fuit excommunicatio subruit ministros evangelii in ordinem cogit immotos summae potestati tibicines supponit tyrannidem Papalem radicitus evellit ecclesiae id est coetui eorum qui Christo nomen dederunt debitam authoritatem restituit abusus qui à multis retro seculis in eam sensim irrepserunt ab origine deducit adversarios suis contradictionum retibus saepissime involvit nec raro eos proprio jugulat gladio tandem quod rei caput est doctrinam fratrum sub proprio ac naturali vultu ita manifeste proponit ut nullus sit nisi sponte caecutiens qui non pervideat mera esse aegrorum somnia ne quid pejus dicam quae fratribus falso imputare nonnulli non erubuerunt independentiaeâ—stigma illis inurentes tanquam politiae omnis ecclesiasticae eversores ac acerrimos omnium coetuum synodalium hostes eos traducentes Haec inquam Paraenesis tua praestat unde promptum est colligere quantae quam eximiae sint animi tui dotes quam indefessum studium in evolvendis omne genus authoribus tum sacris tum profanis quam tenax in tam varia lectione memoria per quam perspicax judicâ—um in tam multiplicis materiae discretione ita ut falsum non obrepat subâ—imagine veri Hac nota te prodis verum ac genuinum Petri Molinaei filium cujus laudibus adhuc personat totus orbis reformatus Hoc nomine se multum tibi debere profitebuntur quicunque rem literariam amant hisce me accenseo Deum suppliciter orans ut te dâ—u incolumem servet ad nominis sui gloriam ecclesiae aedificationem Vale. Tibi addictissimus Vauquelinus Diepae Prid. cal April 1657. The Gentleman speaking more in commendation of my book then I deserve modesty makes me forbear to English it only I think it not amisse to English here the judgement he gave of the same to a friend of his in London to whom he wrote with moâ—e confidence and freedom I Have read Mr. du Moulins book through and am much satisfied by reading of it He is a man of great reading of excellent reasoning and a solid judgement Methinks he overturneth clearly all the foundations on which hitherto excommunication was grounded and till some body appeareth who by stronger reasonings can set it up again I shall remain of his opinion that it is a meer humane invention I was glad to know that the differences between the Presbyterians and those they call Independents were not about points of faith and this joy of mine was more encreased when I saw that the said Independents do not as they were falsly charged to do reject synodall assemblies yea that they are so far from rejecting them that on the contrary they hold them to be of Divine institution acknowledging that they are constituted to give good and wholsome advice for the making of lawes I could have wished one thing of Mr. du Moulin that he had not made the apology for his father against Mr. Daillé and Amyraldus in a controversy that was so different from his for besides that it may incense them to return him a sharp reply very many Pastors who are of their opinion will bring with them a malignant prejudice to the reading of his book which will cause them to loose the benefit that otherwise they might have reaped by the reading of it About one month after when I sent him my Corollarium I gave this answer to his former letter in the same language as followeth TUus idem meus Cognardus vir praestantissimus transmisit ad me Vir reverende literas tuas amicissimas politissimas succo sanguine plenas vere Latinas ad quas deterrerer Latine respondere nisi plane patria lingua balbutirem Non facile est dicere quantum illo affectu tuo quem prolixe testatus es mihi gratuler nec minus triumphem in tuo judicio de opere meo quod ab authore licet laudes attamen ita sum tenuitatis meae conscius ut tuam commendationem potius ab argumento mereri existimem Vtut sit est quod tuum judicium quod mihi instar omnium est opponam sexcentis in Gallia Anglia Belgio viris qui excaecati praejudicus omnis rationis usu sibi interdixerunt ne agnoscant veritatem summae rei quam in nostra Paraenesi astruimus Hanc vir magne cum retexeris multa authoritate polleas oro obtestor dâ—gneris vindicem esse meum adversus saltem vestrates nec procul à viciniatua qui me tanquam Divini humanique juris ac disciplinae in Gallia nostra habita eversorem tum Ministerii deturbatorem proscindunt Indignus sim vita si horum criminum reus sed si me tam intus in pectoris recessu nosces quam sensa mea tibi sunt scriptis comperta omnino me exolveres hac imputatione diceres haec omnia ficta esse ad invidiam conflandum mihi deterrendum lectores à conspectu lâ—bri Sane mihi mea conscientia fidem facit cum verbi ministros tum ipsum ministerium ea à me veneratione coli suspici quanta non puto à quoquam nec minus cultorem esse vind cem disciplinae quanquam non poâ—estatis ecclesiasticae in ecclesia retinendae Quid an is est dâ—sciplinae eversor qui statuit sub magâ—stratu amico orthodoxo ut sub Ezechia â—o sia c. concedere in ejus jura at sub infenso haberi
Divines yet living both of the argument in hand and of the writings of the Author Of some mens strong prejudices against and harsh censures of him 369 The PREFACE I Intend here by way of Preface to give a brief account how I came to write of this subject Having a little before the beginning of the long Parliament in the year 1639. written a piece in Latin against the corrupted party of the English Hierarchy who made as near approaches as they could towards Popery and being a little while after engaged in that quarrell it so fell out that this corrupt party being soon foiled by the great torrent of opposition they met withall their opposers themselves who were very numerous did soon divide into parts and factions dissenting from one another particularly about church-way and discipline which afforded me new matter to study on which I did being indifferently affected towards the four kinds of opinions held in the reverend assembly of Divines viz. of Episcopacy moderated Presbytery Independency and Erastianisme and for many years together not giving my approbation more to one of them then to the rest before such time as I should be well resolved in the controversy I pittyed for a long time the preposterous endeavours of each party tending to make the rent wider while they sought rather the victory then the truth brother became eager against brother branding each other with schisme and heresy their principles so far dividing them asunder that partners in the same martyrdome and who had lost their ears together were soon together by the ears and Mr. Edwards by name in shewing rather his spleen then his zeal and Dr. Bastwick who stiled himself the Captain of the presbyterian army did but powre oyle upon the fire of dissention in stead of quenching it as likewise did our brethren the Scots when they wound up their string of ecclesiasticall jurisdiction to such an height that it was ready to break and ranked the Erastians in the list of abominable hereticks pointing therein particularly at poor and mild Mr. Coleman walking almost alone in a melancholy posture and who would not give rayling for rayling but mildly intreated all the brethren that dissented from him specially the presbyterians to give a satisfactory answer to the queries of the Parliament touching a jurisdiction and government of the church distinct from that of the magistrate and to shew in Scripture a place parallel to Matth. 18. v. 17. where by the word Church is meant either the ministers or a presbyterian consistory besides to find out in Scripture the name and thing of excommunication or that it is as well though not as much a soul-saving ordinance as preaching of the word and the administration of the Sacraments as the reverend presbyterian ministers would fain have perswaded him in their reasons against the dissenting brethren p. 63. At length being well satisfied that truth seldome lyes on the multitudes side as I did much pitty Mr. Coleman so did I fall to study him and thought it but reasonable ere I should join with the generall clamour against him to hear what he could say for himself And indeed his still voice did more work upon me then all the thundring voices of his opposites So then being convinced by him about eight years since I put forth in print a tract in English the drift whereof was only to assert the power of the magistrate in matters of religion which subject being but an answer to a letter I handled cursorily and superficially And while I was upon that work I was much in charity as I expresse in some passages of that tract with the churches of the congregationall-way no lesse cried out upon then Mr. Coleman both here and beyond seas specially in France where namely at Charenton near Paris a nationall synod condemned them by an authentick act yet then I had no such thought as to conceive or imagine that the power and right of private churches or congregations could agree well with the power of the magistrate in matters of religion But soon after the publishing of this English tract my uncle Dr. Andrew Rivet whose memory is very precious to me and to all the Churches of God sent me a Latin manuscript made by a Divine in France wherein he endeavoured the confuting of my English book and besides did much taxe me for favouring the congregationall way so much spoken-against amongst the reformed churches in France and expressely condemned by a nationall synod of theirs About the same time came Amyraldus forth in print as full of bitternesse and invectives against them as Mr. Edwards in his Gangrena Both which books I mean Amyraldus and that which Dr. Rivet sent me were the cause occasion and subject of writing my Paraenesis in Latin In writing of which I was insensibly carried to conceive and propound wayes of accommodation betwixt the brethren of the congregationall way and the assertors of that measure of power in sacred things allotted to the magistrate by Musculus Bullinger Gualterus and Erastus nothing doubting but that by these propositions of reconciliation and accommodation I have given with a very little yielding on both sides the true way and notion of settling in such a nation as this where the soveraign magistrate is orthodox might be made out and the Christian reformed religion worship established with more peace truth and holinesse of life then they were ever hitherto since the times of the Apostles These notions suting more to the purpose and interest of the English climat nation ought to have been then rather put in English then Latin but that I mistrusted my own abilities to appear in publick in any other tongue then Latin or French and that I had a great mind first to disabuse other nations particularly my own countreymen who were possessed with strange prejudices against the godly party of this nation as well presbyterians as others by the false suggestions and informations of Amyraldus so far that some have expressed to me by letters how much they bewailed the lamentable condition of England where all religion and fear of God was well-near quite extinct where there was no church-discipline no excommunication no synods no ordination no lay-elders no Lords prayer or ten commandements rehersed and no Sacrament of the Lords supper administred Now this present tract coming after the other and being otherwise digested and framed and those controversies that concern England being chiefly handled therein and all brought within a narrower compasse I do not despair but that my present designe will be excused though I come short of giving satisfaction to all parties I honour equally the persons learning and piety of those that I assent to and dissent from no lesse respecting the memory of Mr. Gillespie an eminent man for wit piety learning and soundnesse of faith but very erroneous in what he stiffely maintaineth in his Aarons Rod then that of Mr. Coleman or of any of Gods Ministers now with the
head of the Church WE proceed to examine what the Rever Assembly say that Jesus Christ hath instituted this ecclesiasticall â—…sdiction as King and head of his Church Mr. Gillespie one of their body and therefore the best interpreter of their meaning saith in his 2. book chap. 5. that Jesus Christ hath two Kingdoms 1. a generall as he is the eternall Son of God the head of all principalities powers raigning over all creatures 2. a particular Kingdom as he is mediatour raigning over the church only by which church he understandeth a visible church of saints combined in such a body as is the church of Scotland enjoying the ordinances and the discipline of Christ And of this Kingdom he understandeth Matth. 16. v. 28. There be some standing here which shall not taste of death till they see the Son of man coming in his Kingdom So doth Beza against Erastus who with Mr. Gillespie out of those words of Christ my Kingdom is not of this world concludeth two things 1. that the ecclesiasticall government is distinct from the civill or that of the magistrate 2. that that Kingdom is an aggregation of many churches under one presbytery In the 6. chap. of the same book he is very prolix to prove that Jesus Christ as mediatour and head of the Church hath not appointed the magistrate to be his viceregent in the government of the church in the second acception I confesse that the holy Scripture mentioneth two Kingdoms but that both these be visible ones I deny flatly particularly that Jesus Christ is called King and head of the church in reference to the visible congregations of Christians or that by the body of Christ is meant the visible assembly of those that make outward profession of the Christian religion Let us then consider in this Kingdom of Jesus Christ as mediatour the nature of the King and head of his scepter sword power weapons keyes fullnesse that so we may see if all these qualifications yea if any one of these are proper to any visible church particular and nationall Both Rivet and Reynolds in their comments upon the 110. Psalme make this Kingdom wholly spirituall not of this world much lesse seen in this world though known to be in this world It is that Kingdom which is many times mentioned in the Gospell but never once taken for a visible government of men professing outwardly the name of Christ but for the Kingdom of grace and that government which Christ hath over those whom he ruleth by his spirit of adoption The keyes of this Kingdom are the door of utterance in the ministery whereby men have entrance these keyes keep out from coming in those that are without doors but never put out any that are once in and therefore most absurd it is to ground the power of excommunication upon the power of the keyes committed by Jesus Christ to the Apostles if the Kingdom of which Christ speaketh is the Kingdom of heaven or of grace will they say that an excommunicated person is put oâ— of the Kingdom of grace The scepter and sword of this Kingdom is the word of God The weapons are not carnall nor are they used to the putting a man out by excommunication but to the pulling down the strong holds of sin not by tying a man with church-censures but bringing into captivity his imaginations to the obedience of Christ This truth broke through the darknesse of popery and was acknowledged by those that were oppressed by the Popes tyrannie so in the year 1080. the advocate of the Emperour confut 9. saith that the preaching of Gregory the 7. was new since the church had no other sword then that of the spirit which was the word of God This language was acknowledged by the canonists to be in the mouths of the Popes adversaries who yet kept within the communion of Rome never dreaming of a Wicleff or a Luther as can inter 33. quest 3. Ecclesia non habet gladium nisi spiritualem qui non occidit sed vivisificat The law of this Kingdom is not the discipline or censure of the church but the law both of the Gospell and of faith called also the law of the spirit For by the power of that Kingdom described by the holy Ghost in the new Testament and mentioned in 50. places is not in any of them understood the ecclesiasticall power or any such thing as the power of ministers presbyteries synods to make decrees canons to determine authoritatively to suspend excommunicate and absolve but alwayes is meant that power that translateth from darknesse to light and from the power of satan unto God by which we are made sons of God Ioh. 1. v. 12. by which we are enlightened Act. 26. v. 18. and raised unto newnesse of life The fullnesse of that Kingdom is the saving gifts and graces given to the members The head of this Kingdom is Jesus Christ our King Priest and Prophet ruling by his spirit his subjects which are his members offering satisfying and interceding only for them teaching none savingly but them There is no governour or viceregent of this church but the spirit of God working in the heart by the word preached or read and guiding into all truth Though God hath no visible governours of this Kingdom yet he hath externally many subservient instruments and ministers for the advancing of that Kingdom as magistrates by their jurisdiction pastors by their function all godly people by their generall calling and dutie their persecutions afflictions maladies and particularly the ministers of the Gospell are main agents in Gods hands for the building up of that Kingdom What they know they do is the least part of their ministery they themselves being ignorant what and how they work by it in mens hearts Gods chief minister is Christ in the word the power is the efficacious working of the word the keyes are the openings of the heart to the word or rather the openings of the word to the heart and the receiving of the person into the heavenly fellowship This power is not placed in the ministers but the word which though it is delivered by them not only in a way of beseeching and exhorting but also of commanding yet that jurisdiction is only effectuall on those that of unwilling are rendred willing so that it is rather the jurisdiction of the word then of the minister for the ministers operation in the ministery is like to that of the artists in their chymicall operations where they are rather spectators then actors admovendo agentia passivis for nature and fire are the main agents They are like an husbandman in a vintage who maketh not the wine but ordereth it powring it from one vessel to another This being the nature of the Kingdom and church of God of which Christ is the head and King it remaineth to enquire who is the viceregent of God in governing the visible congregations of Christians meeting about the worship of God Properly
church-officers of the Gospell a certain platform of government and that it is arbitrary and of humane institution and therefore not to be administred by a power distinct from the humane THe fourth and the last thing to enquire into in this 30. chapter of the Confession of the Rever Assembly is the rule and modell that church-officers are to govern by which were it granted to be expressely set down in the Scripture would be no stronger an argument for a government placed in church-officers distinct from the magistrate under the new Testament then it was under the old when there was a very exact form of church-government and yet no way distinct from that of the magistrate Which makes me much wonder that in that church loaden with such an infinite multitude of rites ceremonies constitutions lawes whereof the Christian church is wholly freed there was no distinction of government and jurisdiction from that of the magistrate and yet that there should be such a distinction of jurisdiction in the Christian church which hath no modell nor scheme of discipline as the Jewish church had but such as in prudence is assumed by the joint consent of pastor and people That there was no platform of government given to church-officers by Jesus Christ or the Apostles may be proved by a cloud of witnesses I will content my self with a few Camero in his book of the church p. 369. saith that the Christian church hath no need of certain lawes seeing it is made up of men of ripe years not of children under pedagogy and a little lower non est ecclesia certis circumstantiis alligata the church is not tyed to certain circumstances The like saith his scholar and great admirer Amyraldus namely in his Synopsis Salmuriensis cap. 30. of the ecclesiasticall power § 4 5 6. So speaketh Capellus in his Thes Theol. parte priore de potestate regimine ecclesiae thes 40. where we have these words in tantum valet ecclesia constitutio definitio quantum est ratione subnixa The constitution and definition of the church is so far valid as it is grounded upon reason therefore not upon the Scripture Much more large and as expresse he is in the third part of Thes Salmurienses de vario ecclesiae regimine thes 16. and 17. So is Mestrezat no lesse expresse in his book of the church lib. 3. cap. 12. God hath defined nothing in the externall order and polity about the worship of God but only hath prescribed that all things should be done decently and orderly But were there any platform of government judicious and learned Mr. Lightfoot the most able and unpartiall judge in this matter will tell us Harmon on the 1 Cor. 5. that it was according to that of the Jewish synagogues which yet was assumed by a voluntary and prudentiall choice not upon any speciall command from Christ or his Apostles Which notion of his which was also mine before we could or had conferred one anothers notes doth lead us into many considerations 1. It doth decide the argument of the precedent chapter proving that the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing is committed not to all church-officers indifferently but to the ministers of the Gospell only For if it be reasonable as the Rever Assembly saith in their humble advice to the Parliament and as we have examined before that the Christian church should have their elders as well as that of the Iews it is alike reasonable as Mr. Lightfoot saith that the nature and extent of both jurisdictions and powers should be the same and that if the elders among the Jewes did not act in synagogues as men invested with the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing but with the power of magistracy the like should be conceived of the elders of the new Testament That the elders of the church of the Jewes had power of magistracy it is evident by their acts as fining imprisoning casting out whipping and the like and in that the elders of the new Testament are most unlike those of the old and therefore the Jewish elders could be no president to the Christian elders not de facto because these never exercise that power nor de jure for the Rever Assembly will acknowledge that the elders of the old Testament had a right to those acts of magistracy which they performed in their synagogues but will deny that now the Christian elders have such a right although for my part I know no inconvenience to assert that the elders in both times had alike right to all mentioned acts of magistracy though for some reasons it is not found so expedient under the Gospell by the presbyterian churches 2. We may well conceive that if the act of putting out of the church was an act of magistracy under the old Testament there is no reason it should be now otherwise 3. That likewise if the church of the Jewes never knew nor exercised in their synagogues a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate neither now are the Christian synagogues or churches to know or exercise such a distinct power 4. But strange it is that since God giving such very exact lawes as he did to the church of the Jewes yet he gave not to that church a jurisdiction distinct from that of the magistrate it should now be quite otherwise and that God that gave no expresse lawes discipline or rule for the government of the Christian church yet should invest them with a power distinct from that of the magistrate 5. It seems altogether incongruous that that power and jurisdiction as is the ecclesiasticall which mainly is conversant about lawes constitutions and rules which are instituted and ratified by men and do not oblige either actively or passively but as they are commanded by men I say it is altogether unreasonable that such a jurisdiction should not be placed in the magistrate he being the fountain and spring from whom all humane jurisdictions lawes and constitutions do flow And it is so much the more absurd and unreasonable that constitutions decrees canons discipline meerly of humane institution should be ordered and commanded by a power and jurisdiction meerly Divine and distinct from that of the magistrate when as all constitutions lawes and ordinances given to the Jewes and all being of Divine institution were notwithstanding ordered and commanded by the magistrate not by the keepers of an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction distinct from the civil CHAPTER XVI The 31. chapter of the confession made by the Rever Assembly examined The use of synods Two things are humbly represented first that for a re-union of jurisdictions over all persons and in all causes a convocation made up of ministers only be re-established during the sitting of Parliament the second is that ministers may be put into the same capacity as all other ranks of free-born people to sit and vote in Parliaments Of the power of synods and that of the magistrate in calling of
distinction of jurisdiction was not necessary because it was one people one nation and one temple whereto all the Iewes did gather together and therefore since they could conveniently be governed the unity of jurisdiction standing there ought not to have been a distinction yea it was very convenient that there should be an identity of jurisdiction that it might be believed that it was the same God to whom they all ministred There was the same reason for the temple for it was his will that there should be one place in which they should offer sacrifice unto him lest if that had been done in many places they might have thought there had been many gods Stapleton de Prin. doctrin 197. acknowledgeth the same indentity of jurisdiction among the Jewes I come to the second viz. to Mr. Gillespies concessions which are as large as I can wish that the church state were the same materially that the same man was both high Priest and chief judge of the nation that elders of synagogues did exercise coercive jurisdiction that the Jewish Senat after the thirtieth year of Christ was ecclesiasticall and yet was over all persons and causes except capitall and that there was not then any other senat extant but that before the thirtieth year the same senat having the judgement of capitall causes was civil All these being granted I see not what further can be required in the behalf of unity of jurisdiction since 1. the same men that were members of the ecclesiasticall senat were also members of the civil senat 2. that the synagogues were invested with magistracy since the elders had a coercive power so that in the very synagogues there is by his confession a coalition of powers and jurisd ctions 3. making but one senate both before and after the 30. year which judged of all causes and matters and over all persons the civil before the 30. of Christ judging of ecclesiasticall causes and the ecclesiasticall after the 30. judging of civil But I could never understand why he calls the senate after the 30. year of Christ meerly ecclesiasticall because it did not judge of capitall causes though it had cognizance and judgement of all other matters Can the judging or not judging of capitall and criminall causes alter the constitution and name of an assembly or court so as that when it judgeth of capitall causes it must be called civil otherwise it must be called ecclesiasticall Now because there is some obscurity in that concession of his that the church and state were the same materially we will hear what his countrey-men say to that in a late book printed anno 1657. called A true representation of the present divisions of the church of Scotland that we may the better weigh his recantation or rather modification when he saith that though they were the same materially yet they were distinct formally the words are pag. 18. The church of God being restrained to that one people of Israel their church and commonwealth were materially the same by divine constitution so that none could be members of the commonwealth but such as were also members of the church and so professours of the true religion as now under the Gospell it may be otherwise Now let us hear Mr. Gillespie pag. 6. They were formally distinct in respect of distinct lawes the ceremoniall was given to them in reference to their church state the judiciall was given to them in reference to their civil state But if they were distinct in regard of the judiciall and ceremoniall lawes why may they not be united in regard of the morall law For Mr. Gillespie passeth over the morall law and leaves it uncertain who is to be the keeper and guardian of it and whether it was given in reference to their church state or in reference to their civil state or whether a third power jurisdiction or state must not be constituted that is neither civil state nor church state to which the morall law hath reference for sure there was some union of jurisdictions in the protection and defence of the morall law which was as it were the bottom and the basis upon which the ceremoniall and judiciall were grounded and is of far more large extent then the ceremoniall and judiciall put together and from which in so many difficulties that are incident for the clearing of ceremoniall rites and judiciall sentences there must be continuall appeals to the keepers of the morall law which being at least equally in the custody of the magistrate and church-officers and both parties having a joint interest in the morall law as to see all men and businesses governed and squared thereby they also to that end must conjoin their power and jurisdiction For indeed the morall law is no more different from the politick then from the law given to families fathers masters husbands only the politick law is the practise of the morall or is the morall law applicable to cities families c. In like manner the ceremoniall law is but the morall law applyed in the practise of religious service for the morall law saith God only is to be worshipped the ceremoniall saith where how when by whom So that as all lawes are streams from the morall law so must all jurisdiction be from one fountain of magistracy It seems that Calvin had the same thought when in his harmony of the Pentateuch he reduceth all lawes under one classis But to examine a little nearer his distinction of materiall and formall I do not understand what he meaneth by formall in opposition to materiall for the jurisdictions that are one materially must be also one formally Let us suppose two coordinate supreme senates as Mr. Gillespie would have them among the Jewes one civil and another ecclesiasticall and that as he would have it the same men were members of one and the other I say if they do not differ materially neither do they differ formally so long as no law order or constitution civil or ecclesiasticall can have any force without the joint consent of both and except both senates put their seals of confirmation to what either of them hath decreed For example the appointing a day of publick humiliation by the ecclesiasticall senate must be also an act of the same men sitting in a civil senate who if they will have the injunction to stand must make orders subservient to it that there be no markets nor courts that day kept otherwise those that keep markets or courts upon such a day by vertue of former warrants from the civil senate will not know how far they are to obey the injunction of the ecclesiasticall senate without a dispensation from the civil senate This double jurisdiction is in effect but one for the same men appointing a day of humiliation in an ecclesiasticall senate to be kept forbid also in a civil senate all markets and courts to be kept and though one part of the injunction was made in one senate and the
other part in the other senate which is very impertinent and a needlesse multiplication of businesses yet those two jurisdictions must at length be resolved into an integrall one as when Protectour Lords and Commons that make up one Parliament must unanimously agree that all the votes and orders shall end in the same law and act I confesse there can hardly be clashing of powers judgements votes betwixt these two supreme senates such as Mr. Gillespie supposeth so long as the same men are members of both senates but withall I should count it a needlesse and senselesse multiplication of senates and that in vain the same matter and cause were to be decided by two coordinate senates when as one senate would serve the turn for however at length the two senates as they meet in the same persons so must they in the same accord and agreement which is all one as if it were but one jurisdiction Again it is observable that diversity of things and persons to which lawes and constitutions have relation doth not constitute a diversity of power and jurisdiction specially when the same men are to make the same lawes and constitutions for as the same men making lawes about navigation and the militia cannot be said to act from two powers and jurisdictions they are invested with so neither if the same men do make lawes as for example about Gods worship and the militia Briefly I believe Sir Thomas More in all his Utopia cannot parallel such a piece of constitution of state made up of two jurisdictions both coordinate subordinate each to the other materially the same not formally where of the same men are members A happy state indeed in which there can be no clashing except the same man be opposite to himself or that the members of the ecclesiasticall senate forget to day what they decreed yesterday when they met in a civil senate But since these two senates are materially the same men what need we give them severall names and formes for some accidentall circumstances of time and place either because they do not sit in the same place or that they are upon severall businesses must the same members of Parliament sitting to day upon religion be called an ecclesiasticall senate acting by an ecclesiasticall power and to morrow sitting to order the militia of the state it may be in another place be called a civil or military senate acting by a civil or military power But most of those that are for ecclesiasticall presbyterian jurisdiction finding no probability in the opinion of Mr. Gillespie viz. that among the Jewes there was a jurisdiction in the hands of church-officers distinct from that of the magistrate go another way and admit willingly an identity of jurisdiction but withall say that from the coalition of jurisdictions amongst the Jewes it cannot be inferred that the same ought to be under the Gospell that that church in its pedagogy is no pattern to the church in its maturity thus speaketh Amyraldus in his book of the government of the church chap. 3. p. 91. Whoever commits these two powers into the hands of the same persons he not only brings back the church into its infancy as if it were still under the pedagogy of the law but also casts it into that confusion from which the condition of those times did deliver it A man upon better grounds may invert this paralogisme and make use of this reasoning of Amyraldus to prove the quite contrary to what he drives at and so imitate smiths who with the same tool pull out drive in a nayl for had the Jewes had a government of the church distinct from that of the Commonwealth I would thence inferre there is no further need among Christians of such a division but rather of a coalition of powers that the Jewes being rude and weak in knowledge under a burdensome administration loaden with ceremonies and legall rites where the sixth part of the people was either judge elder leader Priest Prophet Levite or officer in the Leviticall service had need to have many keepers guardians tutours many helps of government so the governours might be very well parted into ecclesiasticall and civil and so the whole government might be shared betwixt the two supreme powers the keepers of each having wherewithall to employ themselves but the Christian church being wholly freed from the burdensome administration of lawes and officers and having no platform of government neither hath it need of an ecclesiasticall jurisdiction when there is no ecclesiasticall law or constitution Thus were I of Mr. Gillespies opinion that among the Jewes the government of the church was distinct from that of the Commonwealth I would speak in the language and words of Amyraldus and infer that for the same reason that the Jewes had a double jurisdiction the Christians may be very well without it But the opinion of Amyraldus that there was no distinction of jurisdiction among the Jewes rendereth his inference for a double jurisdiction under the Gospell much more groundlesse weak and absurd for if under a burdensome administration when they had need of many pedagogues and schoolmasters yet they were governed without distinct government of church and state much lesse do the Christians need such a distinct government seeing they are freed from the necessity of having so many schoolmasters guides watch-men and masters to govern them and teach them so many rudiments and unriddle them all the ceremonies besides that sure God never gives distinct governours but also he giveth a distinct law and discipline to be a rule to govern by which yet God never did Though I am so far of the opinion of Amyraldus that the government of the church was not distinct from that of the state yet I am not of his mind in this to think that identity of government would bring a confusion in Christian states for I count that identity so needfull and necessary whether the state be never so much or never so little burdened by men lawes constitutions and businesses to dispatch that in a state loaden with lawes and businesses as the Commonwealth of the Jewes was two jurisdictions coordinate would have brought an horrible confusion and multiplication of suits and businesses and in a state lesse incumbered with lawes and businesses that double jurisdiction would still bring more work then need be if there was but one jurisdiction The argument of Mr. Gillespie to prove that there were two coordinate jurisdictions among the Jewes because of the wide division and distinction of offices amongst them neither the King being to take upon him the Priesthood nor the Priest the Kingdom as it makes nothing for him so doth it rather plead for an identity of jurisdiction under the new Testament for if when the functions were so distinct that the King could not offer incense and be Priest nor the Priest King yet there was no distinction of jurisdictions much lesse is that distinction needfull under the new
constitutions that are made about them are acts of the major part of the members are valid not because they are lawes of Christ and approved to every ones conscience but because like lawes and orders of other societies they do oblige as such and as consented unto in the making of them by the major part of the members though it may be the minor part were in the right for as the acts of a magistrate commanding things directly commanded by God are the magistrates acts so those acts performed in a particular church though commanded expressely by God in as much as they require externall obedience either actively or passively are acts of that magistracy set up in that church I find in a result of a synod in New-England printed at the end of the book of Mr. Cotton of the Covenant of Grace some conclusions wholly consonant to what I now write in this chapter of the two kinds of acts that are performed in every particular church the one done by them as church-members the other being an effect of magistracy set up in every particular church considered not as a church but as a society The first kind of acts is proper to those church-members who by any power of magistacy are not put upon stronger engagements of oredience then if there had never been any The second is exercised by magistracy either in the church or out of the church against the obstinate and unruly and such as need to be compelled I find the synod speak much to that purpose namely p. 40. the collectour saith from them that for remedying disorders and taking away or preventing grosse errors there must be a power of restraint and coercion used and in regard that every particular church is to be as well considered in the quality of a civil society as a society of church-members CHAPTER XX. That the power attributed to private churches by the reverend dissenting brethren doth very well accord with the power of magistracy in matters of religion as it is held by Erastus Bullingerus Musculus Grotius Mr. Selden and Mr. Coleman This same is proved by reason and by the testimony of Mr. Burroughs writing the sense of all his brethren as also by the practise of the churches in New-England WHen at first I undertook to write of this subject I had no other designe but to assert the nullity of a double externall jurisdiction and to prove that there being no such thing neither in Scripture nor reason as an ecclesiasticall power all jurisdiction that was not united under and appertained not to the magistrate was not a power of coercion was no jurisdiction Neither was I then lesse dissenting from the church-way and power retained by the rever brethren of the congregation then from the presbyterian brethren and the rather because I saw both parties carried with as much eagernesse of opposition against Erastus and Mr. Coleman as they were among themselves besides not fancying to my self otherwise but that all jurisdiction called ecclesiasticall and assumed by whatsoever society of men either single or made up by the aggregation of many societies which was not subordinate to the magistrates power was alike against reason and Scripture But being not able to study my main matter intended without enquiring into the nature of the power that both parties assumed to themselves I found that the tenets of the brethren of the congregationall way could very well accord with mine and which was not yet by any considered that the right of particular churches as the dissenting brethren hold might very well consist with that measure of power that Erastus Bullingerus Musculus Gualterus Grotius Mr. Selden Mr. Coleman allowed to the magistrate in matters of religion and over churches and that independency of private churches I mean independency from presbyterian classicall and synodicall judicatories doth no way hinder their right and liberty nor their dependency on the magistrate nor cutteth short the magistrate of the soveraign power he ought to have overall societies and persons and in all causes and matters Lastly I found that this way of reconciliation was most agreeable with Scripture reason the practise of the Jewes and of the primitive church of Christians besides was confessed so by many learned men who though seemingly otherwise affected and carried by more heat then knowledge of what was passed or held in this Island have notwithstanding in their tracts about the power of churches and discipline laid the same grounds that the dissenting brethren have delivered I need not be very long in proving by reason that this reconciliation betwixt the advocates of the magistrates power in matters of religion and those that plead for the right of churches is already made to our hands by what I have already handled I adde further these following considerations 1. Since every private church hath within it self a power of magistracy and that all magistracy in whatever society it be seated is subordinate to the magistrate of those societies it doth consequently follow that that magistracy wherewith every private church is invested is also subordinate to the magistrate for as I have demonstrated since no society of church-members no more then of citizens merchants physicians and the like can be imagined without lawes discipline and power of restraint and coercion so neither can it be imagined that such a power is not dependent on the magistrate for if a member of a society be obstinate and refractory and will not be ruled but by coercion and compulsion it be more then church-members as such can do to reduce him by exhortation and good advice then church-members must act also by a power of magistracy either assumed or delegated however it be that power of magistracy is subordinate to the soveraign magistrate 2. It is a maxime in Scripture Philosophie and common reason that theorems or propositions that are true asunder are no way contradictory one to another Now these two following propositions are of an undeniable truth viz. The magistrate is a soveraign governour over all persons and societies and in all matters and causes whether they pertain to religion or no and this Every particular church hath a right and power to govern it self without any dependence either on other churches or church-judicatories Each of these propositions being considered as true asunder must also be very consistent and no way clashing one with the other 3. That the right of churches may well stand with the power of the magistrate may appear by example of many societies as families corporations halls whose intrinsecall power of magistracy agreeth exceeding well with that of the magistrate over them for none doubteth but every father of a family hath a power to govern his children houshold and servants as he listeth being in his own as it were house a magistrate and a Priest yet none hitherto questioned but that paternall and oeconomicall powers are subordinate to the power of the magistrate for even the civil law and so
that there was no true proper church but a particular church that therefore a presbyterian nationall church made up of many particular churches under one presbytery is not properly said to be a church I am of opinion that the Roman church upon that account is very improperly called a church but most improperly a tâ—ue church for if it hardly deserveth the name of a church how can it be called a true one at least morally though it may be metaphysically it being a consociation of erroneous and hereticall churches for if every privaâ—e church within the Roman communion is so disfigured that I do not think it deserveth the name of a church how improperly then is a systern made up of those particular churches stiled a church And so I conceive that the question about the truenesse of the Romish church which hath so puzzled men may be easily resolved I have but one passage more of Amyraldus to alledge which a man could hardly believe to be the language of a professed enemy to the cause of the brethren For if they should state their own opinion of the power and independency of churches they cannot use more significant words then those of Amyraldus who in his disputation de concil author thes 28. saith that private churches ought to retain their full right liâ—erty and power untoucht specially in matters of great concernment as points of faith not submitting slavishly their own judgements to synods but expecting that synods should define and decree nothing till they have had the advice and approbation of particular churches This is the passage in Latin Alibi diximus pulcherrimum saluberrimum esse earum ecclesiarum institutum quae concillorum decreta ad res magni momentâ— qualia sunt dogmata fidet pertinentia rata esse noluerint nisi prius consultis synodis ecclesiis particularâ—bus quarum quaeque symbolam suam ad veritatis cluc'dationem conferat Salmasius followeth the steps of Amyraldus or rather Amyraldus of him for Amyraldus wrote last He is very large in his apparatus ad libros de primatu and I should be tedious to the reader to set down here all that he hath handsomely stated about the nature of a church I will only quote two pages which are 265. and 266. The substance of his discourse is comprehended under these 4 or 5 heads 1. That all churches by right are equall in power and dignity and are independent 2. That the consociation under the heathen Emperours was voluntary and by consent 3. That under Christian Emperours a consociation was introduced by humane right so that what was at first by free and mutuall consent came afterwards under the Christian Emperours to be of humane institution and constitution 4. That the unity of churches consisted not in an united collection of private churches but in an agreement in faith and doctrine for such an union there is betwixt the Helvetian Belgick and French churches who agreeing in the same faith and doctrine do notwithstanding differ in discipline so that these churches may be called independent each on the other yet they keep an union and communion among themselves No other communion and independency do the reverend dissenting brethren admit and practise either among themselves or with the presbyterian churches both at home and abroad 5. The fifth head is that a consociation of many particular churches joyned with the same band of discipline and under the direction counsell advice not the command or judiciall power of any synod or presbytery doth much conduce to the keeping the unity of faith the band of charity and the communion of saints In the same place and many others throughout his apparatus he saith that the communication betwixt particular churches was voluntary and by way of counsell every church reserving to themselves full right and power as to those acts of their discipline and the acts of binding and loosing so that every church had power to take cognizance of any fact and crime committed in their body to censure and excommunicate them or reconcile them again without any appeal to other churches or synods except it were to beg their friendly intercession for so they were wont to consult and entreat Bishops and namely him of Rome to review the sentence repairing to him as to an umpire not a judge to disannull or evacuate the judgement which makes the Romanists take those applications to the Bishop of ROme as an acknowledgement of supremacy over all the churches To these authorities Iwill adde that of learned and moderate Spanhemius who did not use invectives as others but arguments and reasons as good as he could yet in my opinion the good man mistaketh much in his Epistle to David Buchanan not so much through ignorance of the right as of the fact yet in the 55. page he hath these words which are much to the advantage of the brethren A particular church hath no power at all over another but they are all collateral and of equall right and authority Let us now hear other advocates of the brethren before the word independency came to be given to Protestants in the world The first is learned Amesius in his first book of the marrow of Divinity chapt â—0 where after he hath in the 17 18 19 20. and 26 sections spoken of the parity and equality of particular churches in right and power in the 27. section he tells us what consociation of particular churches may be admitted these be his words Particular churches may yea ought to have a mutuall confederation and consociation amongst them in classes and synods that by a common consent they may be helpfull one to another with as much commodity as may be chiefly in things of greater concernment but this combination doth not constitute a new frame of church neither ought it in any sort to take away that liberty and power which Christ hath left to his churches since this form is only usefull by way of direction John Mestrezat a very learned orthodox Divine lately deceased minister of Paris goeth upon the same grounds with Amesius in his book of the church written in French and his testimony is most considerable because being a French-man he could not know or foresee as Amesius perchance might any such plea in England about right or power of churches aggregated It would be too long here to set down his own words at large For those that understand French they may see specially the 1 chap. of the 3. book where he saith that all power to do any church acts is placed in the particular church that all church-priviledges and promises were made and granted unto and in consideration of a particular church assembled in one place As for aggregation and consociation of churches he holds it not to be grounded upon any pattern or command from Scripture or even from a judiciall power given by Christ to classes synods presbyteries over particular churches but meerly assumed prudentially for mutuall preservation
not of their own nation and religion then they performed by a confederate discipline what the magistrate was to enjoin and command them The confession of Basilartic 6. hath a notable saying speaking of the duty of magistrates to propagate the Gospell as they are magistrates This duty was enjoyned a magistrate of the gentils how much more ought it to be commended to the Christian magistrate being the Vicar of God If then the heathen magistrate fails of his duty in not propagating the Gospell those that live under him and are better minded ought to supply the part of the magistrate in that particular and yet in doing of that they do but perform their own duty and businesse like as a master leading his horse down the hill his man being out of the way doeth both his own businesse and that of his man and both employeth his own strength in guiding an unruly horse and supplieth that of his man or which expresseth more lively the thing in hand as the Duke of Somerset in training up Prince Edward in the true religion did both do his own duty and that of Henry the 8. his father who being wanting to his duty in shewing his power authority to have his son brought up in the true Protestant religion Somerset Cranmer and others were not to be wanting to theirs and yet were not to act by a power distinct from the power of the King for if so then when ever a power is exercised rightly and yet against an unlawfull command of a superiour we had need to give a new name to that power and there would be as many kinds of power as duties to be performed Having done with Origen I come to Ambrose whom I was to alledge upon the 1. of Timothy relating to the places of St. Paul and Origen and to the power of magistracy assumed by churches There he teacheth the custom both of the synagogues of Christian churches of having elders that composed in stead of the magistrate controversies arising amongst church-members saying that first synagogues and afterwards churches had elders without whose advice there was nothing done in the church and wondreth that in his time which was about the year 370 such men were out of use which he thinks came by the negligence or rather pride of some Doctors who thought it was beneath them to be esteemed the lesse in the church as S. Paul saith of them while they are to decide controversies not as judges invested with a coercive power but only as arbitrators and umpires But the true cause why these elders ceased which he wisheth had been still continued he mentioneth not but the true cause is when the magistrate that was for above 300. years heathenish became Christian these arbitrators and elders ceased in great part at least they were more out of churches then in churches and in stead of them the Emperours created judges which yet retained much of the nature of those whereof Origen and Ambrose speak and which were invested as most of the Lawyers affirm as Cujacius for one with them my Rev. Father in his book de Monarchia temporal and in his Hyperaspistes lib. 3. cap. 15. not with a coercive jurisdiction but as they term it audience hence comes the Bishops and Deanes and Chapters Audit However such arbitrators sate in a court and were chosen by the Christian Emperours and were not members as before ever since St. Pauls time chosen by the members of that church where the contention did arise betwixt brother and brother and at that time it was not thought a violation of the command of St. Paul if a wronged brother had gone to secular judges because they were not infidels but Christians faithfull and saints as the Apostle termeth them 1 Cor. 6. 2. therefore it was free for any lay-man or other either to repair to the Audit of the Bishop or to the secular judge Which custome Ambrose doth not like so well as when Jewes and Christians were obliged by the law of their discipline to have controversies decided by their own elders Certain it is that these elders though they were not as Ambrose wisht they had been in his time arbitrators in those churches whereof they were members kept that office a long time under Christian Emperours but with more authority and dignity because they were countenanced by the Emperours their masters We have them mentioned pretty late even in Theodosius Honorius and Arcadius time for in one law they enjoin that ordinary judges should decide the contentions between Jewes and Gentils not their own elders or arbitrators Thereupon it is worth considering that that title which in the Theodosian Code is de Episcopali audientia in the Justinian Code is de Episcopali judicio a main proof that these judgements in episcopall courts had much still of the nature of those references in churches under the heathen Emperours These episcopall courts were set up by the Emperours to favour the clergy that they might be judged in prima instantia by their own judges for if either party had not stood to the sentence of that court they might appeal to the secular court The words of the 28. Canon of the councell of Chalcedon are very expresse If a clerk hath a matter against a clerk let him not leave his Bishop and appeal to secular judgement but let the cause first be judged by his own Bishop Now this episcopall court being in substance the same power with that of the elders mentioned by Ambrose which were first in synagogues and then in Christian churches under the heathen Emperours one may plainly see how weak and sandy the grounds are upon which ecclesiasticall jurisdiction and the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing in the hands of church-officers is built which government say they is the government of Christ and is to be managed by those church-officers by a warrant from Christ the mediatour For Constantine erecting an episcopall court and empowering the judges of the court to decide causes and controversies did not intend to give them a commission of binding and loosing or to put into their hands the keyes of Heaven so delegating a power which was none of his to give but only granted what was in his own power namely that some magistrates under him should set all things in order in the church and among the clergy Besides he intended to set up that magistracy which was through the necessity of the times assumed first by synagogues then by Christian churches under persecution for sure Constantine did not place the power of the keyes of binding and loosing in the exercise of that power managed either by the elders which Ambrose mentioneth or by the episcopall court erected by himself Neither Constantine nor any of his successours did ever conceive that churches were to be governed by any other power then their own as all other societies of men were In this episcopall court any cause between man and man
every society though never so much kept under and in awe can viz. expell any member of their society without giving an account of what they do herein to the magistrate And upon that account might the Corinthians very well expell the incestuous person which act should I hold to have been of the same nature with casting out of the synagogue I see not how any of my opposites could alledge any thing to the contrary But I believe the Lord Jesus Christ and his Apostles had no need to have recourse to that power of magistracy like that of the synagogues assumed by confederation of discipline For 1. In the first preaching of the Gospell there was lesse need of discipline because the number of pastors was greater then of church-members the great work of the ministery being laid upon every man and women converted were to strive to convert others 2. The Apostles and the disciples as Timothy Titus and others who were looked upon as secundary Apostles being conceived to be led by an infallible spirit the people in all controversies arising needed not go far to be resolved or take much time in discussing of them by overseers or elders set a part for that purpose 3. The gift of miracles striking a terrour supplied the place of a discipline therefore Bucer on the 16. of Matth. giveth us this reason why no externall power and jurisdiction was used in the time of Christ which serves also for the time of the Apostles these be his words No commonwealth can be governed without inflicting punishment upon the wicked What was wanting to the church in externall power the Lord Iesus did supply it by a miraculous and singular power and by speciall weapons and a sword called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 12. v. 10. But that extraordinary way of striking terrour into new converts by the power of miracles ceasing Christians being grown numerous and confirmed in the knowledge of the Lord Jesus it was now convenient they should settle churches which they did following the example of the Jewes under a magistrate of a contrary religion for indeed at first Christian assemblies were but synagogues turned into churches so that they needed not to look out for other manner of power and discipline then that which was exercised by the Jewish synagogues Were it granted that excommunication is to be proved by those words Matth. 18. tell it unto the church or by the example of the incestuous person put out of the church of Corinth or by the eleventh chapter of the same Epistle yet this act of exclusion could not be made good not to be such an act of magistracy assumed by confederate discipline as was the casting out of the synagogue Beza in his preface to his book against Erastus alledgeth the opinion of Musculus and Bullinger to be the same with what we now speak of that the first Christians wanting the power of magistracy to restrain them that walked disorderly and wickedly assumed such a power of magistracy to themselves and devised excommunication and that if there had been a power of magistracy in Corinth to punish the incestuous person there had then been no need either of excommunication or of delivering the man to Satan And so far we allow excommunication as it is an act of magistracy assumed by a confederate discipline by the first Christians in imitation of the Jewes for want of a Christian magistrate and not upon any commission granted to the ministers of the Gospell independently from the magistrate or grounded upon the power of the keyes of binding loosing for it were a lesse matter to discard and keep off the magistrate from concurring in acts of exclusion if for the placing it in the ministers the Scripture were not so grossely abused and made to speak what it never intended and that which hath as much strength for upholding the Romish hierarchie as the presbyterian ecclesiasticall jurisdiction Before therefore we come to speak how excommunication from a law of the confederate discipline became to be the main engine to advance the mystery of iniquity we will examine all the places of the new Testament usually alledged by the advocates of the presbyterian jurisdiction to prove that excommunication is a law of Christ and a church-ordinance as well as the preaching of the word and the administration of the Sacraments which are a like committed to the ministers of the Gospell only CHAPTER XXVIII That the whole context Matth. 18. v. 15 16 17 and 18. maketh nothing for excommunication neither Iudas non-admission if granted to the Eucharist nor the delivering of the incestuous person to Satan nor yet the self-examination required 1 Cor. 11. THe first place is taken from the context in Matthew 18. v. 15 16 17 18. a place clear enough had it not been handled by men of prejudiced judgements I wil not loose so much paper time as Mr. Rutherfurd Gillespie have done to make it difficult nor throw so much dust in the eyes of the readers nor repeat all I have said upon this subject in another book I will chiefly restrain my self to Calvins authority to evince that the whole context maketh nothing at all for such an excommunication as is a judiciall act pronounced independently from the Christian magistrate by the ministers of the Gospell 1. Calvin in the fourth book of his institutions chap. 12. § 3. and more expressely in an Epistle to the Neocomenses saith that the offence Matth. 18 15. If thy brother c. ought to be understood of private offences and known only to the party offending and offended These be his words We understand the words of Christ of concealed offences as the words sound therefore if thy brother hath trespassed against thee and it be known to thy self only and there be no witnesse Christ commandeth that thou shouldst repair to him privately And a little lower here it is not meant that hidden sins should be brought to light thereby to shame our brother So that this offence not breaking forth into an open scandall it is not like that the wronged party would have taken a way to put his brother to an open shame or that the Lord Jesus Christ had wished him so to do but rather to make first one or two privy to it and then some more trusty secret friends it may be a colledge of three called a church amongst the Jewes appointed to reconcile disterences between brother and brother which were like the Morum Censores censors of manners or it may be such as are mentioned 1 Cor. chap. 6. who were like the elders spoken of by Ambrose which were not invested with any authority to constrain censure or punish the offender for the words in the 17. verse let him be to thee shew both that the offence was private that the offended party was not to take any other course but only to have no further converse with him For if he offender had been excommunicated by a
Cantons for being to live under a cross magistrate they could not exercise their discipline as a law commanded by the magistrate nor execute their censures of excommunication as acts of the magistrate and therefore the reformed churches of France have upon much better grounds retained excommunication then the churches of Geneva who living under a magistrate that was himself part of the church were not necessitated to divide jurisdictions since the same men who were members of churches were also members of the city and magistracy and since the discipline yea excommunication was a law of the magistrate there was little need to divide powers and jurisdictions which when they should have done all they could must needs stream from the same spring-head But in France they could not be so happy and therefore since they could not have a jurisdiction immediatly derived from their â—agistrate it was requisite they should take up one â—y muâ—uall consent and by a confederate discipline For when the magistrate as it was among the Jewes in their captivity is no countenancer of the true religion nor a keeper of the two tables nor a nursing father of the churches that live under him they musâ— if they can obtain his leave be a magistrate and a law unto themselves and set up a kind of magistracy by mutuall consent not only in their private churches but also in their consistories and synods by which religion and piety may be asserted and errours in lise and doctrine be restrained So that when a private church excludeth a man either out of its communion or assembly this it doth by no other power then a magistrate a town a coâ—poration or a hall should act by in banishing or expelling a member of their own body I confesse few of the ministers in France will acknowledge that their discipline is taken up upon such grounds but rather that it is according to the pattern in the mount and the discipline of Christ as if it were a spirituall censure and a sword committed only to the ministers by a Scripture warrant and from the power of the keyes and of binding and loosing But I much wonder that wise men having a good foundation upon which they may firmly ground their discipline should rather chuse to build it upon the sand and upon the sea shore where it may be soon washt away What man possessing an inheritance by a good title would renounce that and rather feign a false will and testament and upon that ground his title which proving invalid will put him by the inheritance he had a good title to Yet this they do who will acknowledge no discipline but from Christ and will not put a man out of their assemblies but by a power derived to them from Christ But it being proved to their faces 1. that Jesus Christ never chalked out any form of discipline but left it to the prudence and discretion of Christian magistrates pastors and people who in generall are commanded to see that all things be done orderly 2. that excommunication is no otherwise a law of Christ then is the act of putting away a hurtfull member from any society these two things I say being made out to them to be Scriptu e reason and common sense and yet they persâ—sting to have no other grounds for their discipline then those feigned ones who seeth not that their discipline must be groundlesse since they cast away that which might strongly support it Thus they are like a man that cuts off his good leggs and buyes himself wooden crutches to walk upon This is that doctrine that my Paraenesis was so much blamed for by my countrey-men yea nearest kindred as if I went about to take away all discipline and to bring in stead of it disorder and confusion yea further to lay the reformed churches open to the persecution of their adversaries But my conscience tells me I never had any such designe and my reason prompts me that no such thing can be concluded from what I have written of that subject For it is with the discipline of the reformed churches in France under their magistrate as it was with that of the Jewes under the Babylonians Persians and Romans for whereas before their captivity they had no distinction betwixt church and state no other discipline then the law of the land no jurisdiction distinct from that of their magistrate afterwards when they lived under magistrates who were no friends to their lawes and religion they were fain as far as they were permitted to set up a discipline by consent which was in lieu of the magistrate whereof one law was to be casting out of the synagogue which we may call excommunication So that their jurisdiction was no otherwise distinct from that of the magistrate then as the power of a son in ordering his own affairs and religion contrary to the unjust commands of his father is distinct from the paternall power When a man cannot go to the charge of lead he must thatch his house with straw if he wants means to keep a servant he must serve himself and if he wants one to govern him he must be his own governour and yet that power whereby he governeth himself and is master of his own actions is not distinct from that which a governour was to have over him The very same thing the reformed churches in France may say who make use of what magistracy they can contrive and set up among themselves in lieu of their own magistrate who cares not for their religion If they be persecuted while they hold that their discipline is taken up by consent as the Jewes was under strange magistrates I do not see how they will be lesse exposed to persecution when ever they hold that their discipline is not of mans devising but of Christs own appointment For the magistrate doth not give them the liberty 〈◊〉 their discipline under any such notion either as it is confederate and arbitrary or punctually set down in Scripture for either way he counteth their discipline to be but a departing from the true church and their reformation to be a meer deformation So that it matters not much as to their safety what foundation they make their discipline to stand upon Sure it is not like that those that were the authors of the discipline of the reformed churches in France did look upon it as a modell left by Christ to his churches but rather as a collection of rules well digested by humane wisedome and prudence alterable according to time and place For so much saith the last article of their discipline These articles contained in this book concerning discipline are not so determined and ratified amongst us but that they may be altered as the emolument and benefit of the church shall require I hope when all prejudice shall be laid asides no rationall man will deny my principles I have alledged John Mestrezat a very learned man late minister at Paris both in my
per disciplinam confoederatam qualis retinebatur in ecclesia Iudaica sub regibus Idololatris Tantum abest ut invidâ—am placare velim virtute defensione hujus veritatis relictis aut me incoepti poeniteat ut constitutum sit si vita superstes ulterius porrigere edocere nunquam argumentis rationibus cogentibus hierarchiam Romanam cum toto mysterio iniquitatis debellatum iri ut nec potestatem excommunicandi solio deturbandi reges à Protestantibus reformatis quamdiu ipsi retinebunt potestatem ecclesiasticam in summa rei eandem quae Romana est Contra vero principiis nostris de natura potestatis juris imperiâ— legis fori tum interni tum externi intellectis receptis excommunicatione probata posita inter figmenta humana minimo impulsu corruet moles mysterii inâ—quitatis nullis tibicinibus supportata quos tamen tantillum sustinendae supponunt nostri sua potestate ecclesiastica excemmunicatione hac ratione non nisi molliter neque armis decretoriis jugulum petentibus argumenta Bellarmini Stapletoni impugnant Nam rogo si licet excommunicare privatum cur non regem si privatus excommunicatus ultimo judicio scu presbyterii seu synodi debet illius stare judicio nec lites movere sed expectare Deum vindicem cur idem rex praestare non debeat à presbyterio communione aut coetu pulsus si rex sic potest excommunicari à presbyterio ut ejus consortium quisque fugere debeat annon eadem pene est censura quae solio dejiceret quatenus jam in nullum usum solium occupet traditum Satanae mancipium quod pro Christiano magistratu subditus ulterius non agnoscat non colloquatur ei non supplicet At nullo negotio haec deliramenta evertit Paraeâ—eseos nostrae pars 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dum docet tum potestatem pastorum ac proinde Paparum in volentes tantum esse quibus persuaserint tum nullum judicium nullam legem nullam sententiam à quâ—quam in quenquam latam validam esse nisi ratam à potestate externa cogentâ— ad quam fiat provocatio Verum enimvero siquae pastoribus in foro externo datur potestas judiciaria cum Scriptura ad literam loquatur de potestate maxima quae coelum claudâ—t recludit cujus actus interni quicunque dâ—mum â—lli fuerint rati habeantur in coelis contra quam ne quidem portae â—…fâ—rni praevalebunt supra qua ecclesia aedâ—fiâ—ata si quae inquam potestas judiciaria adâ—udicâ—nda sit pastorâ—bus plane modus ejus habitus à Papâ—s clero Romano maâ—orem invemet fidem quam modulus à Presbyterianis retentus Hac via omnino procedendum est ad evertendum Antichristum non impugnando ceassos errores de purgatorio coelâ—batu transubstantiatione ciborum abstinentia pueris notos obvios qui tamen sub umbra potestatis â—cclesiasticae ortum auctum acceperunt Neque enim dubitandum jam tempore Pauli non orsam fuâ—sse aedâ—ficationem impertii â—n imperio quod imperii aedificandi molâ—men fuit gâ—…uinum iniquitatis mysterium quoaque cave credas aliis fulcris supportatum fâ—…sse quam excommunicatione potestate ecclesiastica longe lateque porrecta in omnes nationes reges homines causas res vendicata habita Id thematis vir magne tibi ultro suggero in quod prolixius felicius commenteris Id dum animo agitabis cape Corollarium ad nostram Paraenesim hanc illud juxta tuo judicio subjicit Tibi addictissimus L. MOLINAEUS Datum Oxoniae 3. Non. Maias 1657. Soon after I had this answer in French SIR I Have received in due time the letter and book which you have honoured me with I have read both the one and the other with satisfaction both because they give me fresh assurance of your affection and chiefly for that they strengthen in me the perswasion that the reading of your first book had very deeply imprinted in my spirit Your positions seem so well grounded and back't with so many authorities of the contrary opinion that except you can be convinced of falshood in the citation of the said authors I do not see how your said positions can be overthrown Therefore for the love I bear to truth when it is made known to nee I will adhere fast to that which you have as I think so clearly demonstrated unto me till a greater light causeth me to see that I am gone astray in following your steps and I will not only carefully entertain that truth my self but also strive to impart it to others that they being well acquainted with the matter treated of in your books may have more charitable thoughts of you then those have who go about to make you a profest enemy to the holy ministery and the discipline One of my Collegues who hath read your first book hath acknowledged unto me he is much satisfied by the reading thereof and told me that your opinion is so far from pulling down or shaking the stability of our discipline that quite contrary it is clear to him that it builds it up firmly and strenghthens it laying it upon its naturall and true foundations Another of my Collegues hath not indeed so openly declared to me that he found himself overcome by the strength of your reasons but yet he hath been brought so far as to doubt and make a question of what heretofore he held to be indubitable Mr. Lagnel the fourth of my Collegues a person endowed with a most solid judgement upon the description I made him of the nature of the controversy between the Independents and the Presbyterians and of the reasons you bring in the behalf of the opinion of the first adjudgeth the victory unto them And I doubt not but that those who shall read your writings laying aside all prejudice and weighing as they ought your reasons will give glory to God and entertain so clear a truth which rendreth to the magistrate and to the church what belongeth unto them and plucketh up by the root the remnants of Papall tyranny which have been retained still in the exercise of ecclesiasticall discipline specially among the Scots of whom you give us a notable example which ought to make the hearts of all good men start and tremble So then although your book hath suffered in its birth those contradidictions which usually are incident to them that fetch out a truth from the tombe yet you have reason to hope that the truth delivered in it will render it victorious and make you see by experience that tandem bona causa triumphat Now when I answered your first letter I thought I was not to write to you but only of the principall subject of your book without speaking of the additions for I had well oâ—served that what you said of the holy Supper might be ill interpreted but I also clearly perceived by
the sequel of your discourse that you understood it in the sense that you explain in your Corollary so that if all the readers of the book had brought with them such a spirit to the reading of it as mine you had been freed from the trouble of giving a clear exposition of your meaning I had also taken notice of the digression you make in your Preface against Mr. Daillé and Amyraldus and indeed I did then write to Mr. Congnard my opinion thereof and that I could have wished for many reasons that you had not meddled with them but what is written is written which I hope will not hinder but that those that follow their opinion concerning the universality of grace as conceiving it to be grounded upon Scripture and upon the authority of most Doctors both ancient and modern and chiefly of our first reformers will embrace if they be good men the truth which you present unto them so that they may perceive it without any kind of prejudice I pray God they may do it I am sorry I delayed this answer so long but besides that I am entangled with a law suite which a naughty man hath troubled me with I had a great desire that my Collegues should first have your book communicated to them that I might tell you their opinion what they think of it Be pleased therefore not to take this delay in ill part and to favour me so far as to believe that I honour you and value as much as possible the gifts of God whâ—ch shine in you which will readily put me upon studying all occasions to testifie that I am most sincerely Your most humble and most obedient servant VAUQUELIN From Diepe this 16. of August 1657. Having since the receit of this letter desired him to gi e me leave to publish it in print he granted it me by this ensuing letter SIR YOur work carrieth its commendation with it and needeth not to borrow it from others Yet if you and those to whom you communicated my last letter conceive it will signify any thing and think it fitting to be printed either at the beginning or at the end of the extract of your Paraenesis I willingly give my consent I shall not fear to own a truth of that nature which you propound in your book Amicus Plato c. If any body undertakes to confute it and by the strength and evidence of his reasons can convince me that it is not truth but an errour coloured over I will not then fear to disavow it Those famous authors whose authorities you bring to defend all your conclusions will be obliged to do the like and to sing a Palinodia when they see that you are gone astray in going the way they led you But untill I see this demonstration which at present I think impossible I will stick to that I have embraced and in the mean while will assure you that it will be a great satisfaction to me if I can be serviceable to you in any thing whereby I may testify to you that I am in all sincerity Your most humble and most obedient servant VAUQUELIN From Diepe the 2. of Oct. 1657. Among the persons living that have given their approbation to my Paraenesis I might mention the late reverend and learned minister of Paris Iohn Mestrezat because he was then living when it came forth I have in my Corollarium inserted his letter written a few weeks before he died wherein as in his treatise of the Church one may see he wholly concurreth with me in the following particulars 1. That all private churches are independent from any church-judicatory and that what power so ever is given or promise made to a church ought not to be ascribed to the catholick nationall or presbyterâ—all church but to the private church made up of Pastor and flock meeting in one place about the same ordinances 2. That combinations of private churches are of very good use but yet are arbitrary and of humane institution and not commanded in the word 3. That Jesus Christ never appointed any form or modell of church discipline only hath in generall commanded that all things in the church should be done orderly I might adde the testimonies of many English Divines who have approved of the book and argument with no lesse good liking then the ministers of Dâ—epe or Mr. Mestrezat For I do not doubt but that reverend and learned Mr. Baxter as it seems to me in the Preface to a late book of his will come as near me in the main question handled in my Paraenesis as I differ from him in the other controversy betwixt him and me But I forbear to name either those that like of my Paranesis or those that dislike iâ— having no leave from either of them so to do I am however thus far satisfied that these later have condemned it before they read it and when they never intended to read it either out of contempt oâ— prejudice whereas the other have taken the pains to read it over and been as m ch in the extreams to commend it as those to discommend it Should I set down here the vaâ—ioâ—s jâ—dg ments of men both in England and b yond the seas it would hardly be believed that godly and learned men agreeing in the same holy doctrine of faith and in fervent charity one with the other should be so opposite and contrary in their judgement of my book some condemning it as most pernicious and dangerous adam iâ—gaâ—d damnable book as if they had spoken of some pieces of Socinus or Câ—ellius or of â—nâ—ther and eternall Gosâ—ell written some â—…ndred years a gone by the Friars besides a book full of hes casummes and slaunders and wounding the interest of Jesus Christ on the contrary others commending the book both for the matter and the way of handling it and for the Christian moderation that the author oâ—serveth enrough the whole work equally resâ—ecting and honouring those he assents to and those he dissents from The later since they have known me by my works have had more Christian converse with me by letters and otherwise but the other except they be my noble and old friends did flee from me since as from an heathen and a publican and an excommunicated person only for denying excommunication to be an ordinance of Christ yea so far that a reverend person protested to a friend of mine that he would not come in the company where I should be I thank God I cannot find in my heart to value and honour any one more or lesse for loving me either better or worse for my books sake so that I find godlinesse and sincerity shine in them though in some with much prejudice I pardon them their uncharitable and somewhat rash censure both of the work and the Authour The Lord knoweth my heart that in delivering what I did and now do in this present work I look upon Father Brother Kinsmen English French Scots Dutch Calvin Independents Presbyterians Erastians with an indifferent and unpartiall eye not seeking to close with any of them or fearing to dissent from them nor so much as taking notice whether I please any body or no body so that I may abstain from known errour and sin and deliver that which to me is truth and tending to the honour of the ministery to the rooting out of the churches of God all power that is none of Christs to the unsettling the Romish Hierarchy which hath now no longer any plausible plea from Scripture and reason for their setting up an empire within the dominions of others and lastly conducing to the building up of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ in many mens hearts and making it appear to be wholly internall and sâ—…rituall and only over those that are convinced and perswaded by the spirit of God in the ministery of the word The Lord perswade his people of this truth as I my self and I hope rightly am perswaded and informed undeceiving them that he may have all the glory by their endeavouring with one accord to preserve saving truths by this truth FINIS