Saints together in the spirit of which love I come to your arguments Fourthly That no case is so cleer but some question may be raised about it to which present satisfaction may not be given it is sufficient if the main things things be justified ARGUMENT I. LEt it be granted that the Churches in the Apostles time were Congregationall for all nationall profession in the world was either Jewish or Heathenish yet if they were to be the president of the form of Church-ordering and government for ever under the Gospell how could all the Churches the Apostles had constituted up and down the world yea and all particular Christians be so corrupted as to suffer the government and worship of God to be taken from them so easily as that none that I can heare of are found upon record to have stood up for Christ and the truth but Nationall-Church-government was brought in and we cannot learn that there was any scuffle on contestation against it I do not think there can be named one truth of God that Antichrist or any other Heretique fought against but t is possible with a little search or study to name those peâ—sons that disputed or wâ—it on suffered in the defence of it and stood in the gap to keep out the error only in this all the Christian Churches in the world suffer'd the government of Christ which is so deare to the heart of a Saint to be destroyed and a false Antichristian government and worship to be obtruded on them and all sides are silent in the businesse Where is the Scribe is there no Disputer no Martyr to be found what not one that retained any spark of zeal for Christ that after ages could speak of either oâ—th approbation or detestation for willingly suffering shame spoyling of goods banishment death rather then Christ should be pull'd down in his worship and a Nationall false Church-government set up in the roome of it I cannot but wonder that all Christian Churches should fall at once into such a dead sleep to suffer the evill One thus to pluck up and thus to plant or else if their eyes were open I cannot but call it the greatest piece of cow ardise that ever the Churches of Christ were guilty of to stand idle speechlesse spectators by where was the valour of their faith Heb. 11.33 34. Or if they did dispute and suffer for it I cannot but think it the greatest unfaithfulnesse and oversight the Churches were ever guilty of not to transmit the story to posterity REPLY FIrst this Argument impleadeth Presbyterie as well as Congregationall government for where read we of sufferers for Presbytery Secondly To come more directly to the point you grant the Churches constituted by the Apostles Congregationall now if wee shew this practice of theirs was intended as a pattern for us and so taken by the most Primitive Churches we hope your demand will be satisfied though wee could not distinctly shew you why none appeared in the defence of it of which anon First God and nature do nothing in vain was the saying of the ancient Naturalists the Spirit of God did so distinctly set down the manner of the constitution of the Jewish Church by Moses that posterity may have a distinct pattern as wel as a rule to walk by the Holy Ghost hath to some purpose surely so punctually noted the manner of gathering and governing the Churches planted by the Apostles and what can this purpose be but our imitation in things lawfull and possible for all in the new as well as in the old Testament are written for our learning and follow me saith the Apostle and that by way of forbearing and negatively as by way of doing and affirmatively that is wee may not do what they did not when they might and the nature of the thing seemed to require it as the subjecting particular Churches to a combination of Elders which should have ordinary authority over the severall Congregations which they might have done as well as to keep up the government in one city which they did and as well as the Church of France at this day though under persecution yet keep their government and when by reason of the paucity of believers and the temptation of persecution they had much need of the help of government and no hinderance why they might not seeing though by reason of persecution they might have been hindered for a time and in some places yet the rule of such a government if it had been the will of God had been usefull and though they had been disturbed in one place yet it would have been exercised in some other this was a sufficient argument for God to use Jer. 7.31 they did which I commanded them not and for the Apostle Heb. 7.14 of which Moses spake nothing Ergo God intended it not And so affirmatively what they did for substance we must Hence Gualter in the end of his Comment on the Acts sayes they are not to be listened unto that tell us the way and practice of the Apostles in constituting Churches is not a pattern for us to follow Secondly The Churches in the first and second hundred yeers after Christ did take the Apostles practice for their pattern and therefore every Church did transact all their ordinary affaires within themselves as admission of members choyce and ordination of officers excommunication of scandalous persons deposition of their officers where just cause was in difficult cases indeed they used the counsell and help of other Churches but as being ingaged thereunto only out of the bond of mutuall love and fellowship not of necessity or subjection and where any Church was more famous for gifts numbers Ministers c. to these they gave the greater respects and did more depend upon their guidance till this voluntary and occasionall office of love became a custome viz. for the lesser and obscurer Churches to do nothing without the greater and for the greater to exercise inspection and some kinde of jurisdiction towards the lesser by way of charge and office till in the third Century it was by the Councel of Nice established by a Canon for a Church-law at which time Antichrist had made much progresse towards his usurpation For proof of all which I shall shew you some of the words of the Centurie Writers touching this Argument and first of the constitution of Churches planted by the Apostles 1. Câ—nt lib. 2. cap. 7. de gubernatione Ecclestitul de consociatione c. If it be said these consisted of many congregations and so were Presbyteriall I answer it cannot be proved they were so secondly nor disproved that they were one congregation because we reade so often both in Scripturall and Ecclesiasticall story that they had one Eldership not severall over them and that they all met upon one great occasion together as upon the choice or deposition of Ministers excommunication of members c. and if they did meet in severall places yet having one
evident and what they did unlesse upon expresse either Text or revelation was done with the consent of the congregation 1 Chron. 13.2 c. Fourthly I do not remember that ever they did banish or otherwayes punish all strangers from among them that were not of their own Religion or had such a commission so to do and that these severe lawes about Church-government did belong unto any but their own nation and people or those that joyned themselves to them all that acknowledged the seven precepts of Noah they tolerated Ainsworth on Gen. 17.12 Fifthly Most evident it is that they did suffer severall Sects and differing Opinions among them and that of a more dangerous consequence then is the difference that is the difference that is between the Presbyterian and Independent as the Sadduces the Pharisees the Herodians Alexandrians c. And therefore you may after their example plead for the like toleration or rather for the toleration of those that are of lesse danger Sixthly But if any thing must be added for conclusion we say as the Christians of old leaving the dispute of the Magistrates power in generall we say this Way being of God at least in great probability the Magistrate hath no power to suppresse it which I desire you to take as a full answer those kings of Israel commanded nothing but the expresse will of God and that without infringing the liberties of the Congregation whose consent they had which two things if our Magistrates shall do all that wee shall say will be Go on and prosper Seventhly Whereas you say Let it be shewne where God took this power from the civill Magistrate under the new Testament c. I answer where wee finde types and ceremonies taken away there wee finde this power in matters of Church-government taken away which though it be not exprest in so many plain words as many other cermonies granted on all hands to be taken away are not yet this with others is to be understood as I humbly conceive in that generall expression of the Apostle Gal. 3.24 25. The law was a Schoolmaster to bring us to Christ c. but after that faith is come we are no longer under a Schoolmaster these things being shadows of good things to come but the body is Christ Col. 2.17 And untill it can be proved that the civill government of the Jewes had nothing typicall as well as the Church and that the kings of Israel and Judah were not typicall in this particular I humbly conceive it a sufficient answer to that part of your Argument Eighthly As for the Reasons which you give of the Apostles closenesse for so your word is in declaring the power of Christian Magistrates at that time they are but conjecturall not Scripturall and therefore may as well be denied by me as affirmed by you and that upon as probable grounds Your first Reason is There was no Magistrate then but Heathonish or Jewish and so understood not Gods will in his worship and so had any thing been commanded it had been but a carnall commandement humane which Christians must have refused and therefore it was not their wisdome to speak or write much to that point lest it had proved a snare I answer that mens not understanding Gods will in his worship whether Jewish or Heathonish Magistrate or not Magistrate could be no just ground why the Apostles should not teach them their work being to teach such things which were not before understood and if any thing had been commanded by them though Heathonish or Jewish according to the will of God their commanding the same had not made the commandement carnall for I suppose it is not the person commanding but the nature of the thing commanded that renders it carnall For if a Heathen commands that which is the will of God and a Christian Magistrate that that is net the will of God it is the Heathens command that must be obeyed and the Christian Magistrates command that must be disobeyed because it must be the will of God and not the authority of man that must be the grouud of warranted obedience and they might have taught it without perill by shewing that though he had power in Church-affaires yet not against their profession as being of God which was the only argument they defended it by Your second Reason is Had the Apostles spoken much of a Christian Magistrates power in things civill and Ecclesiasticall and be able to defend Christianity against all its enemies what you mean by this last clause I know not this would have bred jealousies in the Romane State and Christian Churches would have been looked upon as a conspiring trayterous generation and persecutions would soon have been raised up against them it was the Apostles wisdome to keep Cesars head from jealousies that so the Churches might enjoy Christ and their consciences the better c. I humbly answer though it be true the Saints should be as wise as Serpents yet as innocent as Doves and herein the Apostles snewed their innocency in that they kept back nothing of the will of God that was profitable Acts 20.20 I suppose this could not be unprofitable and although every truth must be preached seasonably yet at one time or another your asserting the Apostles supposition of the Saints sufficient understanding the will of God about Christian Magistrates from Gods will revealed therein by the example of the Kings of Israel being only your own conjecture as I said before and not Scripture doth not at all ease this businesse for that must first be proved before we can grant it you and moreover it is evident the Apostles did not balk or forbeare to preach such truths as were every whit as exasperating the Roman Magistrate as this particular you speak of as that Jesus was both Lord and Christ Acts 2.36 and that he should put down all rule and all authority and power yea and that he should reign untill hee hath put down all his enemies under his feet 1 Cor. 15.24 yea and the more they were forbidden to preach the more they went about preaching not regarding the command of the Magistrate when it was beyond the line of his just authority and many other Scriptures of this nature may be given and these things I conceive may be sufficient answers unto your 7th Argument ARGUM. VIII I Desire to know if Gamaliel had given the Councell this advice of refraining and letting alone concerning Theudas or Judas of Galilee I say whether the Councell being able to have demonstrated them and their wayes erroneous they ought to have consented to him or no for this is the true state of the Question and not whether the Ministers and truths of Christ may be suppressed wee all know this would be fighting against God to run a hazard no lesse then death but whether a Councell finding a generation of Teachers erring from the truth and wilfull in their errours must then let them alone and expect
Eldership over them and not severall Elderships for the severall companies and not being tied any of them to come to any one place more then another it doth no more argue they were many congregations or hinder their being one though inconvenient to be governed by reason of its vastnesse then it doth in Holland where the case is so or then in some great parishes in and about London where though they meet in one place yet cannot meet all together by reason of the multitude being above 10000. in some parishes unlesse at severall times if it were so that they had been Presbyteriall in a city yet it is far different from that government that makes many towns cities one Church and drawes them to subjection to one common Presbytery and that in ordinary against which many Reasons might be given though the other were admitted Thirdly If the Churches of those times had not so judged that the Way the Apostles left Churches in was to be their pattern as it had been easie for them to order it as afterward their posterity did into Episcopacie so had it been more advantage and ease to them to have united many Churches together into one body and to set one Councell and President over it for the suppressing of Heresies Schismes c. which yet they did not till times grew more corrupt and which at this day is the state of the Papacie Fourthly Though this might suffice yet I shall now shew you how it might come to passe that this received truth might be lost and no notice left of any contending for it First greater truths then this of government have been stolen from the Church without any great reluctancy As far as appears as the reading of the Scriptures by the people transubstantiation of the bread in the Sacrament adoration of the Host the Masse it self taking the cup from the people c. which the subtilty of men taking advantage by the negligence and cowardise of the people brought in without much opposition till long after Secondly the monuments of antiquity in this kinde are very defective first by the notable carelesnesse of Writers in those times of which Ludovicus apud Illyricum in Refutat Brin pag. 15. an Author of no mean credit complains It is a singular grief to me saith he when I call to minde how diligently the actions of Alexander Scipio Annibal Pompey Cesar Socrates Plato Aristotle and other Captains and Philosophers have been noted that there is no perill of their perishing but the doings of the Apostles except such as are set down in sacred Scripture Martyrs and Saints of our Religion yea and of the Church it self whether growing up or at full age are covered in deep silence for these things which are written excepting a few only are corrupted with feigned inventions c. thus hee a man by profession a Papist Secondly because of the prevalencie of the Romish faction whereby all monuments almost that seemed to oppose the intended usurpation as the ancient government of the Churches especially did were either spupressed or some way violated as amongst many others Dr. James hath discovered at large in his book entituled The Corruption of Fathers c. But Lastly to give you a more direct answer there have not been wanting defendents of the liberties of the Churches in this particular for seeing it is evident by the first second and third particular in this answer that both in the Apostles times and next ages after the Churches were governed each by themselves as in respect of authority out of their own body if there were any that resisted those that invaded that liberty those are the examples of suffering or at least contesting for this government but the Bishops were the first that usurped the power of many Churches in ordinary and these were often resisted by word writing and fact as appeares not only by Aerius who was counted an Heretique for his labour but also by Jerom who saith that Bishops were brought in to prevent Heresies and Schismes but that the Churches were anciently governed by the joynt counsell of the Elders Now this was either by the Elders of the same Church or if with others it was a conjunction by way of Christian fellowship and society not by jurisdiction authority and necessity as wee saw before I adde that the sufferings of so many in opposition to Papall government even in the ancient times is an argument in a negative sense that there hath been sufferings for Church-government because they would not submit to a false government To conclude this argument I shall endeavour at better leisure to give you some particular instances out of the story which maymore fully satisfie this Querie Insigniores Ecclesiae c. They which were more eminent Churches say they were in some honour because of the Apostles that taught in them and because of their Ministers that were more excellent for learning and constancy and likewise of the benefits that those Churches did afford to other neighbour Churches but they had no other power over other Churches then by mutuall offices in things belonging to the edification of the whole Church to afford them their help and then instances in particular Churches 2. The Churches in the next age after the Apostles Cent. 2. cap. 7. titul de consociatione Ecclesiarum Caeterum si quis probatos autores c. If say they any man look into the approved Authors of this age hee shall find that the form of government was almost like a popular government for every Church had equall power to preach the Word of God purely to administer the Sacraments to absolve and excommunicate heretiques and wicked men to elect call and ordain Ministers and upon sufficient grounds to depose them to call assemblies and Synods in doubtfull things and that were controversall to require the opinions of others to judge and determine them Further the neighbour Churches for charity and edification sake not for any superiour jurisdiction but for the command of Christ concerning mutuall love in their necessity craved the help of their neighbour Churches and also afforded theirs to them in more weighty questions all the Churches or Elders of that Province or else the most of the Teachers came together and determined by common advice what was to be done for the faithfull in Asia saith Eusebius quoted by them in that place came often from many places together and examined the new doctrines and pronounced them wicked and rejecting the heresie they cast and excommunicated it out of the Church The Churches that were farther off in other Provinces consult with other Churches by letters which they did generally or by common consent subscribe this new prophesie saith Serapin in Euseb cited by the Cent. is refuted and rejected by all the brotherhood which is in all the world Tit. de Synodis privat each Church that things might be better ordered had their Synod or assemblies or Church-meetings in which the Rector or
Pastor the Elders the Deacons and also the people did deliberate and determine of things belonging to the government of the Church 3. The Churches in the third hundred yeer Cen. 3. cap. 7. Tit. de Synodis privatis in principio Now that the jurisdiction of the great Churches over the lesse was established and the authority of metropolitanes determined by the Nicene Councel yet if any businesse happened which could not be perfected without the rest both Ministers people then they came together and dispatched them with common advice without the calling of the Churches of the same Province So Cyprian cited by them Epist l. 3. cap. 10. From the beginning of my being Bishop or Pastor I determined to do nothing without your counsell hee speaks to the Elders and Deacons nor without the consent of the people by my own private opinion In these assemblies in other Churches there were few orders made by the Bishops or Pastors and afterwards approved by the Church unlesse it was in Rome according to the efficacy of the mysterie of Iniquity they are the Authors words some Bishops made decrees as Damasus Galixtus c. By all which it appeares that the Churches most Primitive were ignorant of any necessity or law lying on them to be governed by one Church or more or of associating with any but as they saw cause and by the law of charity neither understood there was any Provinciall much lesse Nationall or universall and ministeriall and governing Church which must by way of authority dispose of all the affaires of the particular Churches Object But they excommunicated in their Assemblies of many Churches Answ 1. So did they in each particular Church as of their own right and consulted not with others unlesse the cause was difficult 2. The excommunication was rather of the opinion by damning and condemning of it then of persons 3. If there were such excommunication of persons yet it was done by the willing consent of the Churches or else for themselves those Churches that met not for others unlesse by consequent that he who is excommunicated out of one Church if it be duly performed is excommunicated out of all ARGUMENT II. WHy hath not the civill Magistrate a power to set up and establish by a law such a worship as an Assembly of godly Divines shal present to them to be according to the Word of God as well as they had a power to pull down false worship Popery Episcopacie Arminianisme and such grosse errors and innovations as had justled out the true servants and service of God and this they did with the approbations and acclamations of all those that professed the power of godlinesse of what Way or Sect soever they were I never heard of any such that accused them for stretching beyond their line therein If the subject matter of Politicall administration be meerly humane matters why did not Congregationall Divines inform them as much but were silent while they had their hands thrust deep into Church-affaires and things spirituall Why did not their jealousie over the Parliament break out when they saw them begin to dash the foot against that stone but gave thanks to God for them their doing but now when they have come to set up and it proves aworship against their judgement and conscience they are reproved and have no power at all in things Ecclesiasticall but every man must enjoy his conscience worship and way If they once had a power to pull down why have they not now power to pull down in the like case with the like proportioned approbation and if in things Ecclesiasticall they have a power to pull down why not to set up too That the civill Magistrate shall have a power in things spirituall and yet no power is a mysterie unto mee REPLY 1. THe government the Magistrate hath pulled down was erected as a Law of the kingdome and by that power was inabled to the persecution of the Saints and disturbance of the State which was the defection of the Magistracie of these times Now when the Magistrates shall not only withdraw their power but also prohibit the further exercise thereof in the persecution of the Saints and disturbance of the State we suppose it is no more then according to their just power and therefore do rejoyce therein 2. The Magistrates just doing any thing according to the joynt consent desire approbation and congratulatory acclamations of all the Saints is no good argument to prove a lawfull power in the Magistrate to do things contrary to the joynt consent desires c. of all the Saints Herod and Pilate Felix and Agrippa had a just power to release Christ and Paul c. but that doth not argue that their power was just in delivering them up unto whipping imprisonment death c. it was indeed potentia but not potestas might but not right and it is the latter I suppose that you mean 3. We did never deny the Magistrate a lawfull power to intermeddle with that kinde of Church-government or doctrine opinion or practice which shall most dangerously intermeddle with the State it self and thereby prove evidently hurtfull and apparently destructive thereunto and so did the government whereof you speak which was the ground of that act of abolishing the same When Congregationall or Presbyteriall government or the professors thereof be found in their principles and generall practices underminers of the peace and welfare of the kingdome raising up wars and trouble to maintain the same it is high time for the Magistrate who is mainly to minde salutem populi to pull them down and no longer to tolerate the same and such is the instance which you speak of 4. Those Christian or unchristian Magistrates may have a lawfull power and authority to destroy Antichrist which may have no lawfull authority to appoint lawes and rules for the government of the Churches of Jesus Christ and to enforce the same contrary to their judgements and consciences Cyrus may have a just warrant from God for the ruining of Babylon but not for the compulsion of Sion to worship God according to his thoughts of the will of God therein all Magistrates may and ought to assist and preserve the Churches of Jesus Christ from those that wonld ruine and destroy them but that any magistrate hath power to compell the Saints of God what to believe in matters of faith and what to practice in matters of immediate worship especially in things that are of an intricate and deep cognizance and controversall among the godly learned which is the main businesse in hand between the Presbyterian and Independent party is beyond any ground that I can yet perceive from the Scriptures but we shall meet with this again in another of your Arguments ARGUM. III. VVHy do not our Congregationall Divines write to the Brethren of New-England and convince them of their errour who give as some say the civill Magistrate a power to question doctrines censure errours
that God should fight against them from heaven before they would sentence or smite I am sure Gamaliel seems to approve of rejoycing in the destruction of those two forementioned with their followers when onee they were destroyed and doubtlesse they were destroyed in an ordinary course of providence by the Jews God making no extraordinary or remarkable revelations from heaven against them or their errours and therefore I conclude it had been better to have sentenced and quite crushed them in the shell which had prevented all the mischiefes that were done the troubles of the State the subversion of soules not a few Mee thinks through the spectacles that I looke upon the place Gamaliel seems cleerly to imply that if the Councell could have discovered by any means them and their doctrine not to have been of God as before they had done Thendas and Judas finding them so peremptory as they did they might have passed their own sentence upon them and neither God nor Gamaliel would have reproved them for it but good service they had done So that had I been to have spoken to that Text these three points I should have insisted upon 1. It is a most dangerous thing to sentence and persecute the servants and truths of God 't is no lesse then fighting against God 2. God sometimes over-powers wicked men as he did Gamaliel to advise and the rest of the Councell to submit to his advice to make way for the servants and truths of God that they may stand and prosper 3. As to oppose the truth of God is to fight against God so to sentence and oppose doctrines which by the cleer light of Scripture are from men or of a worse descent is to fight for God and do him service this is implied I would gladly know how did God disclaime or renounce from heaven Theudas and Judas of Galilee with their errors that after the Councels forbearing might be a warrant for their destruction what contrariety unto God was discovered in their Wayes when they fell upon them that was not apparent when first they shewed their heads their opinions catching and kindling in the hearts of many might have stumbled the Councell into a longer forbearance of them as being easily of this Interpretation that God owned them and they went on in the power of God and therefore now more dangerous to resist them then before it consequently must never have parted the value of the least haire of their heads against them till they had seen fire and darts come down from heaven amongst them But doubtlesse their destruction was no otherwise but thus the Councell finding their Wayes thwarting Moses and the Prophets were sorry for their thus long forbearance of them sent out forces slew and scatter'd them notwithstanding their consciences notwithstanding their errours claimed doubtlesse a glorious and high descent How has God disclaimed the Church of Rome any otherwise then hee has done Antinomianisme Anabaptisme hee has cleerly written their condemnations with his finger in his Word that all of them stand in enmity and opposition unto him and his providence seemingly never owned any Religion more under the Gospel then it has done Popery and therefore why must not their consciences and Wayes be refrained from as well as the others I cannot yet see how upon Gamaliels words can be grounded the forbearance letting alone any Way that is once discovered to be not according to the rule the Analogie of the faith of the Scripture c. REPLY THat question concerning the Councels duty to proceed against Theudas and Judas in case it was demonstrated unto them their doctrines were erroneous notwithstanding Gamaliels advice to the contrary cannot I conceive be rationally answered except there had been a certain knowledge of the nature of those errours and upon supposition that those errors were grosse and dangerous as it is like they were even unto insurrection and sedition I answer that they ought not to have hearkened unto his advice but to have proceeded according to rules of justice made in that behalf and it is not denyed but that the Christian Magistrate hath a coercive power in matters of Religion in things that are of a morall and capitall consideration such as are prophane swearings cursings blasphemies and such things that first are against the light of nature and conscience yea secondly of cursed apostasie from Christ professedly denying him to be God or come in the flesh or wickedly blaspheming him teaching men so and thirdly such as are turbulent violent mutinous and factious in raising up parties to the disturbance of the peace of the State as the late Bishops did Neither hath Mr. Goodwin in my best observation said or writ any thing to the contrary in his Theomachia or elsewhere for I cannot see any such thing in any of his doctrines raised from his Text of that Sermon and the main point which he prosecuted and which was as it were the spirit and life of all those particular instructions therein contained was that For any man to endeavour or attempt the suppression of any Doctrine Practice or Way that is from God is to fight against God This point is proved and cleered and confest on all hands to be a truth of God and if you look into application he renders those obnoxious to the wrath of God who shall exercise any high handed apposition or contestation against any Way Doctrine or Practice whatsoever VNTIL they have proof upon proof demonstration upon demonstration evidence upon evidence yea all the security that men in any ordinary way at least can have that such Wayes or Doctrines only pretend God to be the author of them and that in truth they are not at all from him but either from man or of a baser parentage What is this against the just power of a Magistrate in matters of Religion and no more power then this can you prove even from the example of the kings of Israel and Judah ☞ and therefore if you will reduce the Christian Kings and Magistrates unto them as a pattern and example of their power in things spirituall and make the case directly as it is you must bring in some instance or other of a difference between the holy and godly Prophets and people of God themselves and that in a case very difficult and intricate and hard to be found out from the Scriptures or any of those wayes wherein God did usually reveale his minde and that in such a case the magistrate did determine the businesse according to his judgement and compell the dissenting party to submission thereunto and that according to the approbation of God and therefore an example for Magistrates under the Gospel such is the very case in hand as might be evidently declared Moreover there were those that did differ in many things of a very deep and serious consideration provided they made profession of the Jewish Religion and government they were tolerated as is very cleer as I said
before Sadduces Pharisees and severall other sorts were permitted neither do I remember where they were compelled against their judgements either in matter of Profession or Practice except as being members of that Church to the main doctrines worship and government expressed in the Word and surely there is far more and better reasons for the toleration and permission of the Independent then can be given for the toleration of such persons as the Jewes did tolerate for these agree with Presbyterians in the main grounds of Religion and principles of the Gospel these are confest by their Brethren to be holy godly and learned and of singular use and benefit both in Church and Commonwealth c. and the toleration of none others are pleaded for in Mr. Goodwins Theomachia from that Sermon which you mention But wee will not stand on this particular because it may be one of the corruptions of those times to suffer such Sects especially the Sadduces who though for reasons not reproved by our Saviour as some other corruptions were not mentioned by him Wee have said enough before to this Argument As for those Doctrines which you say you would raise from that Text if you were to preach upon it I conceive the two first you mention are indeed very naturall but how you will draw the third from thence as naturall from that Text I cannot see but it would be a digression for mee to meddle with that and therefore I leave it to your own further consideration ARGUMENT IX I Desire to know whether that law Deut. 13. of putting a false Prophet to death or any one that should entice men from the Way of the true God there be not morall equity in it and therefore binde the Magistrate and Chuches of God to the end of the world Calvin and the Church vf Geneva burnt a blasphemer they looked upon the morall equity of that law Levit. 24.16 He that blasphemeth the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death all the Congregation shall stone him Why should not Christians be as tender of the name of God as the Jewes were Is not his name as great and glorious that it may be more securely blasphemed now then it might then But a Presbyterian president will have but little authority with Congregationall Churches therefore I desire that Mr. Cotton one of your own upon whose learning and judgement the wel-willer to Mr. Prynne hee that put forth the first answer to his twelve Queries would have men much to rely may be heard speak in the point in his book entituled Powring out the seven Vials on Rev. 16.4 5 6 7. Verses His very doctrine is this Upon the discovery of the deadly corruption of the Sea of Rome it was a righteous judgement of God and such as argued him unchangeable ever like himselfe that the Priests and Jesuits who carryed that Religion up and down the Nations should be adjudged or condemned to a bloody death His meaning is evidently this not because enemies to the civill State but because they carryed Ordinances Doctrines up and down the world which were no better then the blood of a dead man and every soule that drank of them died therefore they themselves must drink blood Within a few lines after his doctrine he quotes Zach. 13.2 3. spealing of the times under the Gospel 't is cleer from the first verse and so doth Mr. Thomas Goodwin interpret it in his triall of the growth of Grace God will out off the false Prophet and if any false Prophet shall arise his Father and Mother shall thrust him therow because hee speaks lies in the name of the God of truth be shall not live Vpon which Text hee thus glosses It is not spoken of his typicall death i of his death by Church-censure or banishment which have a kinde of death in them but of such a death as that he was not worthy to live because he cast a lie upon the God of Truth the Oracle of Truth In his first Reasons of his point he affirms that no Magistrate ought to have put Paul to death for his errours and blasphemies because be did all ignorantly 1 Tim. 1.14 had the truth been made known to him hee would not have done as hee did but such as blaspheme and teach errours wilfully after admonition twice or thrice the glorious light of the Gospel shining round about them those hee affirms ought to be looked upon with another eye ought to drink blood His first objection is this In the new Testament we must look for a spirituall death i Church-censure only He answers his Text is in the new Testament not in the old the new Testament sayes such are worthy to drink the blood of their own hearts the holy Ghost sayes hee will have it true according to the Letter and further answers that 't was one of Moses his morall lawes of perpetuall equity thrusting men away from God is as odious now as then In his fifth Vse he has these very words Heresie is no more pleasing to him nor blasphemie nor seducing nor to change the Way of Gods worship and to draw men to Wayes wherein they cannot enjoy God in peace murther of soules is no more welcome to God now then of old and therefore if there were a law to punish such with capitall punishment it is a like justice in God to enjoyn such lawes in every Christian Commonwealth His second Objection is this Conscience must not be forced men must not be put to death for their conscience Hee answers Heretiques were as conscionable in the old Testament as now and if any man have a conscience to turn men from God God would have men have as much conscience to cut them off glossing upon Tit. 3. 10 11. thus He that will not be admonished is rejected given up to the civil Magistrate to be punished or put to death not for his conscience but because hee sins against his conscience the cleere shining light of the Gospel Whereupon I thinke it followes that any errour whatsoever though not fundamentall if it be wilfully held and taught against instructions and admonitions especially if it make Sects and Factions let them be never so conscionable in their Wayes professe never so much of God to be in them the Magistrate may and ought to punish them according to the nature of their errours and their mouths must be stopped that their teaching do no more subvert REPLY FIrst if that law Deut. 13. of putting a false Prophet to death or any one that shall entice men from the true God be morall equity and still binding the Magistrates and Churches of God unto the end of the world is to be understood as it there followes of inducing to Idolatry wherein notwithstanding there is something peculiar to that nation as in the 15th verse of that Chapter If a City should turn away from the true God to serve other gods that they shauld smite the inhabitants thereof and the