of the keyes without any subjection to any superiour Ecclesiasticall indicatorie p. 187. CHAP. 14. QVEST. 14. Whether or no the power Ecclesiasticall of Synods can be proved from the famous Councell holden at Jerusalem Acts 15. p. 199. CHAP. 15. QVEST. 15. Whether or noe by other valid Arguments from Gods word the lawfulnesse of Synods and Assemblies can be concluded p. 217. CHAP. 16. QVEST. 16. Whether or no it can be demonstrated from Gods Word that all particular Congregations have of and within themselves full power of Church-discipline without any subiection to Presbyteries Synods and higher Church-Assemblies where also the question about publike prophecying of such gifted men as are not in office is discussed against the tenent of Separatists p. 231. CHAP. 17. QVEST. 17. Whether or no some doe warrantably teach that no man hath Pastorall power to preach and administer the Sacraments as a Pastor without the bounds of his owne Congregation And from whence essentially is the calling of a Minister from the Presbytery or from the people p. 260. CHAP. 18. QVEST. 18. Certaine Quares or doubts following upon the Doctrine of independent Congregations p. 272. CHAP. 19. QVEST. 19. Doubts generally seeming to oppose Presbyteriall government discussed and loosed as anent ruling Elders Deacons Widowes the power of Kings in matters Ecclesiastick p. 280. CHAP. 20. QVEST. 20. Whether or no the government of the Church of Scotland can be demonstrate from the cleare testimonies of Gods Word p. 362. CHAPTER I. Whether the power of the Keyes of the Kingdome of CHRIST be conferred upon the multitude of believers as upon the first and proper subject or upon the Church-guides THe Question is not understood of that Royall and Kingly power of excellency and Independencie called all power which is only in Christ Iesus but of the supreme Ministeriall power as all expound it Bucanus Cartwright Amesius Parker that is given to the Church By the Keyes wee understand not the Monarchicall power of Teaching supreme defining Articles of faith and judging the Scriptures as the Jesuites of Rhemes doe dreame Vulcane not Christ made these Keyes We deny not what Bellarmine saith that the keyes signifie a Princedome in Scripture as the key of Davids house promised to Eliakim This key Christ only keepeth Chrysostome and Gregory both say that the care of the whole Christian Church was committed to Peter which proveth not his Princedome but only his ministeriall power given to all the Apostles as well as to him but the Metaphor is borrowed from a Steward or Master-household who hath the keyes of the house given to him to open and shut doores at his pleasure as Calvin Bucan Whitaker explaine it well and it is the power of preaching and governing given to the guides of the Church as servants to open and shut Heavens doore to believers or impenitent persons If wee rightly proceed these distinctions are to bee considered 1. There is a power physicall and a power morall of the Keyes 2. A power popular of the Keyes that belongeth to all and a power authoritative that belongeth to the Guides only 3. The power of the Keyes is in Christ as in the formall subject and fountaine 2. In the Church of believers as in the finall object seeing all this power is for the Church 3. In the Guides as in the exemplar cause representing the Church as we say the image is in the glasse and learning in the booke and this Petrus de Alliaco and Gerson hath the like 4. The Keyes may be thought to be given Mat. 16. to Peter as Prince and King of the Apostles as Papists say or 2. As Peter representeth the Church of believers as some say or 3 As bearing the person of Church guides as we shall demonstrate God willing 5. There is a power ordinary and a power extraordinary 6. The Keyes may be thought to be conferred by Christ immediately either by the immediation of Christs free donation and gift or or by the immediation of simple designation in the former respect the keyes were given by Christ once to the Apostles and still to the Worlds end to the Church guides immediately without the Churches power intervening in the later respect Christ giveth the keyes mediately by the popular consent and election of the Church of believers who doe under Christ designe and choose this person rather than that person Thomas rather than John for the sacred office of weelding the Keyes neither is any man now elected immediately by Christ as the Apostles were 7. Then we may well distinguish in this question these foure 1. Power physicall 2. Power morall 3. Power of order and jurisdiction 4. The use and exercise of that power Wee are to observe that it hath beene a noble and grave Question betwixt the Church of Rome and the Vniversitie of Paris as Spalanto and Robert Parker with others have observed whether Christ hath given the power of the keyes immediately to all the faithfull and by them to the Pastours and Doctors as the Parisians hold so teacheth Almain Ioan. Major Gerson and Occam or if Christ hath given the keyes immediately to the Church guides as we maintaine from Gods Word The mistake hath beene that some Doctors believe that the power of the keyes seeing it is for the good of the whole Church must have some common subject viz. the universall Church in which it must for orders cause first reside before it be given to certaine guides But neither Scripture nature nor reason requireth such a shifting of the keyes from hand to hand seeing Christ can keep them and immediately put them in their trust whom he liketh best Hence for the determination of the Question I. Conclusion The physicall power of the keyes is given to men as they are professors that is men and not Angels are capable of that power for when they are made members of the visible Church they are differenced both from Angels and Infidels as Pagans and Turkes for Angels according to Christs humble love and deepe wisedome are not upon the list to be office bearers in his house but this is not formally a power of the keyes but a popular power about the keyes whereby popular consent may be given to the key-bearers for their election II. Conclusion There is a power popular but not authoritative a power of private Christians not an officiall power of charge given to the visible professors to make choise of their owne office-bearers those against whom we now dispute brethren reverend learned and holy doe confound and take for one and the same the power of electing or choosing officers and the power of Ordination And they make election of Elders which by Gods Word is due to all the faithfull an act of jurisdiction whereas it is a private and popularâ—act flowing from that spirit of grace in believers and from
the light of saving faith and a grace that they call gratia gratum faciens grace whereby wee are accepted to God as Aquinas speaketh for it is that Heavenly instinct of Believers whereby they try all thing and keepe that which is good and whereby they try the spirits even of Officebearers whether they be of God or not and know the voice of the Shepheard from the voice of a stranger and have their senses exercised to discerne good and evill I denie not but there is a twofold power of election of guides one proper to believers which is as I have described it their choosing of Officers De jure and should flow from this descerning instinct of saving grave in believers there is an other power of election De facto that floweth from a common grace of discerning in visible professors both is sufficient for Ecclesiasticall choosing of guides yet both is but popular not authoritative but power of authoritative jurisdiction is gratia gratis data a common grace given to many that are never converted nor saved yea the office of a publike guide to save others is given to a man that is never saved himselfe and requireth some indowments of governing that are not required in all the faithfull as is cleared by Paul 1 Timothy 3. Therefore Gerson will have us to difference betwixt these two a Pastour ad utilitatem and a Pastour ad veritatem and a called Pastour and a called Christian Pastour And Almaine proveth well that the calling to a Church-office is not founded upon saving faith and charitie This power of choosing is a power about the keyes but not a power of the keyes 2. It is common to all believers who are not to take Pastours as the market goeth upon a blinde hearesay but officiall authoritie is given to Demas and Iudas and such men often 3. It is given to women to try the spirits yet women have not authoritie neither are to usurpe authoritie over men in the Church I desire in the feare of God that this may be considered by William Best Henry Jacob and the Author of Presbyteriall Government examined for our Divines as Daneus give the calling of â—hurch guides to the Presbyterie and the approbation to the people Vrsine differenceth betwixt the judgement of Elders and the consent of people and Bucer judiciously distinguisheth power from authoritie And Martyr Calvin Beza Zuinglius Viretus Luther so the Fathers Tertullian Cyprian Ambrose Chrysostome In this meaning said Augustine the keyes were given in Peter to the whole Church so our Divines are to be expounded when they say the power is in the Church and the exercise of the power in the guides for that power which is in the Church of believers is popular not authoritative III. Conclusion The physicall power of the keyes is in all professors as our first Conclusion saith 2. The supreme morall power in Christ Iesus formally and independently To mee is given all power in Heaven and Earth Matthew 28. 18. this includeth the power of working miracles by the hands of his Apostles all as well as the power of the keyes and is communicated to the Church not formally but in the effect 3. Power morall about the keyes as is said in 2. Conclusion is given to all the faithfull 4. The exercise of the keyes to preach and administer the seales of Grace to open and shut Heaven by the keyes is given to the Rulers in some things as they are scattered and single men as to preach and administer the Sacraments without consent in speciall to every singular act in some things as to exercise power of Jurisdiction the exercise and the power is given to a communitie not to one Vnitati non uni as Gerson observeth from Augustine and Augustine from the word Matthew the sixteenth for the Church not one single man hath power of Discipline if one Pastour himselfe alone should Excommunicate the Excommunication were null both in the court of CHRIST and his Church if a Pastour should baptize against the Churches minde the Baptisme were valid howbeit there were an errour in the fact for power of jurisdiction is given to the members of the Church scattered tanquam subjecto cuidam materiali potentiali in remote power and not formally but as they are met in a Synod in Christs name 5. The power of the keyes is given to the Church of believers two wayes 1. As to the end or the small object of the keyes and this we acknowledge as truth for Christ gave officers for the Church as his intended end Hee gave some to bee Apostles c. for the perfecting of the Saints for the worke of the Ministerie for the edifying of the Body of Christ. But 2. The power of the Keyes is not given to believers as to the formall subject that they may authoritatively make and ordaine officers Hence the IV. Conclusion is this When the Church standeth of believers only as contradistinguished from her guides it is then totum homogeneum a body consisting of alike parts where the denomination of the whole is given to the parts as every part of water is water so every three believers of five hundred believers is a Church of believers Now if a Church should be in a remote Island not consociate with other Churches and yet wanting guides our brethren say in this case the power of the Keyes should bee seene to bee in believers and they might choose and ordaine their owne officers I grant they have great Schoolemen to say with them as Almaine and Ocâ—am and the Schoole of Paris who say if all the Cardinals were dead the faithfull might and should choose the Pope Sylvester in summa verbo excommunicatio 9. nu 2. saith The Romane clergie should have the power of choosing the Pope in that case But Câ—jetan Tom. 1. Epist Tractat. 1. Vasquez in 3. part Thomas Tom. 3. Disput. 244. cap. 3. 30. 31. doe better say in that case the power of choosing should be in the hands of a Generall Councell and that by divine right Then by their minde supreme power or the keyes by divine right is in the hands of Church guides But great Schoolemen say that the keyes by a miracle and extraordinary might remain in the body of the faithfull But I say in this case Necessity is an unbooked and naughty Lawyer and God extraordinarily should supply the want of ordination as he can doe the defect of second causes so that if God send some pastours to a congregation that were unwilling to choose their owne Eldership Pastours might ordaine themselves Pastors in that case to these people and God should supply their want of popular election and this is all 's good to prove election to be in the hands of Church guides which both our brethren and wee deny as the other case
is to prove the power of the keyes to be in the multitude But we are now disputeing about the power of the keyes in a Church ministeriall which is totum heterageneum where the whole giveth not a denomination to the part as every part of a man is not a man a Church made up of only believers is not Christs organicall body where there are eyes eares and hands and feet as is meaned Rom. 12. and 1 Cor. 12. for all are here an eye of believers and all of collaterall and equall authoritie neither is there here an eye or an hand in a ministeriall function above a foote But wee now dispute about the keyes of a ministeriall Church as Iunius saith made up of integrall parts of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Shepheards and Sheepe V. Conclusion The office bearers of the Church have the power of the Keyes and their office immediately from Christ by the immediation of free gift they have their offices from the Church by the mediation of orderly designation seeing it is the Church which designeth such a man to such an office therefore it is said Eph. 4. 11. Hee gave some to be Apostles for the Church he saith not to the Church as if the faithfull by an innate and received power from Christ did ordaine by authoritie Ministers as their servants and Deputies for all the authoritie is Christs not the believers I grant what is given for the Church in some sense is said to be given to the Church as Chrysostome said The gift of baptisme is given to the whole Church but the power of baptising is not given to all the believers as to the subject This Conclusion I prove 1. That is not to be holden which is not written as our brethren hold So Best Travers Parker Ames M. Iacob so also Theodoret Cyrill Augustine Ambrose but it is neither expresly nor by good consequence in Scriptures no precept no promise where all the faithfull lay hands on men for the Ministerie as Titus Paul and the Presbyterie doe 1 Timothy 4. 14. or where all the faithfull doe binde and loose and receive witnesses judicially against Elders as Peter and Timothy have authority to doe 2. Argument If the word say that the power of the keyes is given to certaine select persons and not to all believers then is not this power given to all believers but the word saith the former er The Assumption is thus proved If these Offices that essentially include both the power and the exercise of the Keyes be given to some select persons and not to all the faithfull then are not the Keyes given to all the faithfull but the Lord gave the office of Apostles Prophets c. to some only And God hath set some in the Church then not all first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers c. And hee gave some to be Apostles not all and some Prophets c. Are all Apostles The major is proved because to be an Apostle a Pastor c. is to have a power given by Christ to use the keyes by preaching binding and loosing by censures as an Apostle Pastor c. This cannot be answered seeing there must be another power to binde and loose in Pastours and Elders than is in all believers women believing children and many believers unapt to governe 3 Argument To whomsoever Christ giveth the power of the Keyes to them he gave a ministeriall spirit by way of speciall ambassage to remit and to retaine sins as the Ambassadors of God in Christs stead and them he sent as the fatheâ— sent him as is cleare in the Scripture As the Father sent me so send I you c. He breatâ—ed on them and said receive the Holy Ghost whosoever sinnes ye remit they are remitted In which words our Divines Calvin Bullinger Musculus Beza yea and Papists Cajetan Toletus teach that Christ here did inaugurate his Disciples to preach and exercise the censures of the Church so also Cyrill Chrysostome Cyprian But this ministeriall spirit Christ gave not to all the faithfull but only to the Apostles for he sent not Mary Magdalene and Cleophas in this place as M. Smith saith and why because it is gathered from Luk. 24. 33 34 36. That Magdalene and Cleophas were there saith he when Christ said As my Father sent me so send I you Therefore Mary also and Cleophaâ— received a ministeriall power of the keyes all as well as 〈◊〉 Apostles I answer but this place is all one with Mat. 28. 18 19. where they are commanded to preach and baptize which is not lawfull to women 1 Cor. 14. 1 Tim. 2. And it is all one with the Commission Mark 16 14. which is restruted to the eleven Another weake ground he hath that the eleven were not made Apostles untill Christs Ascension Act. 2. when the spirit was sent and untill he led captivitie captive Ephes. 4. 11. but this power was given to all the Disciples before his ascension Answer a higher mâ—asure of the Spirit was powred on the Apostles at Christs Ascension and by vertue of his Ascension he ordained Apostles Eph. 4. 11. but will it follow none were made Apostles untill he ascended if this were good by vertue of his death wee obtaine forgivenesse of sinnes by his ascending to heaven we also ascend But hence it followeth not that there is no forgivenesse of sinnes while Christ die and that there is no ascending to heaven of the spirits of the Patriarchs and Fathers while Christ ascended 2. That the Apostles were called and received Apostleship from Christ in the dayes of his slesh before his death is cleare Matth. 10. 2 3. and that they went out and preached and cast out divels A second exception there is of some who say a concionall or preaching power of forgivnesse of sinnes is not given to all to whom a loosing from sins by Church censures is given as is cleare in our Ruling Elders who have not power to forgive sinnes by preaching yet have power to forgive binde and loose by Church-censures Answer We may distinguish where the law distinguisheth for howbeit the power of preaching be not given formally to ruleing Elders yet it is effectually in the fruit given to them in the judiciall and authoritative applicatioâ— in the externall court of Christs Church but believers as believers only have neither power to preach formally nor yet effectively to apply judicially the threatnings of the word in discipline to the judiciall correction of delinquents now the keyes in the word and the keyes in the discipline are the same keyes of Christs kingdome as Amesius observeth and the keyes of the word are the keyes of the kingdome committed to all either formally or effectively to whom the keyes of discipline are given but they are never given to
supernaturall ends and effects and then forbidden multitudes who have this power as men women and children to touch the Arke or to preach or meddle with the holy things of God So Francis White Andrea Duvall Soto Victoria Baynes 8. Christ would have set down rules how all Beleevers should use this power as he setteth downe Canons how all Church-men should use their power in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus If any such power as is pretended were originally and fundamentally in all Beleevers But we reade of no rules or no Canons in Gods word obliging all Beleevers to bring in act to actuate or exercise this power thus and thus and not according to their owne liking Therefore there is in them originally no such power CHAP. VI. Q. 6. Whether Christ hath left the actuall government of his Church to the multitude of Beleevers PLato said well of Government by the hands of the people That amongst lawfull governments it is worst amongst uniust governments the best Aristotle saith of of its nature it is corrupt and faulty Plutarch calleth it the Serpents taile leading the head Xenophon speaketh not well of it Our Divines as Calvin Beza Chemnitius Mâ—lancthon Luther Junius Pareus make the government of the Church to partake of all the three governments In respect of Christ the only supreame King it is an absolute Monarchy but this is the invisible government for the most part in respect of the rulers as Pastors and Elders it is an Aristocracie the visible government being in the hands of the Elders and in respect of some things that concerneth the whole members of the visible Church it is a Democracie or hath some popular government in it We are now to enquire if the government of the visible Church be in the collective body of the Congregation as indeed by consequent they teach with whom we now dispute or in the Eldership in Classes and Synods provinciall and nationall as it is now in Scotland We hold that the government popular as it is properly taken when the collective body judgeth and governeth to be expresly against the word of God Eph. 4. 11. He gave some not all to be Apostles c. 1 Cor. 12. 28. And God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly teachers after that miracles c. 1 Thess. 5. 12. Now we beseech you brethren to know them that labour amongst you and are over you in the Lord Heb. 13. 17. Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves c. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour Hence it is cleare as the noone-sunne if there be some over the people of God some that are Elders that rule well some to whom the people should submit and give obedience then the whole people are not rulers all have not the rod nor a definitive voice in that highest censure of excommunication All are not overseers guides governours fathers stewards shepheards but some are governed subject sons the flocke ruled and fed then doth not the people governe 2. The keyes were only given to the Elders as is proved 3. God set downe in his word rules canons and directions for all lawfull governours how Timothy and Titus should behave themselves in Gods house in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus but no where doth God give directions how all beleevers should rule command and governe neither hath he promised that Spirit to all in that charge 4. Guides are eyes eares fathers gifted-teachers Eph. 4. 11. But the whole body is not an eye for then where were the hearing 1 Cor. 12. 17. All are not fathers nor all governours gifted therfore 1 Cor. 12. 28 29. actuall government is not in the hands of all the community of believers 5. The faults of evill government is laid upon some not upon all 1 Tim. 3. 4 5 6. Mat. 24. 28. Tit. 1. 7. 1 Pet. 5. 3. Revel 2. 14 20. 3. Ep. John v. 10. And the praise of good government is given to some not to all 1 Thes. 5. 12. Heb. 12. 17. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Rev. 2. 2. 2 Tim. 4. 4 5. 1 Pet. 5. 4 5. 6. It is against the dignity of such as are Embassadours in Christs roome 2 Cor. 5. 20. representing his person who are to be heard as himselfe Mat. 10. 41 42. His Angels Revel 2. 1. intrusted with his secrets 2 Cor. 5. 18. His stewards and builders 1 Cor. 4. 1 2 3. Cor. 3. 10. the friends of the Bridegroom Joh. 3. 29. Therefore they must have some honour of government that is not given to all and every one of the people 7. That government which necessarily includeth a confusion is not to be thought to come from the God of order popular government is such for in some Apostolike Congregations that were independent there were six thousand and above Act. 4. 9. Two answers are given here 1. Smith saith one may speake for all the Church or two Answ. These two are then a representative Church and doe speak in the name of the rest which he denyeth 2. M. Best saith none should be a congregation but so many as may orderly meet without confusion Answ. Then the Apostles government was confused els there was an Eldership that represented the rest and the Church of believers was no independent Church A third answer is Let heads of Families and fathers onely speake Answ. Yet you fall upon a selected and representative Church which otherwaies you deny 2. If sonnes and servants have a like interest in Christ and a like power of the keyes who dare for eschewing confusion take from them what Christ hath given them We may not do evill or rob any that good may come of it Ainsworth against Bernard The Authours deny they maintain popular government Therfore say they the state is popular the government on Christs part is a Monarchy and in the hands of Elders an Aristocracy The people is freely to voice in Elections and judgment of the Churches let the Elders publickly propone and order all things let them reproove convince exhort c. So they say they hold no Democracy or popular government Ans. I acknowledge that the Doctors of Paris doe make distinction betwixt the state and government who yet doe acknowledge a visible Monarchy in the Church and so did the Fathers of the Councell of Constance For the state of the Church is indeed popular in respect nothing that concerneth the state and body of the Church so concerneth theÌ„ should be done without the privity or consent of the people of God no excommunication untill the man and his scandalous sinnes be delated to them 1 Cor. 5. Nothing should be concluded in a Synod untill the people heare and know yea they have all place to speake object reason and dispute
being a number of preachers Acts 20. 36. Paul prayed with them all and yet they were set over that flocke by the Holy-Ghost Acts 20. 28. therefore they had each their owne Church and one canot officiate or exercise Pastorall acts amongst the flock of another Pastor as our brethren would prove from this same place Acts 20. 4. What shall we say the Church of Rome was onely an independent single Congregation that met in one place or house seeing the faith and obedience of the Saints there was heard through all the world Rom. 1. 8. Rom. 16. 19. so that Tertullian in his time saith halfe of the City was Christians And Cornelius saith beside himselfe there was forty and five Presbyters Consider how many prime persons families Paul saluteth Rom. 16. Paul stileth them one Church and one body that had jurisdiction common to all Rom. 1â— 3 4 5 6 5. So Galatia is written too as to one Church and had one government and discipline Gal. 5. 9. A little leaven of false doctrine leaveneth the whole lump as 1 Cor. 5. v. 6 7. and Gal. 5. ver 10. He that troubleth you shall beare his judgement whosoever he be ver 12. I would they were even cut off by the rod of discipline as Pareus and Perkins expound it that trouble you So Gal. 6. 1. the spirituall are to restore in meeknesse the weake falling in sinne and yet they were many Congregations in Galatia Gal. 1. 2 1 Cor. 16. 1. 6. We finde a Presbyterie at Antioch of Prophets and teachers Acts 13. 1. who laid hands on Paul and Barnabas 2 3. and ordained them to goe and preach And a Presbytery at Lystra Acts 16. 1 2 3. where Timothy was recommended to Paul and received in his company and laid hands on by him Now that this imposition of hands was not done by the collective body of the Church but by the Elders and Presbytery is cleare from 1 Tim. 4. 14. as Iunius collecteth for that the people laid on hands there is no ground 7. And Acts 21. 18. There is a Presbytery at Ierusalem of Iames and the Elders exercising jurisdiction for before them Paul giveth account of his ministery amongst the Gentiles v 19 20. and they enjoyn Paul for the believing Jewes sake to purifie himselfe v. 23 24. which Paul obeyed v 26 27. and this Presbytery taketh on them the Canons of the Councell of Jerusalem made Acts 15. at least as a part of that famous Councell 8 To ordaine Elders in every city is all one as to ordain Elders in every Church Act 14. 23. so doth Luke expone it as Parker confesseth Act 20. 17. And from Miletus hee sent to Ephesus and called the Elders of the Church he saith not of the Churches Act 16. 4. And when they went thorow the cities they delivered them the decrees c. now what is meaned by cities is exponed in the next ver 5. So were the Churches established So Tit 1. 5. That Thou shouldest appoint Elders in every city as I appointed thee Then that there bee an Eldership and Presbytery of Pastors in every city is an Apostolike Institution and so the commandement of our Lord Iesus for that Paul understandeth there especially preaching Elders in every city is cleare by the words following that sheweth what sort of men preaching Elders should be ver 9. able by sound Doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gain-sayers c. Hence if an Eldership in a city as Ephesus and Ierusalem and Antioch where all cannot meet for multitude bee an Eldership in one Church as our book of Discipline hath it then there was Presbyteries in great cities where there were many Congregations but the former is proved already ergo the Presbytery of many Congregations is the Apostles Presbytery 9. If Gods word warrant a number of officers in Gods house who ordaineth Pastors by laying on of hands and who tryeth these who say they are Apostles and Pastors and are lyars and who hath jurisdiction to punish false teachers as Balaam and Iezabel and who appointeth Elders in cities and Churches then is there a Presbytery and society of Pastors and Elders in moe consociated and neighbour congregations appointed for this effect But there is such a number of officers in Gods House of which number are no single believers not cloathed with any Ministeriall calling Therfore there must be a Presbytery diffâ—rent from private Professours that overseeth many Congregations I prove the proposition First that there is such a number and that they are different from ordinary professors 1 Tim 4. 14. Neglect not the gist that is in thee which was given by the laying on of the hands of the Elders Re 2. 2. Re. 2. 14 20. Tit 1. 5. 1 Tim 5 22. now that ordinary professours who are not Elders doe lay hands on Pastors ordain or appoint Elders and judicially try and choose or refuse false Teachers and censure or deprive them wanteth precept promise or practice in the Word of God except we say the Epistles to Timothy and Titus are not written to Church-men but to all professours that they should lay hands suddenly on no man that they should appoint Elders in every city Now also that this united Presbytery is a Presbytery of one single Congregation is 1 Against that which we have prooved of the great Church of Ephesus Act 20. Act 19. Rev 2. as also against the necessity of Pastors labours who are not to stay in numbers together upon one single Congregation where two or moe cannot be had To the place 1 Tim 4. 14. some answer that that laying on of the hands of the Presbytery was extraordinary and ceased with the Apostles Others say he speaketh of the office not of the persons Answ The latter is a devise of Prelates refuted by our Divines an office neither hath hands nor feet but persons only have hands 2. Castalio calleth this with good warrant The Senate of Elders Chrysost and Hugo Cardinalis a Colledge of Presbyters Iunius saith it is all one with the Church Mat 18. But thirdly we deny not but there was an extraordinary laying on of hands by the Apostles by which the Holy Ghost was given Act 8. 18. But this is the laying on of the hands of the Apostles as Presbyters which is ordinary and is limited and ruled by the Word and must not be done suddenly 1 Tim. 5. 22. now no such rule is laid upon the miraculous laying on of hands there is no feare that the Apostles in working of miracles should partake of other mens sinnes and that the ordinary laying on of hands such as this was did not give the Holy Ghost is cleare Act 14. 3. The Elders layeth hands on Paul and Barnabas who before had received the Holy Ghost Act 9. 17. 3. This answer is against the nature of this Epistle where Paul setteth down a plat-forme of Church government to be keeped unviolably to the second comming
and every one of them commanded to heare 2 The promise of eating the tree of life v. 7. of giving the hidden Manna and the white stone and the new name and they shall be cloathed in white and their names not blotted out of the booke of life who overcommeth agreeth not to Ministers onely 3. The command of being faithfull to the death of holding fast what they have that none take away their crowne of strengthening what remaineth of being zealous and of repenting are not given to Ministers only 4. The rebukes of falling from the first Love of not watching of lukewarmnesse are not laid upon Ministers onely therfore to the Angell of the Church of Ephesus of the Church of Smyrna must need force have this meaning Vnto the Church of Ephesus of Smyrna and what is said to the Angels is said to the Churches as is cleare comparing chap. 1. v. 20. and chap. 2. v. 1. with v. 9. 11 17. So Acts 18 v 21 22. Paul is said to salute the Church that must be the chiefe men and Elders of the Church for the Church being so numerous at Jerusalem as is proved he could not salute the Church of beleevers 1. his manner in writing his Epistles is to salute the prime persons onely and the rest in generall and this being a reall salutation or by all appearance verball he could not salute them all man by man seeing he saw them in the bye and the Kirke of Jerusalem for he landed at Cesarea was more numerous then that he could salute them all man by man And also the Church is named from the Pastors Isa. 40. 9. Sion that bringeth good tydings and it is the Preachers that ordinarily preach the good tydings and the woman that has many sonnes Isa. 54. 1 2. Gal. 4. 26 27. Isa. 49. 21. the woman that bringeth forth the manchilde Rev. 12. the bride who is made the keeper of the vineyard Cant. 1. 6. Now it is the Pastors properly that travell in birth to beget children to God Gal. 4. 19. to the policye of which Church respect is had in this forme of speaking the word Kahal Gnedah Ecclesia a Church an Assembly doth onely signifie the Princes and Rulers when the spirit is speaking of matters of government discipline commanding complaints or controversie as he speaketh here Psal. 62. 1. God standeth in the Church Gnedah or Congregation of the mighty Num. 35. 24. And the Congregation Gnedah shall Judge betwixt the slayer and the avenger of bloud but it is expounded Jos. 20. 4. and the slayer shall declare his cause before the Elders of that City So Deut. 11 12 16 17. thâ—se that are called the men of Israel Josh. 9. 6. are called the Princes of the Church or Congregation v. 15. So compare 2 Sam. 7. 7. spake I one word with one of the tribes of Israel with 1 Chron. 17. 6. spake I one word to any of the Judges of Israel So compare Exodus â—0 18 19. All the people saw the thunder v. 19. And they said to Moses speake thou to us with Deutronom 5. 23. And it came to passe when yee heard the voyce out of the middes of darknesse that ye came neare to me even all the heads of your Tribes and Elders and said compare Exod 4. 29. with 30. 31. also compare 1 Chr. 28. And David assembled all the Princes of Israel the Princes of the Tribes and the captaines of the companies that ministred to the King with chap. 29. 1. Furthermore David the King said to all the congregation Ainsworth acknowledgeth that the word Congregation is thus taken for the Elders only so the Separatists in their confession cite this Psal 122. 3. Lev 20. 4 5 c. with Mat 18. 17. Adde to these that 1. Judges and Priests in Israel might give sentence of death and judge of Leprosie without the peoples consent Deut 1. 16. 2 Chron 26. 16. Deut 17. 8. and yet Israel as well as we were Kings and Priests to God Exod 19. 5 6. Psal 149. 1 2. And why may not we say Tell the Church of Elders as Judges and in telling them ye tell the believers in respect that Elders are not to pronounce sentence of Excommunication while they make declaration to the Church of believers 11 Argument That Church which the plaintiffe must tell that is publickly to admonish the offender but that is the Church of Elders 1 Thes 5. 12 13 14. 1 Tim 5. 20. Luk 10. 16. for they only are to receive publick delations and to rebuke publickly as is Titus 1. 13. 1 Timothy 5. 1. and ver 19. 2 Timothy 4. 2. 12 It shall follow if Christ understand heere by the Church the Church of believers that in the case of an Elderships scandalous life or if otherwise all the officers be taken away by death that then a company of believing women and children being the Spouse of Christ and so having claime and title to Christ his covenant and all his ordinances may censure deprive and excommunicate the â—lders and ordain Elders and pastors with publick fasting and praying and laying on of hands But this latter is unwritten in the Word of God For 1. Private believers farre lesse believing women and children cannot judge the watchmen and those who were over them in the Lord. 2. In the Old Testament the heads of Families only excommunicated Gen 21. 10 11 12 13. and the Priests judged the Leper Levit 13. 3 4 5. Deut 24. 8 9. Numb 5. 1. not the people and in the New Testament the Apostles and Elders only ordained pastors and officers with praying and laying on of hands Act 6. 6. Act 13. 3. Act 14. 23. 1 Tim 4. 14. 2 Tim 1. 6. 1 Tim 5. 22. Tit 1. 5. and never the people also if three be believers happen to be an independent Church and then the plantiff rebuking the offender according to Christs rule Mat 16. 16. before the Brethren who are witnesses he shall tell the Church before he tell the Church because three are an independent Church by the Doctrine of our Brethren and moreover if these three being a Church shall excommunicate the offending brother before the Church of which Christ speaketh when he saith tell the Church shall heare of the matter Then shall 1. Christs order be violated 2. The offending brother shall be excommunicated by a true ministeriall Church â—lave non errante and that duly because he is contumacious to them and yet he is not excommunicated because Christs order is violated and the matter is never come before the Church who hath power to binde and loose on Earth 3. And certainly they must say three or foure believers doe not make a Church and they must give some other thing to make up essentially one true visible Church then a company of believers visibly professing one Covenant with God 13. And we have here for us the testimony of learned Parker who is otherwise against us in this plea
Their Word is the savour of life unto life unto some and the savour of death unto death unto others 2 Cor. 2. 16. They are to preach with all gentlenesse waiting if God peradventure will give repentance to the gain-sayers 2 Tim 2. 24 25 26. 5. They are Embassadours in Christs steed beseeching men to be reconâ—iled unto God a Cor 5. 20. 6. The weapons of their warfare are mighty through God to fling downe strong holds of unbeliefe to cast downe imaginatims and every high thing that exalteth it selfe against the knowledge of God and to bring unto captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ 2 Cor 10. 4 5. and so they are to pull men out of the hands of Satan 7. They are to seeke the Lords Sheep Ezek. 34 4. Hence the object and matter that a Pastor is to worke on as a Pastor is unbelievers unborne men gain-sayers proud disobedient keeping strong holds against Christ So the nature of the Pastors office is to open the eyes of the blinde to turne them from darknesse to light and from the power of Satan unto God that they may receive forgivenesse of sinnes Act 26. 18. and this evidently evinceth that the visible and rightly constitute Church where God hath erected a Ministery is a number of blinded sinners in Satans power and in the power of darknesse for the most part while God by a Ministery delivers them suppose they professe the Faith It is also a Doctrine unknowne to the Word of God that the Church of Christ is gathered and edified formally as a Church without Christs Ministers that are sent to gaine the consent of the Bride to marry the Bridegroome Christ. It is also unknown to Scripture that Prophets are no Pastors and have no power of the pastorall calling or sâ—ales of the Covenant Should those bee the ordinary officers of Christ that gather sinners in to Christ and convert to the Faith of Jesus men dead in sins and trespasses who yet are neither Pastours nor Doctours sent by Christ and his Church 6. Conclusion Seeing then the Church hath no other marke and rule to looke unto in the receiving in of members into a visible Church but externall profession which is no infallible marke of a true convert the Church is rightly constitute where all borne within the visible Church and professing the Faith are received suppose many wicked persons be there Now seeing time favour of men prosperity accompanying the Gospell bring many into the Church so the Magistrate may compell men to adjoyn themselves to the true Church O saith Master Barrow Ainsworth Mr. Canne The blast of the Kings horne can make no man a member of Christs body that must be done willingly and by the Spirit of Christ not by compulsion The Magistrate say they can worke faith in none he ought indeed to abolish Idolatry set up the true Worship of God suppresse errours cause the truth to be taught yet he cannot constrain men to joyne to the Church I answer This is a senslesse reason for how doth the Magistrate abolish Idolatry set up the true worship of God It is I hope by externall force and power For the Magistrate as the Magistrate doth nothing but by an externall coactive power The Magistrate useth the sword not reasons preaching and counsell Yea this way he cannot abolish idolatry nor erect the pure worship of God for it is a worke of Gods Spirit and a willing worke that a subject forsake Idols and worship God purely at the command of a King as it is the worke of God that he believe in Christ and joyn himselfe to the Church of true believers 2. That a man by externall profession adjoyn himself to the true visible Church is not a work of saving faith as our Masters dreame for Simon Magus and Ananias and Saphira a turned members of the visible Church upon as small motives as the command of a King upon the motive of gaine and honour and were never a whit nearer Christ for all this 3. The Magistrate cannot compell men to believe nor can the Minister by preaching or the power of the keys doe it except Gods Spirit doe it but as Juniusâ—aith â—aith he may compell men to professe beliefe but not to believe he may compell to the externall meanes not to the end 2. The Magistrate as Voetius saith may compell by remooving impediments as idols and false teachers and authoritatively 2. compell to the means Now it shall be easie to answer their Objections who wouâ—d prove that Saints are the onely matter of a rightly and lawfully constitute visible church First Master Barrow reasoneth against us thus The materiall Temple from the very foundation was of choyse costly stones the beames of choyse Cedars and Algummim-trees which typified the church of the new Testament Isa. 54. 11. Behold I will lay thy stones with carbuncle and thy foundations with Saphirs c. Isâ— 6. 17. for brasse I will bring gold Isa. 35. 8. No Lyon nor ravenous beast shall be in the mountaine of the Lord but the redeemed of the Lord Jer. 31. 34. They shall all know me from the least of them to the greatest in this mountaine there shall be no cockatrise aspe lyon leopard untill they have left their poyson Isaiah 11. 6. Answer first These places none except Anabaptists can apply according to the letter to the Church independent of every Parish may not the Separatists who â—each that there is rotten timber in their visible Temple and chalke stones Lyons Wolves Cockatrices for saith Barrow Ainsworth and all their side there are always in the Church glorious Hypocrites now such as Judas Demas Hymeneus and such hypocrites are not precious stones gold taught of God there is not a visible Church of a congregation out of Heaven where there is not a hypocrite and an unbeliever 2. The place Isa. 54. and Jer 31. is understood of the Catholick Church with whom the covenant of grace is made Isa. 54. 10. Jer 31. 31. and this covenant is not everlasting nor an eternall covenant to any one Parish Church yea nor to a Nationall Church nor to Corinth Ephesus Pergamus all which particular Churches are fallen under horrible Idolatry and in those Mountains are Lyons and Leopards and therfore as Musculus Calvin Hierom and the course of the Text cleareth he is speaking of the begunne holinesse of the whole Church of the redeemed under Christ which is finally and fully accomplished in Heaven for what use should there be of excommunication and of the Pastors and Porters care to hold out and cast out by the Church censures Lyons Leopards Cockatrices if all and every one in the Church be taught of God 3. It is beside the Text to make the Temple of Jerusalem a type of a Parish congregation it was a type of Christ Iohn 2. 21. of every beleever 1 Cor. 6. 19. and of the whole Catholike Church 4. Where it is
not absolutely but upon condition it agrees to Gods Word They fifthly urge But I am necessitated in a false Church to communicate with those whom I know to be no members of the true Church but limbs of Satan because in Gods court they are excommunicated and no members of the Church but through the corruption of these that have the power of the keyes these are permitted to be members of the Church who in Gods court are no members at all and if I remaine in the Church I must communicate with them yea if I remaine in the Church I must communicate at that table where the holy things of God are prophaned by dogges and swine therefore in that case I must separate Answ. In your holiest independant Church where discipline is mâ—st in vigour you meet with this doubt and must separate also if this reason be good For suppose you know one to be guilty of adultery and murther and had seen it with your eyes the party guilty to you is not guilty to the Church For 1. you are but one none is guilty Ecclesiastically and to be debarâ—ed penally and judicially from the holy things of God except by confession to the Church or by two or three witnesses 2. You know what is holden by all our Divines yea even the Canon Law and Papists teach that the Church cannot judge of hid things and acts of the mind So saith Thom. Aquin. Cajetan Soto Durandus Almain Gerson Navar. Driedo Joan. Maior Paludan Antonin their ground is good The Church cannot judge of that they cannot see And the Churches power of the keyes is all for the externall policy of the Church and therefore such a sinne cannot be the object of Church-censure or cause of Separation Excommunication is ever used against externall scandals Mat. 18. 15. 1 Cor. 5. 1. 1 Tim. 1. 19 20. 2 Thes. 3 14. shew one place where the Church excommunicateth for non-regeneration 6. They object It is not lawfull to call God Father ioyntly with these who are not brethren but sonnes of Satan Ergo we are to separate from such So Smith reasoneth Answ. Except they be all and every one the sonnes of God that are in our visible Church and not one hypocrite or childe of Satan amongst them by this argument we must separate from them and so Separatists are to separate from their owne Congregation wherein they acknowledge there be hypocrites This is Anabaptisticall holinesse Isa. 65. 7. They object It is not lawfull to make Christ a Mediator to all the prophane in the land and to make all the prophane members of his body Ergo we are to separate from a confused Church Answ. So was Corinth Galatin Ephesus confused Churches wherein there were hypocrites We make Christ Mediator and Head to the visible Church according to the best part as Christ speaketh Joh. 17. Thine they were when Judas was never Gods And Paul calleth Corinth Saints Colosse Saints and faithfull brethren and Peter the elected according to the fore-knowledge of God begotten againe to a lively hope where yet there was some at Corinth 2. Cor. 2. 16. To whom the Gospell was the savour of death unto death some to whom it was hidden whom Satan had blinded 2 Cor. 4. 3. And some in Colosse carried away with Angel-worship not holding the head Christ some of those to whom Peter writeth were such who stumbled at the stone laid on Zion and there was amongst them false teachers privily bringing in damnable Heresies 2. and many followed their pernicious wayes spots feasting amongst the Saints having eyes full of Adultery that cannot cease from sinne c. 8 They object These that are mixed with unbeleevers consent to all the sinnes of the unbeleevers and to all their prophanation of the holy things of God seeing God hath given them the power of the keyes to hold out and excommunicate all wicked persons therefore beleevers are to separate from all prophaners of the Covenant except they would forfeit their Covenant Answ. A simple worshipping with hypocrites whom we know not is not a consent to their prophanation of the holy things of God Christs eating the Passeover with Judas the Disciples eating the Passeover when Christ said One of you hath a Devill one of you shall betray me did not import consent nor partaking with Judas his prophaning of the Sacraments 2. Neither hath God given to all beleevers the power of the keyes that way as is alleadged 3. Suppose the Eldership in whose hands onely are the keyes should permit a knowne adulterer who never professed his repentance therefore to the Lords Table yet this were not in the Eldership the sinne against the Holy-Ghost and to forfeit the Covenant though it were a great sinne 9. They object God commandeth the godly to plead with their mother because saith he she is not my wife nor I her husband Ergo if the Church turne a harlot the children are to protest and plead against her as reputing her no mother and so they are to forsake her Answ. If this place prove lawfulnesse of separation from the Jewish Church as from a harlot cast off of God it shall crosse a maine principle of Separatists that the Jewish Church was the onely visible Church from which it was not lawfull to separate seeing the Messiah behooved to be borne there and the Temple sacrifices were onely there Also this pleading was for harlotry and Idolatry But M. Smith and others say that wickednesse and Idolatry did not marre the constitution of the Jewish Church so being they had ceremoniall and typicall holinesse according to the letter of the outward legall service and so from this separation from the true Church is vainly collected 2. Plead with your mother for her harlotries Hence it followeth first 1. They were to esteem her as a mother and of duty as sonnes to plead with her 2. If they were to plead with her and rebuke her they were to keep communion with her because non-rebuking for a time is a signe of separation and suspending communion for a time Ezech. 3. 26. Thou shalt be dumbe and shalt not be to them a reprover for they are a rebellious house Ergo reproving is a signe of communion But they say they were to plead with their mother by power of the keyes and if their mother would not return to the Lord her first husband then they were to goe on to a full separation from her I answer Then two or three faithfull ones in the Church of the Jewes no lesse then in the Christian Church were a true visible Church having the power of the keyes This is contrary to their owne doctrine who make a typicall and ceremoniall cleannesse sufficient to constitute the Jewish Church but require a reall true and spirituall holinesse to the constitution of the Church of the New Testament For if the children may plead with the mother for
but the childâ—en of beleeving parents aime at this That the faith of the father is imputed to the children which indeed reverend Beza doth maintaine Or then a worse that Infants are not to be baptized at all seeing they oppose the places that we cite for the lawfulnesse of baptizing Infants The authors of Presbyteriall government call the baptizing of children a untimous anticipation Our brethrens mind is that the Infants of both Parents knowne to be unbeleevers are not to be baptized untill they come to age and can give proofe that they are within the covenant of grace what Anabaptists thinke here is knowne Some say that Boniface the 4. in the yeare 606. began the Baptisme of infants M. Best saith too nakedly I beleeve at Augustine Cyprian Origen Cyrill Nazianzen Ambrose and many other Fathers affirme that the Church hath received the Baptisme of Infants from the Apostles What doth he not beleeve that it is most evidently in Scripture and hath he no better warrant then the â—athers Fourthly M. Best objecteth If there be no precept nor example for baptizing of Infants begotten of both Parents unbeleeving then there is no promise of blessing made unto it but the first is true Ergo the second Answ. 1. We aske with what faith and by what precept or example was ever circumcision in the whole old Testament denyed to any male-childe of the most wicked Jewes and by what precept and example is Baptisme denyed to any Infant in the New Testament for his Parents wickednesse the Fathers professing the Christian Faith Yea seeing Baptisme is denyed to Infants upon a suspition that their Parents are destitute of faith and not within the Covenant Now this suspition is not faith nor grounded upon any word of God or certaintie of faith for whether an other man beleeve or beleeve not it is not faith nor knowne by faiths certaintie to me but by the judgement of charitie Fifthly they object If all promiscuously be baptized Gods name is taken in vaine and the holy Sacrament greatly abused Mal. 1. 12. Heb. 10 29. Answ. This is to accuse God as if he had not found sufficient wayes out to save his owne name from blasphemy Nor can our brethren by their Doctrine save his name from dishonour nor the Sacrament from prophanation because multitudes of Infants borne of beleeving Parents are reprobates and yet God hath commanded to baptize them who being reprobates must be without the covenant and so the covenant is prophaned and many Infants of wicked Parents are chosen and within the covenant yet are we forbidden by our brethren to give them the seales of the covenant untill they come to age which also should be given to them and needs force by their doctrine that Christ hath commanded a certaine way of dishonouring his name which is blasphemy â—or we have not such a cleare way to know Infants cleane and uncleane as the Priest had to know the polluted bread and the polluted sacrifices Mal. 1. 7 12. as he citeth For what Infants are within the covenant indeed and chosen of God and what not We neither know nor is it requisite that we know further then that we are to know that they are borne within the visible Church Sixthly they say The Church of God is defiled Hag. 2. 14 15. Ezech. 44. 7. If all Infants promiscuously be baptized for then the people and every worke of their hand and their offering is uncleane So M. Best Answ. We deny that children borne within the visible Church are an uncleane offering to the Lord and that the baptizing of them polluteth the Nation and all the worship of the Nation as they would gather from Haggai For being borne of the holy Nation they are holy with a federall and nationall holinesse Rom. 11. 16. If the root be holy so are the branches For our brethren baptize children of Parents who are hypocrites and unbeleevers and so the uncircumcised in heart come into the Sanctuary Yea Peter in baptizing Simon Magus and Ananias and Saphira brought in the uncircumcised in heart and the strangers to Gods covenant as Best alledgeth from Ezech. 44. borrowing such abused testimonies of Gods word from Separatists as they borrowed them from Anabaptists For we preach and invite in the Gospell all the uncircumcised in heart and all the wicked to come and heare and partake of the holy things of the Gospell and receive the promises thereof with faith And when many come to this heavenly banquet without their wedding garment Mat. â—2 12 13. 2 Cor. 2. 16. Mat. 21. 43 44. It followeth not because they prophane the holy things of God that Ministers who baptize the Infants of hypocrites and prophane persons are accessarie to the prophaning of the holy things of God and that we bring in the polluted in heart to the Sanctuary of God It is one thing whom Ministers should receive as members of the Sanctuary and Church and another thing who should come in and what sort of persons they are obliged to be who come to be members To say that Ministers should receive none into the Church but those that are circumcised in heart and cleane and holy and cloathed with the wedding garment of faith is more then our brethren can prove Nay we are to invite to the wedding good and bad chosen and unchosen Mat. 22. 9. As many as you find bid to the wedding But that all that come to be received members of the unvisible Church are obliged to be circumcised in heart and holy and cloathed with the wedding garment else they prophane the Sanctuary and holy things of God is most true But we desire that our brethren would prove this The Porters that held out the uncircumcised and the strangers out of the Sanctuary were types of the Ministers and Church of the New Testament who should receive none to be Church-members and invite none to the wedding of the Gospell but such as have their wedding garment and are circumcised in heart and are cleane and holy else they prophane and defile the Church of God as M. Best saith We beleeve this latter to be an untruth and yet the strength of this Argument doth hang upon this They are obliged to be such who enter into the Church else they defile the Sanctuary Ergo the Church and Ministers of the New Testament are obliged to invite none to any Church-communion or receive them into a Church fellowship but only the circumcised in heart Wee utterly deny this consequence It is one thing what sort of persons they ought to be that should be members of the Church doubtlesse they should be beleevers And another thing whom the Church should receive in these should be professors Seventhly M. Best reasoneth thus The Minister is made a covenant-breaker Mal. 2. 8. who baptized the childe of prophane Parents and why because he offereth the blinde for a sacrifice to God Answ. What if the Parents be
and Hugo Grotius object this also This is the answer of Bridgesius and Hugo Grotius who deny the necessity of reformed Synods Parker who is for our brethren in many points refuteth this and proveth it was a Synod They object sixthly They were not neighbouring Churches that sent for Jerusalem did lye two hundred â—iles from Antioch How could they that lay so far distant ordinarily meet as your Classes did Answ. To the essence of a Synod and the necessity thereof is not required such meetings of Churches so farre distant but when the Churches necessity requireth it the lawfulnesse thereof may hence well be concluded and that when they lye so neâ—r-hand they may more conveniently meet 2. Neither is this much to give M. Best his Geography at his owne measure when the Churches were now in their infancy and the question of such importance that the Churches travell many miles for their resolutâ—on in this They object seventhly How prove you that these that were sent from Antioch had authority in the Church of Jerusalem Answ. Because Paul and Barnabas sent from Antioch had voyces in these Decrees They object eighthly It cannot be proved from henâ—e that Antioch was a Church depending on Jerusalem Answ. Neither doe we intend to prove such a matter But hence it followeth that both Antioch and Jerusalem and Syria and Cilicia depend upon the Decrees of these Pastors of divers Congregations assembled in this Synod They object ninthly That Papists and Prelates alleadge this place to prove their Diocâ—san Synods Answ. So doth Satan alleadge a Scripture Psalme 91. which must not be rejected because it was once in his foule mouth Prelates alleadge this place to make Jerusalem a Cathedrall and Mother-church having Supremacy and Jurisdiction over Antioâ—h and other Churches that there may be erected there a silken chaire for my Lord Prelate and that Lawes may bee given by him to bind all mens consciences under him in things which they call indifferent we alleadge this place for an Apostolike assembly to make Jerusalem a collaterall and Sister-church with Antioch and the Churches of Syria and Cilicia depending on a generall Councell We deny all Primacie to Jerusalem it was only judged the most convenient seat for the Councell We allow no Chaire for Prelate or Pastors but that they determine in the Councell according to Gods Word laying bands on no mans conscience farther then the Word of God and the dictates of sound reason and Christian prudency doe require They tenthly object That the matter carried from Antioch to Jerusalem was agreed upon by the whole Church and not carried thither by one man as is done in your Classes So M. Best Answ. It were good that things that concerne many Churches were referred by common consent to higher assemblies but if one man be wronged and see truth suffer by partiality the Law of nature will warrant him to appeale to an assembly where there is more light and greater authority as the weaker may â—ly to the stronger And the Churches whose soules were subverted with words Acts 15. v. 24. did â—ly to the authority of a greater assembly when therâ— is no small dissention about the question in hand Acts 15. 2. They object eleventhly The thing concluded in this assembly was divine Scripture imposed upon all the Churches of the Gentiles v. 22. 28. and the conclusion obliged because it was Apostolike and Canonicke Scripture not because it was Synodicall and the Decree of a Church-assembly and so the tye was Divine not Ecclesiasticke It seemed good to the Holy-Ghost Answ. 1. So the excommunication of the incestuous man 1 Cor. 5. if he was excommunicated and his re-receiving againe in the bosome of the Church 1 Cor. 2. and the laying on of the hands of the Elders on Timothy 1 Tim. 4. 14. and the appointing Elders at Lystra Iconium Antioch and fasting and praying at the said ordination Acts 14. v. 21 22 23. was Scripture and set downe in the Canonicke History by the Holy-Ghost but no man can deny that the conclusion or Decree of excommunication given out by the Church of Corinth and the ordination of Timothy to be a Pastor and the appointing of the Elders at Lystra did oblige the Churches of Corinth Ephesus and Lystra with an Ecclesiasticall tye as Ecclesiasticall Synods doe oblige 2. That this conclusion doth oblige as a Decree of a Synod and not as Apostolike and Canonicke Scripture I prove 1. Because the Apostles and Prophets being immediately inspired by the Holy-Ghost in the penning of Scripture doe never consult and give decisive voices to Elders Brethren and the whole community of beleevers in the penning holy Scripture For then as it is said Ephes. 2. 20. That our faith is built upon the Apostles and Prophets that is upon their doctrine so shall our faith in this point concerning the taking in of the Church of the Gentilâ—s in one body with the Jewes as is proved from Scripture v. 14 15 16 17. be built upon the doctrine of Elders Brethren and whole Church of Jerusalem for all had joynt voyces in this Councell as our brethren say which is a great absurdity The commandements of the Apostles are the commandements of the Lord 1 Cor. 14. 37. But the commandements of the whole Church of Jerusalem such as they say this Decree was are not the commandements of the Lord For we condemne Papists such as Suareâ— Vasquez Bellarmine Caiâ—tan Sotus and with them Formalists such as Hooker and Sutluvius who make a difference betwixt divine commaâ—dements and Apostolike commandements and humane ordinances for our Divines as Junius Beza Pareus Tylen Sibrandus Whittaker Willet Reynolds Jewell make all Apostolike mandates to be divinâ— and humane commandements or â—cclesiasticall mandates to oblige onely secondarily and as they agree with divine and Apostolike commandements But here our brethren make mandates of ordinary beleevers that were neither Apostles nor Prophets to be divine and Canonicke Scripture 3. That which is proper to the Church to Christ his second comming againe doth not oblige as Canonicke Scripture â—or Canonicke Scripture shall not be still written till Christ come againe because the Canon is already closed with a curse upon all adders Rev. 22. but what is decreed according to Gods word by Church-guides with the consent tacit or expresse of all the community of beleevers as this was v. 22. as we and our brethren doe joyntly confesse is proper to the Church to Christs second comming Ergo this Decree obligeth not as Scripture 4. The Apostles if they had not purpose that this Decree should oblige as an Ecclesiasticall mandate but as Canonicke Scripture they would not 1. have advised with all the beleevers as with collaterall and joynt pen-men with them of holy Scripture 2. They would not have disputed and reasoned together every one helping another as they doe here v. 6 7 8 9 10 c. 3.
publikely Answ. These Prophets were Prophets by office and so bâ—side that they were gifted they were sent with officiall authority to preach 1. They are such as Paul speaketh of 1 Cor. 12. 28. God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets Ergo they were officers set in the body as Apostles were at that time Eph. 4. 11. 2. They are called Prophets 1 Cor. 14. v. 29 32. But in all the old or new Testament Prophets signifie over these that are in office as the places in the margen cleare and a place cannot be brought where the word Prophet signifieth a man who publikely preacheth and yet is no Prophet by office but possibly a Fashioner a â—lough-man a Shoomaker 3. The formall â—ffâ—cts of publiâ—e edefying comfeâ—tiâ—g convincing converting soules are ascribed to these â—ophets v. 1 3 4 5 12 24 25 31. which are ascribed to prâ—â—ching Pastors Rom 10. 14 15. 1 Cor. 4. 1 2 3. 4. In this chapter and in chap. 13. Paul doth set downe Canons anent the right use of the offices that he spake of 1 Cor. 12. 28 29. 5. Paul must thinke them Prophets by office while as he compareth himselfe who was an Apostle and Prophet with these Prophets v. 37. If any man thinke himselfe to be a Prophet or spirituall let him acknowledge that the things that I write to you are the Commandements of the Lord. Also these Prophets were extraordinary and temporary as were the gifts of tongues and miracles and therefore none out of office now are to prophesie publikely M. Robinson saith they cannot be extraordinary because extraordinary Prophets are infallible and cannot erre else the Scriptures should have been written by Prophets who could erre but these Prophets 1 Cor. 14. could erre and were not infallible because their doctrine was to be judged v. 29. Answ. This is a silly reason Pareus Bulling Calvin Beza saith all spirits are to be tryed by the word and all Prophets even Samuell and Nathan may erre and looke beside the booke and may speake of their owne spirit how then were the pen-men of Scripture infallible saith Robinson I answer there are none simply infallible but God every man is a lyar The pen-men of the Scripture were infallible because when they were actually inspired by the Holy-Ghost they could not erre And the spirits of all Prophets are to be tryed by the word even of Paul preaching at Berea But it followeth not that Paul then could erre To this they answer that false Prophets as Balaam could not erre when they were actually inspired no more then Canonicke writers Answ. In the case of infallibility all are alike none are infallible by any infused habit of a Propheticall spirit but false Prophets were inspired with an habituall spirit of lying which spirit is not in Canonicke writers Robinson and others of his side thinke them not extraordinarily inspired 1. Because these Prophets might have been interrupted and put to silence that another to whom choiser things were revealed might prophesie v. 3. 2 Because Paul exhorteth to pray for the gift of interpretation and to covet saith others to prophesie Now we cannot seeke in faith from God an extraordinary and miraculous gift 3. Others adde this prophecying was subject to the free-will of the Prophets for they might prophesie or keep silence as they pleased but the acts of extraordinary prophecying are not subjected to the free-will of the Prophets therefore this was but ordinary prophecying to the which all gifted professors even out of oâ—fice are obliged for the edefying of the Church of Christ to the worlds end Answ. All these three come to one to wit acts of extraordinary prophecying are under the determination of free-will A little of this 1. Conclusion Pareus observeth well that there be two kinds of Prophets 1. Some who foretold things to come of these the Text in hand speaketh not 2. Some extraordinarily inspired with an extraordinary grace of interpreting Scripture The former were Prophets in the old Testament the latter especially Prophets of the new Testament knowledge of both were given without study or paines So there was a Propheticall spirit in Paul Gal. 1. 12. I received it not of man neither was I taught it but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. 2. Conclusion The act of foretelling things to come especially things meerly contingent which are determined onely in the free Decree of God is not so under our free-will as the acts of preaching and interpreting Scripture out of a Propheticall infused habit For prophecying things to come seemed to have come on the Prophets of old as a fire-â—lash appeareth to a mans eye in the darke ayre he cannot chuse but see it Ezech. 2. 14. So the spirit lifted me up and tooke me away and I went in bitternesse in the heate of my spirit but the hand of the Lord was strâ—ng upon me Jer. 20. 9. And I said I will not make mention of him nor speak any more in his name but his word was in my heart as a burning fire shut up in my bones and I was weary with forbearing and I could not stay 2. King 3. 15. The hand of the Lord came upon Elisha and he prophecyed See Ierom. Oecumen Gregâ—r and Thomas The Propheticall spirit in the New Testament seemeth to be more swayed with free-will and morall threatnings 1 Cor. 9. 16. Woe unto me if I preach not the Gospell yet the habit from whence he preached was a Propheticall principle Galath 1. 12. 1 Cor. 14. 32. 3. Conclu Hence prophecying is not a habit and it is a habit It is not an habit 1. Because no Prophet can simply prophecy when he will except the man Christ especially of things to come by contingent causes the presence of which things saith Suarez is onely connaturall to God and to no morrall man comming on men by a transient irradiation while as the candle of Gods propheticall light glanceth upon the fancy and from thence to the mind that the man may see and reade the species and images and when this light shineth not Nathan and Samuell reade beside the Bible and are widely out Prophâ—cy also is an habit For 1. something remaine in Isaiah and Jeremiah while they sleepe and prophecy not from whence they are named Prophets and really are Prophets for when God hath once revealed himselfe to one as to his owne Prophet even from by past revelation 1 There remaineth a disposition to prophecy 1 Sam. 3. 20. All Israel knew even from Dan to Beersheba that Samuell was established to be a Prophet of the Lord. 2. Because there remaineth a propheticall light whereby the man gave assâ—nt to the last propheticall revelation and so the species and propheticall images must remaine in the fantasie and with these a propheticall memory of by past predictions and so some experimentall certainty that what he fore-telleth shall come to passe See Thomas and Caietan now the object propheticall is
knowne three wayes 1. When the naked naturall images or species of the materiall object are only cast in by God and no more and this is most in dreames as Nebuchadnezar saw a tree in his dreame but knew not that it was a King Pharoah saw seven blasted reeds and seven leane kine but knew not that they were seven yeares of Famine And sometimes in a vision being in an extasie as John Rev. 1. saw 1. seven candlâ—sticks but knew not that they were the seven Churches of Asia while Christ revealed the meaning to him 2. The images and species are knowne formally as signes signifying thus and thus as Joseph by a propheticall light saw the seven leane kine to be seven yeares of famine 3. Now there is a third light to judge of the act of seeing which I take to be two-fold 1. When the Seer and Prophet is perswaded that what he seeth is a propheticall vision and not a delusion of Satan this is as saith Pareus the very light of prophecy or some extraordinary light as saith Anto Walleus There is another light whereby the Seer beleeveth these things shall come to passe which he seeth either by a common light of historicall faith as Pharoah might beleeve that seven yeares of plenty should come and Balaam that Christ the starre of Jacob should certainly arise and shine upon the Church or the Seer seeth and beleeveth by light of saving faith as Isaiah and Daniel beleeved that the Messiah should be slaiâ—e and this latter light whatever good Schoole-men say on the contrary is the light of faith for the three former lights might well be in Balaam 1. He might see in his fantasie the species of the starre of Jacob. 2. And know that they meaned no other thing then the Messiah 3. And be certainly perswaded that he saw so and that he was not deluded yea and historically beleeve that that blessed Starre should arise and yet he had no light of saving faith to beleeve that the Messiah should come So hâ—â—e we cannot but distinguish betwixt a propheticall light in the second and third sight which is gratia gratis data a free gift and the light of saving faith which is gratia gratum faâ—iens a saving grace of GOD in the sound beleever onely in this last sight 4. Conclus Hence Separatists may see that extraordinary acts of prophecy may well be subjected to the determination of the Church and yet be extraordinary inspirations and that divers wayes 1. Because theâ— were Prophets of the New Testament and so grace being more aboundant now nor under the old Testament it can bow and facilitate free-will to acts of prophecying and Paul from more grace laboured more aboundantly then they all 2. Prophecying at that time in Corinth might well be obtained by prayer upon the extraordinary impulsion of the spirit as Daniel obtained by prayer the interpretation of a dreame neither can it be proved from 1 Cor. 14. that Paul willeth them all without exception to covet to speake with tongues and to prophecy but only these that were extraordinarily moved to pray except these v. 31. yea may all prophecy be contrary to these words 1 Cor. 12. 29. are all Prophets which we cannot say 3. Because it was of old in the power of Prophets to use some meanes to dispose themselves to prophecy for when the passion of anger overclouded the fancy and the species therin then Elisha calleth for a minstrell to play and dispose the minde better as Caâ—etan saith Howbeit for all that the Text saith the hand of the Lord only actuated these species and caused him to prophecy Neither are Robinsons arguments of great weight I answer only these that have most apparency 1 If the Lords giving of the spirit extraordinary to Eldâ—d and Medad made them Prophets both in office and exercise by due proportion gifts under the New Testament are sufficient to make men ordinary Prophets Answ. The antecedent is false because to Eldad and Medad were given both the spirit of prophecy and from that gifted spirit came a propheticall impulsion actually to prophecy without any farther call of the Church for God spake then by impulsion as he doth now by his Word els one may say the physicall and naturall power that Samuell had to kill Agag was a calling sufficient to authorize him to kill â—gag and an hability to discharge the office of the high-Priest in a man of the tribe of Iudah were a good calling for one so gifted to thrust himselfe in Aarons chair which God tyed only to Levies Tribe 2. This is that which Epiâ—copius Seâ—inians and Arminians teach from Anabaptists so Theâ—phil Nicolaiâ— And Radaecius Catech. of Raccovia Ostorod Socinus the 〈◊〉 1. That the sending and calling of Ministers by the Church nâ—w when the Gospell is sufficiently promulgated is not necessary 2. That any gifted man hath a warrant because he is gifted to be a Pastour without any call or authority officiall from the Church And what will Robinson say because these Propheâ—s are gifted to baptize and to administer the Supper of the Lord as well as they are to preach the Gospell then by this goodly reason of his they may be pastors without any calling of the Church and certainly any man gifted to be a King and a Magistrate by the calling that the Word of God alloweth shâ—ll by this reason have a call to leape up to the throne and the bench but our Divines as Calvin Parcus Zanchius Iunius Beza make two difâ—eâ—rent things in a lawfull calling 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gifts for the calling which is not enough 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 authority from the Church which is also required 2. He objecteth 2 Chron. 17. 7. Jehoshaphat sent his Princes to teach the cities of Judah with the Levites and all Princes and Maâ—istrates are bound to expound open up and apply the law by which they governe else they rule by tyranny Hence the publick Sermon of Jehoshaphat 2 Chron. 19. to the Iudges and Levites and his prayer and Hezekiahs Sermons 2 Chr 29. and Nehemiah taught the people Neh. 8. Answ. 1. Iunius and Ar. Montâ—â— Iehoshaphat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shalach Lesarou read he sent with the Princes the Levites to teach so that the Princes were not sent to teach 2. It is said hee sent the Princes to teach not in their owne persons but hee sent them to take care that the Levites should teach in time of that Apostacy 3. The Kings and Judges were to teach according to the judiciall Law the equity of their sentence to the ill doer as a Judge to convince a thiefe and a murtherer may lay before him the eighth and the sixt commandement in so farre as the breach of these disturbeth the peace of the common-wealth not as they are Church scandals and whither the male-factor be convinced or not the Judge punisheth with the sword so that
may not preach nor baptize that so they may be prepared for the ministery according to that 1 Tim. 3. 13. For thâ—y who have used the office of a Deacon will purchâ—â—e to themselves a good degree and great boldnesse in the faith Answ. What Philip and Stephen did in facto in an extraordinary fact nihil ponit in iure it belongeth nothing to Law but the 〈◊〉 of it selfe is a serving of Tables and a taking of the burden of caring for the poore of the Pastors that the Pastors may give themselves to the word and prayer Acts 6. 2 4. Now if Deacons ex officio turne Preachers and give themselves to the word and prayer then by the Apostles reason Acts 6. 4. they cannot serve Tables but they must have other Deacons to take the burden of the poore off them that they may give themselves to the word 2. Christ ordaineth Mat. â—8 18. Apostles and Pastors their successors to preach the word and not Deacons 3. There shall be moe officers in Gods house given for the edifying of the Saints then Pastors and Doctors even preaching Deacons yea all the offices in Gods house shall be Preachers the Prelate to Formalists is a peece of a Preacher the Pastor and Doctor by their office must preach the ruling Elder is nothing to them and the Deacon is a teacher and so all are teachers ex officio why then doâ—h Paul 1 Cor. 12. difference betwixt Governours helps and teachers seeing all are teachers 4. Rom. 12. He who sheweth mercy and he who distributeth are differenced by their specificke acts from the Pastor who exhorteth and preacheth 5. Paul requireth 1 Tim. 3. that the Pastor be apt to teach but he requireth no such thing of the Deacon whose qualification he describeth at length 6. The well using of the Deacons office is no more by 1 Tim. 3. 13. a degree to the ministery or pastorall calling then much boldnesse in the faith is a degree thereunto for he who ex officio doth preach and baptize is not a degree to a Pastor as he who discourseth is not in degree to be a man or in preparation a man onely but he is formally a man now to preach and baptize are specificke acts of a Pastor Mat. 28. 18. and so the Deacon must be formally a Pastor as he is formally a a man who can and doth performe acts which proceed only from the specificke forme of a man 7. It is a mystery that a Deacon may preach and baptize but he may not administer the Sacrament of the Lords Supper For 1. Philip an Evangelist as well as a Deacon might have done both 2. Is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper holier then the Sacrament of Baptisme that the Deacon may administer the one Sacrament and not the other But this is a Masse-mystery there is no Transubstantiation in Baptisme and therefore a woman a laicke as they speake may baptize but he must be a consecrated and orderly Priest who hath power to make and create the naturall body of Christ. So Greg. de Valentia Suarez Vasquez Bucanus teacheth us 3. The word of God knoweth not any who have power to baptize and have no power to administer the Lords Supper 8. The Popish Libeller in the Survay saith when now contributions and collections cease the Deacon may preach and baptize Then Deacons ordained Rom. 12. 8. Acts 6. 4 5. 1 Tim. 3. are now out of the world and they have given to us for a well made Deacon an ill made and a spilt Minister but the cause remaining the office should remaine the Churches poverty remaineth For the Prelate hath a singular faculty of creating beggars in his Officiall-Courts Q. 9. How is it that you have taken away widowes which was an office established by the Apostles Rom. 12. 8. For some say they should be gone because they were temporary and the heate of the Easterne Countries which caused sicknesse required them but they are not needfull now So saith Cartwright Others make them perpetuall as Fenner some make them to be women as Cartwright some men as Travors some neither men nor women onely as Beza and Junius Answ. The perpetuall use of that office we thinke continueth that is that there be some to shew mercy on the poore which are captives exiled strangers diseased distracted and that there be Hospitals for that effect and Chirurgians Physicians aged men and women but that widowes were officers in the Church as Elders and Deacons are we thinke no but that that service may be performed by men or women as the Church shall thinke good Cartwright thinketh no other then what I say Fenner thinketh well that the sicke should alwayes be cared for neither by men only nor by women onely as Beza and Junius thinke but by both as need requireth Quest 10. Presbyteriall government cannot consist with a Monarchy you ioyne with Papists in oppugning the Princes authority in causes Ecclesiasticall Cartwright Viretus Calvin teach that the authority of Kings commeth immediately from God the Creator not from God in the Mediator Christ. So the Survay Answ. It is the slanderous malice of Court-Sycophants to say a friend to Christ cannot be a friend to Caesar but we set downe our mind here anent thus 1. Concl. Presbyteriall government and the regall power of Monarchs doe well consist Paul a favourer of this government 1 Tim. 4. 14. commandeth that prayers be put up to God for Kings and all who are in authority and so doe we teach 2. Conclusion Our adversaries here corrupt the mind of Cartwright Viretus Calvin and others who say that the authority of Kings come immediately from God as Creator and not from God in Christ as Mediator For the kingly power is considered two wayes 1. In generall as kingly and in the person of heathen Princes who know nothing of God as a Redeemer in the Mediator And so the kingly power in generall as given for the good of all humane societies in generall is from God the Creator for the good of all societies whither heathen or Christian. So Nebuchadnezzar Darius Nero and Julian were essentially Kings and yet had not their kingly power immediately from the Mediator Christ except in this generall sense that the kingly power is a lawfull ordinance of God warranted by the word of God and Testament of our Testator Jesus Christ because these are essentially Kings and lawfull Magistrates who either never heard of Christ nor any thing of God but onely that he is Creator of the world or then who persecute and hate the name of Jesus Christ. It may be that the fruits of persecuting Princes their government redound to the â—ood and salvation of the Saints and that by accident as all things worke out for the good to those who love God Now â—ormalists denying such to be lawfull Kings as either know not
Christ or beleeve not in him joyne hands with Papists and make way for Anabaptisticall Anaâ—chy that a persecuting or an unbeleeving King is no King not to be obeyed but to be turned out of his Throne And to this meaning Calvin Viretus and Cartwright teach that the kingly power floweth immediately from God the Creator not from God in the Mediator Christ. But 2. thâ— kingly power is considered in a speciall manner as it is in a Christian whether professing onely the Gospell or truly beleeving in Christ and so in relation to Christs Church and to the soule of a beleeving Prince the kingly power floweth from God in and through the Mediator Jesus Christ as all common favours which in generalâ— flow from God the Creator are sanctified and blessed to the beleevers in the Mediator Christ as meat drinke sleep riches kingly honour And in this meaning Sauls kingly honour in respect of Saul himselfe is but a common favour flowing from the Creator howbeit to Gods Church for whose good he did fight the battels of the Lord it was a speciall favour flowing from God in Christ as our Divines say that creation which in it selfe is a common favour to all is a meane in the execution of the Decree of Elâ—ction to the children of God 3. Conclusion Hence our Divines say that kingly authority is the same ordinance of God essentially considered in the heathen Princes as in Christian Kings as Cartwright and others say Neither doth it follow as our unlawfull Canons teach That the Christian Kings now have that same power in Causes Ecclesiasticall which the godly Kings amongst the Jewes as David and Salomon had â—or David and Salomon were Prophets as well as Kings and had power to pen Canonâ—cke Scripture and to prophesie which power in Ecclesiasticke causes no King now can have Neither doth it follow which Whytgift saith that we give no more authority to the Christian Magistrate in the Church of Christ then to the great Turke Our Divines say and that with good warrant that the kingly power as kingly is one and the same in kind in heathen Nero and in Christian Constantine As a heathen man is as essentially a father to his owne children and a husband to his owne wife and a King to his owne subjects as a Christian man is a father husband and king to his owne children wife and subjects Neither doth Christianity superadde and give of new any kingly power to a King because he is now become by Gods grace of a Heathen King a Christian King Christianity addeth indeed a new obligation to imploy his kingly power which he had full and entire before now in its exercise and use to more regall and kingly acts as to take care that the Gospell be soundly preached the Sacraments and discipline of the Church kept pure and heretickes punished according to that he to whom much is given from him much shall be required But the same King while he was a heathen King had the same kingly power and authority to performe these regall acts but being yet a heathen he wanted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 supernaturalis a supernaturall or reall and physicall power to performe these acts now this power which he wanted before he heard of the Gospell and beleeved in Christ was not a kingly authority for then he should not have been a compleat Heathen King before which is against Gods word commanding obedience to heathen Kings Rom. 13. 1 2. 1 Tim. 2. 1 2. 1 Pet. 2. 17. but this power that he wanted is a Christian power to exercise regall and kingly acts Neither is this an inconvenience that power to exercise the acts of a calling in a Christian manner be Christian and supernaturall and yet the authority kingly and not formally Christian but such as is and may be in a heathen King therefore kingly power and Christian power are here carefully to be distinguished and a Christian Kings power as a Christian is more then the Turks power in Church-matters Hence our Adversaries here dethrone and degrade the King for they give the King a head-ship and dominion over the Church as he is a Christian man and take that headship from him as a King because if the Turke by sword should conquer Britaine and become our King by their grounds he should be Head of the Church no lesse then our Christian Prince who now reâ—gneth over us and certaine it is a poore Headship that they give to the King even such a Head-ship as a Heathen King and the Turke hath over subdued Christian kingdomes and thus by their way Nero and Julian were heads of Christs Church 2. If unbeleeving Kings cease to be Kings then when they commit any fault that maketh them in Gods Court no members of the Church they are to be dethroned which is most seditious doctrine and so Formalists herein joyne with Papists 4. Conclusion There be these distinctions here considerâ—ble 1. The Kings power ordinary and extraordinary 2. His power as a King 2. and as a singularly graced Christian. 3. His power hortatorie as a Christian and coactive as a King 4. His power accumulative not privative in Church-matters 5. His power in actibus imperatis in acts commanding to another and his power in actibus elicitis which he is to performe himselfe If a King were a Prophet as a David he might doe many things in an extraordinary way in Church-matters which he cannot now ordinarily doe 2. As a singularly graced Christian he may write Sermons and Commentaries on holy Scripture for edifying the Church but this should be done by him by no kingly faculty 3. As a Christian he may exhort others to doe their duty but as King he may command that which Paul commanded Timothy and Titus to commit the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others to preach in season and out of season to lay hands suddenly on no man and reforme Religion purge the Church of idolatry and superstition as Joshuah and Hâ—zekiah did all which Church-men and Synods might doe also but Synods doe this in an Ecclesiasticke way upon the paine of Ecclesiasticke censures The King doth it by a regall kingly and coactive power of the sword 4. the Kings power is accumulative in giving to the Church and ayding and helping God hath given to the King the ten Commandements and the Gospâ—ll as a pupill is given to a Tutor The King holds his sword above the Law of God to ward off the stroakes of wicked men who doe hurt the Law but the Kings power is not privative to take any priviledge from the Law and the Church so his power is as a tutor to keep not as a father who may both give and take away from his son the inheritance his power is defensive not offensive 5. He hath power in actibus imperatis to command that all preach sound Doctrine decree just Canons exercise discipline aright but in