prescriptions and that they could receive no other prescriptions besides Christs prescriptions to regulate them in the exercise of their Ministry 4. They declare how desirable and refreshing the exercise of this their Ministry was to them 5. They declare what power they acknowledged in the Magistrate it 's not a lawless but lawfuâ— Authority which they acknowledge they acknowledge no other power in the Magistrate but what is the Ordinance of God for so they describe lawful Authority the excellent Ordinance of God They declare it 's the work of Magistrates to protect the Ministers of Christ in the exercise of their Ministry 6. That they purposed and resolved to behave themselves in the discharge of their Ministry with that wisdom and prudence which became faithful Ministers of Jesus Christ 7. They declare that they continued in their known judgment in Church-affairs they did let the Magistrates know that they had not altered their Judgement in Church-affairs that they were still Presbyterians Their judgment is known from the Confession of faith chap. 23. Art 3. ch 25. Art 6. ch 30. Art 1. ch 31. Art 3. and all who have any knowledge of the Judgment of Presbyterians know that they own Christ for the alone head of the Church and fountain of Church-authority and that they are as opposite to Erastianism as they are to Prelacy That they are so far from ascribing a Supremacy of spiritual power to the Magistrate that they profess that the Magistrate hath not any power of the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven committed to him and that it doth not belong to the Magistrate to ordain or depose suspend excommunicate or to exercise any Church-censures and that it doth not belong to him to form Church-Canons or to prescribe Instructions for regulating Ministers in the exercise of their Ministry and that they are of that Judgment that no Magistrate nay nor all the powers on earth though they were united can dispose of Ecclesiastical matters according to their Wisdom or pleasure seeing the things of the house of the God of Heaven must be done according to the wisdom and pleasure of the Lord and not according to the wisdom and pleasure of Creatures These and many other Tenets are known by all who know what Presbyterians are to be their known and professed Judgement Now seeing they declared their continuance in their known Judgement and adherence to their former principles and that to the Magistrate and had declared before their resolutions to behave as faithful Ministers of Christ and that they believed the account they were to give of their Ministry to Jesus Christ They did shew to the Magistrate that they did not nor could not approve of power or acts of the Magistrate which were contrary to their Judgements for that had been so far from becoming the faithfulness of the Ministers of Jesus Christ that it could not consist with common Ingenuity 8. And they clearly enough insinuate that there was an opposition betwixt their known Judgements and the actings of the Magistrate in subverting Presbyterial Government and setting up of Prelacy and other actings contrary to Presbyterial Principles some whereof I mentioned before This opposition is clearly insinuated and imported while they say And to demain our selves towards lawful Authority notwithstanding of our known Judgment in Church-affairs as well becometh Loyal Subjects for if the Affairs of the Church had been then according to their known Judgment that notwithstanding had been impertinent and could have had no sufferable sence But Church-affairs being setled by the Magistrate contrary to the known Judgment of Presbyterians some might have alledged that Presbyterian Ministers would not be Loyal towards lawful Authority to obviate this they say That notwithstanding their known Judgements they would behave as Loyal Subjects 9. And hence they declare to the Magistrate that there was no disloyalty in their Principles or practice of their Principles that their known judgement in Church-affairs and the faithful discharge of their Ministry according to their known Judgement did well consist with loyalty and with that respect which from a principle of Conscience they did owe to lawful Authority though it did not consist with some of the actings of those who were in Authority 10. They modestly declare the low esteem they they had of themselves in saying they were the unworthiest of many of their Brethren and they so far from selfishness in desiring to partake of this liberty alone that they express their desire that others of their Brethren may be sharers of the liberty which they enjoyed It appears from what is said that these Brethren witnessed a good Confession before the Council and the Author of the History of the-Indulgence hath in this respect done right to these Brethren and good service to the Church in Printing the Speech which Mr. Hutcheson spoke in their name before the Council If any object that their Testimony is not good because they do not expresly and in terminis testifie against the Invasions made upon the Church I would desire these to consider that in saying so they condemn the Testimonies of many Martyrs who in their Confessions only expressed the truths which they did believe and some of them only in the general asserted that they were Christians They condemn also our Confession of Faith which doth not so expresly and in so many words refute and reject many dangerous and damnable errors but doth only assert the truths opposite to these errors yea they condemn the Testimony of the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures which is good and perfect and yet doth not in terminis and expresly mention every error which is contrary to the truth but leaves the refutation of many of these errors to be gathered by good consequence from what is said in the Holy Scriptures and they condemn also that good Confession which Christ witnessed before Pontius Pilate in asserting himself to be a King for he doth not expresly mention and reject all the errors which are contrary to his Spiritual Kingdom And seeing I am speaking of Testimonies I shall mention what the Indulged Ministers who were called before the Council for not keeping the 29. of May declared in the face of the Council As they had agreed that Mr. Hutcheson should declare that the Magistrate had not a power formally Ecclesiastical and that they could not receive Rules intrinsecally Ecclesiastical from the Magistrate So Mr. Hutcheson to prevent the Councils giving them any such instructions desired that their Lordships would be pleased not to burden them with impositions in the matter of their Ministry wherein they were the Servants of Christ And after Mr. Alexander Blare who was called before Mr. Hutcheson had shewed that he could not receive such instructions to regulate him in his Ministry Mr. Hutcheson before he was called spoke against their L. L. imposing Rules intrinsecally Ecclesiastical for regulating Ministers in the exercise of their Ministry who were the Servants of Christ in these matters
to this purpose in the place cited but from what hath bin cited from the Authors mentioned whose Books are common and no doubt have been seen by the Author of the Epistle he might have seen that it was great rashness to suppose that none would or could deny that Christ by his blood did intercede for vengeance Those Authors mentioned have a far other up-taking of Christs Priestly Office and of that part of it his Priestly Intercession by his blood for they think his Priestly Office was wholly an Office of Grace and altogether an Office of Grace founded in Grace and Mercy and that Mercy is an essential qualification of a Priest as a Priest that it 's an Office for men for expiating sin and not for punishing it that the designe of it is mercy and grace that the Priestly intercession is only for the Elect and in this distinguished from Christs Royal Power which as it is for protecting the Elect so it is for punishing the enemies of his Church 2. But suppose Christ did intercede by his blood against some I enquire at him how he knows that he intercedes by his blood for vengeance upon the Authors of the Indulgence what knows he but some of them may be elect I am sure he will not say that the blood of Christ which was shed on earth for the Elect doth plead against them within the vail in Heaven if he say that he knows they are all Reprobates he knows more than the Author of the Cup of cold Water knew in the year 1678. for pag. 40. he says It may be there are some of the Elect so far left at present as to run along with this course I hope he will not take on him to say They have sinned the sin against the Holy Ghost If by vengeance he mean eternal vengeance he must conclude them Reprobates if he mean temporal vengeance how knows he that Christs blood pleads for that We see Aaron as Priest stood betwixt the dead and the living to stay the Plague he made an atonement to avert the wrath of God and not to bring it on Numb 16.46 47 48. And the Plague which came after the numbring of the people is stayed by building an altar It belonged to the Priest as Priest to bless in the name of the Lord for ever 2 Chron. 23.13 and offering burnt-offerings and peace-offerings 2 Sam. 24.25 Again whatsoever Christ intercedes for by his blood he obtaineth it now how knows he that temporal vengeance will certainly come upon the Authors of the Indulgence May not Sovereign grace avert the temporal judgment which mens heinous sins have deserved who can set bounds to the Grace of God who hath Mercy on whom he will have Mercy and hath shewed mercy to some of those who were the chief of sinners 3. Suppose that were granted that Christ did by his blood intercede for vengeance and that the Author of this Epistle could condescend upon the particular persons against whom Christ intercedes and that he intercedes against the Authors of the Indulgence because of the complex of this deed of the Indulgence yet this would make no discrepancy betwixt Christs Intercession in Heaven and Mr. Hutchesons Speech upon earth for except he proves that Christ intercedes for vengeance upon them for their taking off the civil restraints of penal Statutes and granting the peaceable exercise of the Ministry all he says is nothing to the purpose For Mr. H. and the Indulged Ministers did give thanks for this and not for the complex of the Indulgence for they never gave thanks for the Instructions He will never prove that Christ as King willeth the execution of vengeance upon Magistrates for taking off such undue restraints and much less will he be able to prove that Christ as Priest intercedes by his blood for vengeance upon that account And as for the Prayer which is in the end of Mr. Hutchesons Speech That the Lord would bless his Majesty in his Person and Govenment and their L. L. in the publick Administration that was according to the Lords Command 1 Tim. 2.1 2 3. where it is expresly said That this praying for Kings and all that are in Authority is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour And what they meant by his Majesties Government is clear from what they said before in the Description of Magistracy which they design lawful Authority and the excellent Ordinance of God Seeing Mr. Hutcheson spoke according to the good and acceptable will of the Lord revealed in his word this alledged discrepancy betwixt Christs Intercession and their Speech is one of the Authors roaveries a Melancholy dream with which he may affright himself but the Indulged Ministers are not such weak Fools as to be affrighted with his many terrible words of terrour trembling confusion of face shame and astonishment This minds me of the censure which I saw of him in an Answer to the History of the Indulgence that he hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 passions without reason The Indulged Ministers believe that they have followed the Lords will in not slighting the opportunity of the peaceable exercise of their Ministry which the Lord in his good providence did offer to them and they look upon the direction which they had from the Lord in this matter to chuse the good and refuse the ill and upon the Lords assistance of them in the exercise of their Ministry and his helping them hitherto to run with patience in the course of their Ministry notwithstanding of the contradictions and false reproaches they have met with from some from whom they expected better things and upon the blessing of the Lord in the exercise of their Ministry as the fruits of Christs Intercession so far are they from being confounded and terrified with reflecting upon the Intercession of Christ There are other things in this 3d. Question which may be denyed at for example That our Rulers in affronting Christ have outdone all that ever went before them and were resolved never to be out-done by any who should come after them What no not by the Council at Jerusalem who condemned him of Blasphemy and after commanded his Apostles not to speak at all to any man in the name of Jesus But the Gentlemans observation holds here for he goes as far as his fancy can go he minds me of a Drunken man in the times of Popery who could not get on upon his Horse at length having prayed to the Haly-rude of Crail to help him on he went to some advantage and did cast himself over the Horse and then he blamed Haly-rude of Crail because it could not do except it did over-do I wish his stile were as solid and temperate as that Speech of Mr. Hutchesons which though he slightingly calls an Harangue yet was such as did well become a Minister of the Gospel whereas this Author by a flood of great swelling words is often carryed away beyond all bounds of Rime
Councils ministerially to determine controversies of Faith and cases of Conscience to set down Rules and Directions for the better ordering of the publick Worship of God and government of his Church Art 5. Synods and Councils are to conclude nothing but that which is Ecclesiastical and are not to meddle with Civil affairs which concern the Commonwealth unless by way of humble petition in cases extraordinary or by way of advice for satisfaction of conscience if they be thereto required by the Civil Magistrate Chap. 23. Art 3. The Civil Magistrate may not assume to himself the administration of word and Sacraments as the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven yet he hath authority and it is his duty to take order that unity and peace be preserved in the Church that the truth of God be kept pure and intire that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed all corruptions and abuses in worship or discipline prevented or reformed and all Ordinances of God duly setled administred and observed for the better effecting whereof he hath power to call Synods to be present at them and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them be according to the word of God These Articles and the Scripture-proofs do clearly hold out and confirm That Christ not the Magistrate is the Head King Lord of the Church which is the Body House and Kingdom of Christ that Church and not the Magistrate is the Fountain of the Spiritual Power of the keys of the kingdom of Heaven that the Offices in the Church are of divine institution given by Christ and that these Offices which Christ hath given are sufficient for gathering and perfecting the Church seeing he hath given them for that end and that they are Ministerial and not Lordly and hence it follows that the Office of a Prelate who claims a majority of Directive and Coercive power over Ministers who not only takes upon him without election to moderate Synods but also is above the censure of the Synod and who can hinder the Synod from concluding any thing how necessary soever they find it and without whose Authority the Synod is no Synod who imposes Moderators upon the meetings for exercise and to whom these meetings are countable for their actings without whom there can be no ordination deposition excommunication relaxation from it who exacteth an Oath of Canonical obedience from Ministers not being in the Rolls of the Offices and Officers given by Christ and being a Lordly and so more than a Ministerial Office Presbyterians cannot own it nor judg it useful for gathering or perfecting of the Church They shew also that the Magistrate to whom God hath given the Lordly power of the sword is so far from having a spiritual Supreme power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven that he hath not the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven given to him at all for the power of the keys which Christ hath given is Ministerial and makes those who are invested with it Ministers of the Church but the power of the Sword is Magistratical and a Lordly Dominion and that it belongs to Synods and Councils and not to Magistrates to make Ecclesiastical Rules c. and that none neither Magistrates nor Ministers may order Ecclesiastical matters according to their mind and pleasure but those things must be ordered according to the mind and will of God revealed in his word And all true Presbyterians believe That seeing both the Lordly Power of the Magistrate in general and in special the Kingly Power and the Ministerial Power of Church-Officers are of God and his Ordinances that they are not contrary to one another for the Ordinances of God do not justle one against another but sweetly agree and any justling or clashing which hath proceeded from the corruptions of Magistrates or Ministers are not to be imputed to the Lords Ordinances and it 's the earnest desire of all truly godly and loyal subjects who seek the glory of God and the Magistrates true honour and interest That whatsoever in the actings of their rightful Magistrates hath exceeded the bounds which the Lord hath set to them may be in mercy discovered to them and in time reformed That all occasions of grief and stumbling may be taken out of the way of truly loyal subjects and all occasion of doing mischief may be cut off from those who take advantage from those excesses to render the Magistrate contemptible and to overthrow that Power which they have from God As for what they say of Ministers hindering those who would have given a testimony and censuring others who did give it the truth is Presbyterian Ministers endeavoured to restrain some young men who instead of preaching the Gospel made it their work to revile the Magistrate and Ministers who made use of the liberty granted by the Magistrate but these youths discovered themselves not to be of Presbyterian Principles by their refusing to be subordinate to the Ministers and by reproaching them who would have reclaimed them from their disorderly and Schismatick practices By this the Magistrate may perceive if the Presbyterian Ministers who are Presbyterians indeed had by allowance of the Magistrate the peaceable exercise of their Ministry and liberty of meeting for regulating their own actings and the actings of those who profess themselves to be Presbyterians such unruly persons who stir up the people to Schism and Sedition would not be admitted to the Ministry or if they after their admission discovered themselves to be of pernicious principles they would be put from the Ministry and so the people who are true to Presbyterian Principles would not own them and so they would not have access to pervert the people with Seditious and Schismatick doctrine this would be found the most proper Remedy for these distempers But what wonder is it if young men who are ordinarily rash being but Novices who have not studied the Body of Divinity and who have no experience and know not the Principles and Practices of Presbyterial Government who are not put ro Presbyterial Exercises for their trial and instruction and who it may be have never seen any thing of the Exercise of Presbyterial Government in Presbyteries or Synods and who are not under the iâ—spection of meetings of Presbyterians but wander to and fro at random not thinking themselves accountable to any meeting of Ministers nor censurable by any What wonder is it if such persons when they are blown up with the vain applause of some ignorant and humorous people who under their sad sufferings have taken up such prejudice against the Magistrate and all to whom the Magistrate shews any favour that they think what is most cross to the Magistrate is most right and any thing which the Magistrate allows they think it wrong and so they cry up those Preachers most who speak most invectively against the Magistrate and against those Ministers to whom the Magistrate shews any favour I say what wonder is
them and they must stand and fall as they are pleased to determine Their Soveraignty is the more absolute that their Dignity proceeds of themselves and men use not to limit their own power when they have it at their own making or taking the old Prelates depend upon the King and they are sent from Court It 's true Athanasius * Epist ad Solitariam vitam Agentes finds fault with that ubi ille Canon ut è palatio mittaturis qui futurus est Episcopus Yet any thing that is in its nature excessive and inclined to pass bounds is less dangerous when it is limited by some other thing on which it depends than when it is left to its own indefinite appetite or inclination Their new Prelates depend neither upon King nor Kesar but are independent their Prelacy proceeds of themselves this makes it very dreadful like the Dominion of the Chaldeans Hab. 1.7 They are terrible and dreadful their judgment and dignity shall proceed of themselves They were terrible because as Mr. Hutcheson upon the place saith They would be their own carvers in all matters of advantage and honour standing to no law either of Nature or Nations in dealing with a terrified and subdued people but meerly following their own will armed with power If ye say they are not designed Lords nor a Soveraign power ascribed to them in the Bond but they are designed Ministers that is Servants I answer if folk will be beguiled with names the Pope will call himself Servus servorum a Servant of Servants but there is a real Soveraignty given to them when a Jurisdiction over all Presbyterian Ministers to suspend depose and dispose of their Ministry as they please is ascribed to them And the other Prelates deal more candidly in taking the name of Soveraignty and Lordship seeing they have the thing Is it not a strange arrogance that a Presbyter or two or three Presbyters shall claim a stated Jurisdiction over a great multitude of Presbyters who have the same office with themselves they either have that power over their Brethren by vertue of their Ministerial Office as they are Presbyters or by vertue of some other Office not by vertue of the Office of a Presbyter or Minister for then one and the same Office should make one Presbyter a Soveraign and Lord and another Presbyter his subject a Presbyter as a Presbyter cannot have dominion over a Presbyter for one and the same Office cannot make a man Soveraign over another who hath the same Office that he hath If they have this Soveraign power over their Brethren by vertue of some other Office than the Office of a Minister or Presbyter then let them tell us what Office this is if it be not the Office of a Prelate 2. It hath not yet been proven that the Lord gave a Soveraign power and Spiritual jurisdiction to any one of his Ministers no not to the Apostles over the rest Paul Bains in his Diocesan Trial Pag. 73 77. shews that a majority of directive and corrective power such a power as Bishops claim is more than Ministerial And Mr. Rutherford in his Divine Right of Church-Government saith Nor do we find that the Apostles had jurisdiction over Pastors in the Scripture nor in any Ecclesiastick Records but where Papacy was working See Pag. 21. There is but one Lord in the Church Ephes 4. and Christ hath forbidden Lordship and enjoined ministry and serving Luk. 22.24 1 Pet. 5.3 Non requiritur in dominatione humilitas sed ipsa Dominatio prohibetur saith Whitaker Christus de re dominantur non autem de modo dominandi hoc vel illo modo dominantur saith Junius The work of all Church-Officers is a Ministerial work not only Doctors and Pastors but Apostles Prophets and Evangelists were appointed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the work of the Ministry Ephes 4.12 2 Cor. 4.5 Paul calls himself a fellow-servant with Epaphras Col. 1.7 with Tychicus Col. 4.7 Paul's dignity consisted not in Lording over other Ministers but in labouring more abundantly than others the Apostles claimed no Mastery or stated jurisdiction over other Ministers but they did draw with them as yoke-fellows and fought with them in their Spiritual warfare as fellow Soldiers and wrought with them as fellow-labourers Phil. 4.3 Phil. 2.25 Phil. 2. Rom. 16.3 they engrossed not the power of Jurisdiction in the Synod of Jerusalem to themselves for the Presbyters judged with them the Decrees of the Council Act. 16.4 were Ordained by the Apostles and Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Church at Antioch sends Paul to Jerusalem Act. 15. the Officers of the Church at Antioch lay hands on Paul and Barnabas Act. 13.1 2 3. Paul and Barnabas are sent with a Collection Act. 11.29 30. the Apostles claimed no negative in Presbyteries or Synods in Ordination Excommunication c. The Apostles were extraordinary Ambassadors had infallible instructions by their Doctrine and practice did shew the Platform of the Church were not limited to any fixed charge and so might exercise their Ministerial authority in all places where they came they were to lay the foundations of Churches But that they had any such stated Jurisdiction over other Ministers as Prelates claim over Presbyters is yet to be proven for any thing I know their instructing Ministers and Churches in their duty and reproving their sins will not prove it for the Prophets did so and yet they had no stated Jurisdiction over the Priests Paul reproved Peter but had not jurisdiction over him That Timothy or Titus had such a stated Jurisdiction over the Ministers of Ephesus and Creet is yet to be proven that they had the sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction and that the Ministers of Ephesus and Creet had no power of Ordination and Jurisdiction is not yet proven The Apostle directs them to Ordain but that they are directed to do it alone and not in conjunction with other Ministers is yet to be proven Lay hands suddenly on no man is a Direction applicable to every Minister there are multitudes of Directions given them that cannot be denied to be given to all Ministers and that some Directions are given to them as Prelates and some as Presbyters is as easily denied as affirmed But though it were granted that those extraordinary Officers in founding Churches at first might do some things which ordinary Ministers might not do this would be no warrant for these two or three who were but very ordinary persons to claim a Jurisdicton over the rest Whence have they their power No man can receive any thing of this nature except it be given him from Heaven Joh. 3.27 Let us see their Patent that we may know if it be leill come They must first shew a Warrant from the word for such a Prelatical Sovereignty and then let ut see how they came by it no man should take any Honour in the Church to himself at his own hand he must be called of God