before us 1. From Scripture practice and example Acts. x 15. to the end Chap. 6 vers 1. to 9. and 14 vers 13. where we have Arguments both from the more to the lesse and from the lesse to the more which are acknowledged by all to be concluding Topicks and much used in the Scripturs When our adversaries have the like from Scripture and antiquity how use they to insult but poor we must not be allowed this liberty 2. It is evident from the constant practice use and custome of the Church from the Apostles times till the Popes of Rome inhansed and swallowed up all power and priviledges either in taking them a way or bringing them into an absolute dependance upon them For this we appeal to the records and histories of the Church yea to the histories of the Pops PLATINA and others in many of which we shall not only finde the uncontrolled use of the peoples election mentioned but its right just fled and defended and many canons of Councels made for its regulation and against the encroachments that were by some made upon it in a mater so clear and graâ—ted by the adversary â—â—e need nor spend time If any ask us why we plead antiquity here and reject it anent Prelacy Our Answer is because we finde in this question as it is stated betwixt us and the adversaries antiquity full and clear which it is not in the other Let the State of the question about Prelacy as it is now agitated betwixt us be in every part of it brought to the pure times of antiquity and if it can be evidenced made out even as to the sole power of ordination jurisdiction and superiority of some Ministers over other Ministers of the Gospel and we shall yeeld the cause and quietly submit but in the business of the peoples right of election it is beyond all contradiction clear even in the confession of our Antagonists 3 All relations amongst rational creatures that are not founded on nature are free there is alwayes requisite mutual consent from which as its proper cause and foundation it does result as is to be seen in all sorts of such relations It is not denyed but yeelded by all that there is a particular special relation betwixt a Minister and the Congregation he in ordinare serves we desire to know what is the cause or foundation of it if it be not this All other relations of this kinde are founded upon consent and why not this 4. The good effects that have come to the Church by the free and voluntar election of the people where it hath been admited and in use confirmes us not alittle in this perswasion we have obseved in universal experience that not only a more universal and chearful subjection hath been given to the Ministry of those that entered this way into congregations but a faithful and able Ministry hath been more generally propagated to the great advantage of immortal souls if we may gather the nature of the tree by the fruit we cannot say this is evil but truly good Assertion 3. It belongs not to the Magistrat to prescribe Rules and give Directions to the Ministers of the Gospel for regulating the exercise of their Ministry as is done in this indulgence Our reasons for this are 1. We see no precept institution and example in all the Scriptures impowering the Magistrat to this we hope none will expect we should receive and subject to a power that hath no warrant nor foundation in the word seing all church power owes its descent and derivation from it our Antagonists themselves grant that not only the power they ascribe to the Magistrat is in and from the Scriptures but the regulation of its exercise should be conforme thereto so that there will be no debat about the consequence The great Patrons of Erastianisme plead the instances of David and Solomons ordering the courses of the Levits and the priests and of other things relating to the worship of God in the time of the old Testament but to little purpose seing they acted therein as Prophets and at the directions and instructions given from God by the Prophets and not as Magistrats as is clear from the very letter of the Scriptures in many places 2 Chron. 29 vers 25. and 35 vers 15. with others If the Magistrats of our time did produce such warrant for what they assume to themselves and do in this mater how readily should they be obeyed But the Objection of greatest seeming strength is that of Hezekias practise keeping of the passeover in the second moneth 2. Chron. 30 2. which conforme to the institution Exod. 1â— should have been observed in the first moneth Our Ans to this is first if this practise be pleaded for a leading example to Magistrats it will warrant Magistrats to change things institute by God which we hope all will say is absurd Obj. It was but the circumstance of time that he changed Ans a command or institution makes circumstances determined by it as unalterable by men as the substantials of the ordinance it self does not this if it be concludent impower the Magistrat to change our Sabboth from the first to the second or any other day in the week as he pleaseth What may not come in at this dore Next Our satisfying Answer to this is that what Hezekiah the Princes Congregation did they did it at or by the word of the Lord concerning this alteration and not of themselves as is express vers 12. 2. As it is usual for commissions given to Ambassadors by those that send them to containe all necessary instructions for regulating their carriage in the discharge of their ambassage so we finde in the Word of God rules precepts and directions given to the Ministers of the Gospel about the ordering of the worship of God and the exercise of their Ministery in all its parts which not only impowers them for this work but brings them under as strait Obligations to observe the same as the work and maine substantials of the ambassage on which they are sent for this let 1 Cor 14. two Epistles to Timothy with other Scripturs be consulted and we doubt not but this will be beyond disput with the unprejudged If the Erastians could give us such commands and precepts in the word for the Magistrat power in this how would they triumph and so they justly might for they should have no such willing and cheirful assenters to them then we if any such thing could be shewed 3. This power in the Magistrat would subject Ministers to and bring them in the exercise of their ministerie in a dependance on him the contrare of which we have proved before and shall do more after wards The truth is we tremble to think on the consequences of this dependance for thereby the Magistrat may suspend the ministry in these parts and exercises of it that Christ Jesus cals them to in the stated cases
it be one with the same why may not Presbyters consecrat and if they may ordaine as we undertake to make out from Scripture and Antiquitie what necessitie was there for going to England for it seing it might have been done by the Presbyters of this Church If consecration differ from ordination sure it is a humane custome and invention for which we have nothing in the Scriptures and pure Antiquity that only speaks of ordination the only way in which all Pastors entered into the pastoral office 3. The truth is as a Church Ministerial and politick constitute according to the Word of God with all officers of divine appointment hath the full power of the keys of the kingdome of God so there is no sort of officer necessare by divine institution to her edification but she is enabled to furnish her self with such without a necessitie of seeking to other Churches for them and if it be so the Presbyters of this Chruch being her representatives their consent should have been had Although we had no just exception against the office of the Prolates as it is constitute and declared by law as we have but their violent intrusion in this Church it puts a sufficient bar on our subjection to them so that we may not yea cannot owne them as the lawful pastors of this Church Obj. 3. The Magistrat consented to and procured their consecration Ans If any will make it appear that the Magistrat is the Church as Erastus does insolently assert without all probation yea a member of it as such or hath the power of mission we shall yeeld the cause and quietly submit but when we search into the Scripture we find the Magistrat as a Professor of Christianity a member of the Church without all Church power â—et be to be the fountaine of it and subjected as such to the care and oversight of Church Officers in the exercise of their ministerial authority and power We grant it is his part to put the Ministers of the Church when negligent in furnishing of her with officers to their duty anent it but not to thrust in officers upon her of himself without her consent Obj. 4. But the Curats have entered by the Church Ans 1. This we deny the contrare is clear from constant practice for the Curats come in upon congregations only by the Bishop and Patron who are not the Church nor have any power from her for what they do in this all their right and power is founded upon and derived from the supremacy and acts of Parliament and not from the Church in which the Bishop acts as the Kings delegat and substitute only impowered thereto by his law so that the Curats having and deriving all their power from the Prelates cannot have the same from the Church none gives what he hath not But. 2. The prelates not being the lawful governing Church any that enter congregations by them cannot be said to enter by the Church no more then if a Minister should enter into a congregation of this Church by a Minister or Ministers of the Church of France or Holland without the Ministers of this Church can be said to enter by the Church here for the Ministers of other Churches are not the governing Church of this Church The antecedent is to us clear for as the Prelates have entered without the Church so the lawful Ministerial ruling Church although scattered and persecuted is yet existent and in being who by the unjust and violent intrusion of others have not lost their right of ruleing this Church but in point of right and obligation do continue to be her lawful pastours for violence persecution and intrusion do not dissolve the relation betwixt the Church and her Pastours either general or particular there being nothing in our case that can justly do it other wayes it should be in the power of the Magistrat to undo and destroy the political Ministerial Church both formally and effectively which is abâ—ord We ask at any who think persecution and intrusion do in our case annul the pastoral relation betwixt Ministers and Churches whether the Magistrats violent ejecting of Ministers and puting of Mahumâ—tan or Popish Priests in their roomes will discharge Ministers and Congregations of their obligations to one another if they think not then how can these untye their obligations in our case We ask a reason If they judge persecution and intrusion by the Magistrat in â—his case to have this effect then it will inevitably follow that the Magistrat can destroy divine commands flowing there from contrare to the practice of divine relations obligations to the obedience of the Church in the primitive times who notwithstanding of the Magistrats Edicts threatnings much actual violence performed the mutual duties of pastours and flocks Arg. 2. All power of the Prelates and their creaturs in the Church is by law fountained in and derived from the Magistrat and in its exercise subordinated to him as is evident from the act of restitution Parl. Carol. 2. 1. Ses 2. Act. 1. which derivation and subordination they owne and homologat by their compliance with what the law does require in order to it therefore such we cannot we may noâ— owne receive and subject to as our ministers under seing they acknowledge subject themselves in their ministery to another head then Christ Jesus which by law is set in and over this Church That the force of this Argument may be more perspicuous and clear we shall put it into forme thus Those that receive and derive their Church power from and are subordinat in its exercise to another head then Christ Jesus should not be received and subjected to as the ministers of Christ in his Church But the Prelats and their Curats do receive and derive their Church power from and are subordinat in its exercise to another head then Christ Jesus therefore they ought not to be received and subjected to as the ministers of Christ in his Church We suppose the first proposition will not be denyed all the debate will be in the Second Which we prove thus These officers in the Church professing themselves such that derive their Church power from and are subordinat in its exercise to a power truely Architectonick and supream in the Church beside Christ doe derive their power from and are subornat in its exercise to another head then Christ Jesus But so it is that the Prelates and their creaturs do derive their Church power from and are subordinat in its exercise to a power truely Architectonick and supream in the Church beside Christ therefore the Prelates and their Curates do derive their power from and are subordinat in its exercise to another head then Christ The major proposition is evident for whoever hath a supream Architectonick power in and over the Church must be an head to the same and the fountaine of all Church power it is a repugnancy to be supream have an Architectonick power
and not to be the head of that Society to which any is such Now to the Minor that the Prelats and their Curats have their power from and in its exercise are subjected to a supream Architectonick power is beyond disput clear from the act of restitution formerly mentioned and other acts to be mentioned afterwards and will be so to any that consideratly peruse the same of which we are to speak at more large under the last head but for the time we propose these three from these acts for making out of this argument 1. They are expresly made to have a dependance upon and subordination to the King as supream to them in their Church judicatories and administrations 2 The government of the Church in its ordering and disposeing is annexed to the crowne as one royal prerogative thereof which not only suppons the government to be in him as the fountaine thereof but to be exercised with that dominion that is suteable to his regality 3 The giving of Church power to Church officers is supponed to be the effect and deed of his lawes and acts without which all power in the Church is declared to be null and void Objec Although the Kings Majesty be supream governour in all causes and over all persons Ecclesiastical yet he is not head to and of the Church Ans If he be supream governour in such causes and over such persons in Linea directa no question he is the head political to the Church for GOVERNOUR HEAD are equipollent terms whosoever is supream Governour to any society in this sense is a proper political head to it it is needless to quarrel about words if the thing be granted And that this subordination or supremacy is direct or in Linea directa is we judge clear from the fore mentioned acts seing they not only make the King the fountaine of Church power but moreover in the act anent the the National Synod he is made the All of the same and without him it is nothing The like of these the sun never shined on except these made by King Henry the 8. of England which being scrupuled at by all sorts of persons at home abroad they were in Queen Elizabeths time forced to alleviat the mater by removeing the title head and some mitigating explications allowed and ordered to be given to the subjects at the taking of the oath of supremacy but no such explications allowed here Arg. 3. If the Ministers and Churches required by law to receive and submit to the Prelats and their Curats thus thrust in upon them were constitut and setled in Christs way as Pastors and flocks in the just possession and actual use of all ordinances conforme to the rules of the word then it is no sinful separation for Churches in adhering to their Ministers not to receive nor submit to the Prelates and their Curats But so it is that the Ministers and Churches required by law to receive and submit to the Prelats and their Curats thus thrust in upon them were constitut and setled in Christs way as Pastors and flocks in the just possession and actual exercise of all ordinâ—â—ces conforme to the rules of the word Therefore it is â—â—â—o sinful separation on their part not to receive and submit to the Prelats and their Curats in hearing and receiving of ordinances from them We suppose the consequence of the major proposition is evident and will not readily be denyed by any and if it shall happen to be we prove it thus If there be divine obligations on Ministers and their Churches to the performance of the mutual duties of Pastors and flocks then it can be no sinful separation for Churches in adhering to their Ministers not to receive nor submit to the Prelats and their Curats But so it is that the Ministers and Churches required by law to receive and submit to the Prelats and their Curats were under divine obligations to the performance of the mutual duties of Pastors and flocks Therefore it is no sinful separation for Churches not to receive nor submit to the Prelats and their Curats The consequence of the major proposition leaneth upon these two and is infallibly made out by them first that thâ—â—e is a divine relation of Pastor and flock betwixt Ministers and the Churches over whom they are set and secondly that they are bound by divine commands to do the mutual duties of such contained and prescribed in the word of God none that acknowledge the Ministery to be an ordinance of divine instution and the Scriptures to be the rule of religion and righteousness will be able to refuse these We conceive none even of our Antagonists will deny the Minor if they do will it not follow that the Church of Scotland before and at the Prelats introduction was no Ministerial political Church which is false as we undertake to prove when ever our opposites give their reasons to the contrare But we know the greatest debate will be about the Minor proposition of the first argument to wit that Ministers and Churches required by law to receive and submit to the. Prelats and their Curates were setled in Christs 〈◊〉 as Pastors and flocks in the just possession actual exercise of all ordinances of divine appointment This for mater of fact is beyond all denial for the Churches of Christ in Scotland before and at the Prelates late entry among us in the Year 1662. were for the generality of the furnished with Pastors and in the possession of all ordinances The debate then will run upon the jus of that constitution that was existent and in being at the Prelats introduction against which there is nothing that can with any colour of reason be objected but one of these three Obj. 1. Prelacy was wanting in that constitution which it should have had Ans 1. To the validity of this objection it must first be made out that Prelacy as it is established by law and in use and exercise among us at this day is of divine right or an office institute in the word of God which is not yet done and for any thing we have yet seen never will Let our adversaries in this great debait consider the reasons and exceptions we have given in against iâ— and answer them yea we undertake to prove that it is not only without but against the word of God 2 We ask at the Patrons of Prelacy whether they judge it essential to the constitution of the Ministerial political Church If they judge it essential doth it not necessarily follow that all the Reformed Churches of France Holland c. are no ministerial Political Churches and that all ordinances dispensed in them are Nullities yea that the Churches of the vallyes of Piemont called the Albigenses which by all historians have their original deduced from the Apostles were not such seing 〈◊〉 the confession of all they never had Prelacy from their begining of Christianity to this day which is contrare to
sake although differing from us in some other things 5 It is thought sufficient ground for this charge that some yea many of the persons that come to and haunt our meetings are found not to be conscientious and Christian in their walk but flagitious or in many of their practises scandalous We cannot think our adversaries are serious in this do beleeve as they speak seing 1 This does fall as heavy and will to onlookers reflect as much and more on the objectors themselves as on us whose meetings for worship are found to be the sinck of all debauched and profaine persons thorow the Land can they refuse this It is like the foresight of this forced them to say in their lybel of greivances against us that the abominations mentioned in one Article were commited at our meetings and not by persons present at them otherwise their assemblies for worship should have been as chargeabâ—â— therewith as ours but in this our Antagonists 〈◊〉 like to the persecutours of the Christians in the prâ—â—mitive times who charged them for having these 〈◊〉 the like abominations commited at their assemblies as is to be seen in Church Histories The Lord deliver us from and rebuke the lying Spirit that is entered into and possesseth many 2. But if the presence of wicked and scandalous persons at the assemblies of Christians for hearing of the word and performing of other acts of worship be sufficient ground for chargeing the wickednesse and impieties of such on them as the cause inductive to scandals will not the assemblies that Christ his Apostles Ministers and Christians keeped in all ages be as lyable to this charge as we who excluded none but admited all to the hearing of the word and some other acts of worship as is manifest from Scripture and History whatever our adversaries will say for clearing of Christ Iesus his Apostles c. will acquit us 3. Do not men know that in preaching of the Gospel to sinners we should designe and labour their conversion as much as the edification of the converted Is not the Gospel with which Ministers are intrusted the mean and power of God to the one as well as to the other And seing this is our designe as it hath been our practice so it is our resolution not to exclude any from our assemblies how wicked soever they have been or are Truth is to charge us and our meetings with the sinnes and scandals of those that frequent the same is to reproach the Gospel of Christ and to Father all the wickednesse of its hearers on it contrare to its grand designe which is to save sinners from sin and all the miseries that follow upon it SECT V. Some Reasons why the Indulgence was not accepted IN the next place we come to the head of the Indulgence the not allowing of which hath been represented as a full evidence of our pivish wilful and stiff disposition to unpeacableness and distoyalty but we hope when our carriage in this mater is seriously thought upon and the reasons that determined us to this refusal are weighted in the ballances of the sanctuarie this charge will be found light and we are confident that upon trial it will appear we are not against but with all expressions of thankfulnes shall be ready to intertaine and receive any libertie for the Gospel its true interest and our selves that is consistent with our known principles that the Magistrat shall be pleased to grant us We look upon it as an unjust state of the question in this mater which hath been offered by some whether the Magistrat jure may or have it within the compass of his Magistratical power to give liberty to Ministers and people for serving and worshiping of God in his Son Christ Iesus according to his word this we do not deny but chearfully grant that although the exercise of Church power that is properly such be independent on the Magistrat yet the peacable exercise of it is truely from him it belongs to him no doubt to encourage countenance and protect the Church against all enemies and to relieve her of oppression when under it to this he is impowered and oblidged both as a Magistrat and as a Christian Neither is it with us a question whether the Magistrat may command Ministers to the duties of then function nor whether he may exeem them from the hazard of suffering to which they are obnoxious by law for their non-conformity nor yet whether he may confine Ministers simply and abstractedly considered from our present case which is only proper to the Magistrat and not all to the Church All these and much more we yeeld to the Magistrat about persones and maters Ecclesiastical according to the Word But the true state of the question to us is whether the Magistrat Jure Magistratico may of himself and immediatly without the Church the previous election of the people assigne and send Ministers to particular Churches to take the fixed and pastoral over sight of them prescribe rules and directions to them for the exercise of their Ministery and confine them to the said congregations The question thus stated being complex and consisting of several branches conform to the acts of Councel anent the indulgence we must of necessity for giving a just accompt of the grounds of our dissatisfaction therewith speak to them severally in some assertions with the reasons subjoyned Assertion First The Magistrat by vertue of his Magistratical power cannot of himself and immediatly assigne or send Ministers to particular congregations to take the pastoral charge and oversight of them For 1. We finde not in all the Word of God any such power given to or exercised by the Magistrat in the Church none hath yet given any instances of this If there be let them be produced and we shall acquiesce All acknowledge the Church not to be founded on the law of nature but on positive institution and supernatural revelation and therfore not to be governed in wayes and methods of Mens invention but in these that are revealed by the Holy Scriptures without which there cannot be a Church so that she owning her being constitution and all to them there must be some evident proof produced from these before we can yeeld to any such power in the Magistrat how long shall we exspect this 2. Also we finde the Church in the possession and exercise of this power from the times of the Apostles to the breaking up of the reformation by Luther and others in Germany as is manifest from Scripture and History We grant there was for some time a considerable debate betwixt the Pope and the Emperour of Germany about the investiture of Bishops which gave the rise to other Princes claming of the same seasing upon it but what says this to the mission of Ministers application of their Ministery to particular congregations For as Prelacy was the invention of men and the cause of horrid contentions in Churches and States so
none wonder we take this ticklish subject into consideration and dar adventure to give an accompt of our thoughts of the same to the world for we solemnly professe that on the exactest enquiry and search that we have been able to make about this mater we finde it as diametrically opposite to our true Covenanted principles as Prelacy and in its effects we fear shall prove as destructive to the Church and work of Reformation as any thing that appeared on the field against it Times past and present speak much to this but the future will say more the storme that this Supremacy threatens to this Church and nation is such that it is the part of all that wish well to Zion to pray inflantly day and night that it may be graciously averted The truth is as we look upon it as an high corruption in it self tending to the subversion of the Churches concerns in doctrine worship and Government so it lies at the bottome of our non-conformity to the law in Church maters and is not only one but a maine reason why we cannot joyne in Church assemblies especially for Government which thereby in our apprehensions are made nullities That our procedour in speaking to this may be distinct and clear to all we shall observe this method 1. We shall consider speak to the Government of the Church and shew what it truly is 2 We shall prove its distinction from independency on the civil Government And3 Shew how far this Government of the Church is by law lodged in and exercised by our Rulers contrare to Scripture and the practice of the Church till these hundered years past For more light to the whole we shall premise these preliminary considerations or propositions which we think will not readily be denied by any 1. Propos it is out of our rode and inconsistent with our intended brevity to insist on the tearms GOVERNMENT CHURCH what is usually signified by them these we leave to the Criticks and all that write on this subject but all are agreed in this that GOVERNMENT is a tearme importing power and authority which is nothing els but a right to rule others and an obligation on these invested therewith to use the same for attaining the ends of Government So that Government makes its acts due bindes them to all these acts means wayes by which Government is enabled to reach its ends 2. Propos All created power authority is originall in God as the first cheif cause thereof derived from him as the universal Supreme Monarch and Governour of all in heaven or earth hence it necessarly followes that as the power that cannot prove its descent from God is not to be admited so all just powers are directly subordinat to him as the universal head of all 3. Propos that the Church of Christ not being founded in nature but on supernatural revelations her Government must wholly depend upon flow from it in these things where it differs from other Governments so that the All of this Government is by positive institution and warrant from God supernaturally revealed 4. Propos That Christ Jesus as Mediator being made the head of the Church under God and thereby her Government fountained in him all powers in the Church must be derived from and subordinat to him as the Supream 5. Propos Beside the invisible and internal Government that Christ Jesus exerciseth by his Spirit on the souls and consciences of his people that consists in the inward light and power of his Spirit guiding and enabling them to that obedience he requires of them in his word there is likwise a true visible Government of the Church institute by him and visibly exercised in her in his name as her Supream 6. Propos The Government of the Church as shall be proved afterwards is not properly and in linea directa subordinat to the Magistrat for 1. It hath its derivation from another fountaine Christ Jesus who being the Churches Supream head and governour all power in her must come from and depend on him 2 The Magistrat cannot take away nor change the Government of the Church which he may do in Governments and powers subordinat to him yea he cannot impede its exercise in these intrusted with it seing they are under obligations for it antecedent superiour to these of the Magistrat 7. Propos That the holy Scriptures being the word and law of Christ as King of his Church must be the instrument and rule of the Churches Government according to which she ought to be ruled not only in these acts of faith and obedience in the inner man but also in the outward 8. Propos Although powers specifically distinct be not subordinat to one another yet there may be and is a mutual subordination of persons invested with these powers so as the persons are in different respects superiour and inferiour to one another as Jesse was to David supposing him to live in his son Davids reigne which subordination of persons does not take away the destinction of these powers nor the mutual subjection the persons owe to one another hence we assert that as Magistracy does not destroy the Ministry nor loose the persons cloathed therewith from the subjection they owe as Christians to Ministers in the right exercise of their Ministery so neither does the Ministery destroy Magistracy nor untye Ministers as subjects from that subjection and obedience due to Magistrats from their subjects Ministers are bound to this as much as any 9. Propos As in all Governments there are somethings that is intrinsick although visible wherein its nature and specifick essence does consist and somethings accidental and separable from it that belongs not to its esse but BENE ESSE so there are in the visible Government of the Church somethings essential intrinsick of which afterward and somethings accidental and extrinsick without which it can subsist even in its exercise 10. Propos These things in and about which the Government of the Church is conversant are of diverse sorts some are purely spiritual as the Word Ministery Sacraments and all Ordinances of divine appointment Others are of a mixt nature partly spiritual partly civil as the necessary circumstances and mods of worship and Government which although civil in their own nature and common to other actions yet partly by reason of the general divine appointments impowering the Church to dispose and order these partly by reason of their necessary connection with things purely spiritual are truely Ecclesiastick and become a part of the object of the proper power of Church Government called by all Divines DIATACTICK Some are properly purely civil in their owne nature and immediat ends as Churches Stipends Manses Glybs c. which although they be by general precepts secured to the Church and belonging to her yet they are formally civil and come directly under the Magistrates power as other civil rights and proprieties do about which
Magistrat cannot yea may not exercise the Government of the Church being disenabled thereto by the commands and institutions of Christ who hath laid the burden thereof on others and not on him The most grant the Magistrat himself may not exercise some parts of this Government as ordaining of persons for the Ministery excommunicating c. and why he may do other parts and acts belonging to it and not these We desire proofe all our antagonists arguments in this conclude for the whole Obj. But some Magistrats have exercised both powers as Moses Samuel David Solomon c. Ans These were both Magistrats and Prophets and it is evident from the Scripture that what they did either in constituting or in exercising of the Government of the Church they did it as Prophets and not as Magistrats we find Magistrats that were not Prophets attempting it reprehended for so doing as Saul Uzziah which says that it did not belong to their Magistratical Office Arg. 4. That Goverment that is founded upon and regulated by another rule and instrument then the law of the civil Magistrat is distinct from his Government But the Government of the Church is founded upon and ruled by another law or rule then the Magistrats the law and word of Christ therefore c. the first proposition is clear for the Government of the Magistrat does flow from and is regulated by his owne lawes of which he is the sole fountaine The second we suppose is undenyable among Christians who acknowledge the Scriptures for a rule of Doctrine Worship and Government to the Church of Christ Obj But there are somethings necessare to the Government of the Church not contained in the Scriptures Ans This we deny For 1. What the Scriptures containe anent the Government of the Church if reduced to practice is able to attaine its ends and more is not necessary Let the Church have these and the work will be done we make feigne necessitles but no more is necessar to the ends of the Church Government then what is determined by the Scriptures anent it 2. The ability of the Churches Government for reaching its ends lyes not in the innate sufficiency of its instituted means but in the Spirit of Christ working with in and by them by which low weak and despicable wayes Christ carries on the salvation of his people that the excellency of the power may be of him and not of us 3. The Scriptures being a full and perfect rule for all maters of faith and obedience what it containes of and anent the Government of the Church must be perfect and sufficient sure we are the Churches Government is a good work and its exercise acts of obedience to Christ Jesus anent which it is said I. Tim. 3. The Scripturs are able to make the Man of God perfect throughly furnished to every good work 4. We enquire when the Church is without a Christian Magistrat and under the feet of a heathenish persecuting one in which case our opposits grant her a Government distinct from and independent on the Magistrat whether the Government exercised in her be able to attaine its ends If it be as the experience of the Church in this case puts beyond doubt why may it not do the same under a Christian Magistrat Arg. 5. That Goverement that is exercised in the name of another distinct Supream Head besides the Magistrat is distinct from the Government of the civil Magistrat But the Government of the Church is exerced in the name and authority of another Supream head not subordinat to the Magistrat Therefore c. What can be said to the first proposition we understand not for all Governments one with and subordinat to the Magistrat are exercised in his name and authority But this Government of the Church is exercised in her in the name of Christ Jesus by his Officers as is clear from the word Arg. 6. The designations denominations and relations in and with which the Church is represented in the Scriptures do also confirme this truth she is called the Body of Christ the Kingdome of Heaven the City of God the House of the living God the new Jerusalem As all these do necessarily import a Government in the Church so they insinuat the same to be different from all other Governments Which we may mould into this Argument That society which is the body of Christ c. must have a Government distinct from the Government of the civil Magistrat But the Church is that society that is only the body of Christ c. Therefore c. Obj. But all these are said only of the invisible Church Ans But the contrare is clear from those Scriptures where these Epithets are given to the Church 1. Cor. 12.1 Tim. 3.15 Arg. 7. That Government whose immediat and essential ends are specifically different from the immediat and essential ends of the Magistrats Government is distinct from the Government of the Magistrat But here it is so the essential immediat ends of Church Government are different from the essential immediat end of Magistracy as will be clear to any that compares them together The ends of Church Government are the saveing of the foule the conversion and edification of sinners c. The endâ— of Magistracy are the outward publict peace and prosperity of the common wealth the execution of justice in the maintaining and preserving of propriety c. with these the Churches government does not medle nor intend them of it self Obj. The Magistrat ought to intend and endeavour the spiritual happinesse and wellfare of his subjects Ans We grant this but as all others ought to do it for every one in their station are bound to designe and labour the eternal salvation of these under their charge this being a common end that all Christians in their several capacities should seek after in their love to one another the first proposition is evident because the specificall distinction betwixt powers habits and acts is taken from their Objects and immediat proper ends Where these differ they are by all Philosophers constitute into different species's In the next place we assert That as the government of the Church does specifically differ from the government of the Magistrat so it is independant thereon and not directly subordinat thereto A truth how much soever it be decryed we are not shamed of nor affrayed to profess maintaine and whosoever will lay aside prejudice and earthly interests and consider these reasons with us will be forced to acknowledge it Arg. 1. The Magistrat is not the fountaine of Church power it hath not its derivation from him and therefore is not directly subordinat to him The consequence is founded on this truth granted by all Lawyers and Divines that all power directly subordinat to and dependant on the Magistrat is derived from him as the fountaine thereof the antecedent we prove thus 1. The Magistrat as a Magistrat is not a member of the
exercise her Government in these times by confederation and mutual consent and not by institution and command for as there is nothing in Scripture and pure antiquity for this So the Churches being gathered and constitute by the Apostles we presume they continued in the constitutions which the Apostles left according to the precepts and rules they gave them to which we find in the word and Church History their practice conforme When the persecutions of the Church ceased upon the Magistrats turning Christian we find her continuing in the exercise of the former Government but with the addition of some corruptions which grew to a sad hight afterwards throw the excessive munificence bounty of Constantine the great the first Christian Emperour and exercising the sameâ— as formerly as is clear from History that speaks of these times Here our adversaries speak of some instances of the power the Magistrat did exerce in the Church as convocating of Synods labouring in the peace of the Church lorely rent at sometimes through lad heresies and schisms And that saying of Constantines repeated by them ad nauseam vos estis Episcopi ad intra Ego ad extra But how is our Antagonists conclusion made out by all these will it follow that becaus the Magistrat did convocat Synods its Government is derived from subordinat to him No wayes for 1. Albeit the Magistrat have a power to convocat the officers of the Church anent maters relating to his owne conscience and duty whether about Church or State yet this is not privative of the Churches power to convocat her owne assemblies either for worship or government as we find she did in the primitive times not only without but against his consent yea when the Magistrat became Christian she retained and exercised this power in assembling into several Synods without the Magistrat It is true we do not read of general Synods assembled after this but by the Magistrat till the Pope of Rome claimed this power and usurped therein on the Church and Magistrat as he did in all other things but the vastness of the Empire and large extent of the Church which exceeded its bounds made this in point of prudence necessare for without the Magistrat it could not easily be done But 2. Convocating of others is not alwayes in its self and infallible signe of a superiour power and dominion over judicatories convocated as in limited Monarchies and not absolute where the Supream power is lodged in the King and States of the Kingdom although the King have the power of conveâ—ning the States yet they share wiâ—h him in the leg stative and executive power while in being therefore the illation is bad and not concludent 4 What imaginable advantage-can accrew to our adversaries assertion by that saying of Constantines formerly cited We grantâ— the Magistrat is the overseer of things without the Church but this will not prove that thâ— government of the Church is in and from his hands and subordinat to him they must first make it appear by good reason that ner Government is ad extra which they have not yet done nor never will for although it be visible in its institution and exercise yet it is as intrinsinck to and within her as her doctrine and worship which by this sence will be as much derived from and subjected to the Magistrat as her Government seing the one is as visible in its dispensation as the other Arg. 5. The Magistrat may not yea cannot jure impede and hinder the exercise of the Churches government therefore it is not derived from nor subjected to him the reason of this consequence is what ever power is derived from the Magistrat and subordinated directly to him he may suspend hinder its exercise yea he may totally remove and annihilat it this is yeelded by all and taken for a sure Maxime in Politicks but the Magistrat may not do this in the Government of the Church and that becaus it is of divine institution and the persons intrusted with and called to its â—xercise are under the obligations of divine precepts and commands for it which the Magistrat cannot hinder nor by any deed or command of his make void These that deny this divine institution of Church Government we refer to the forecited book where it is strongly pleaded made out from clear and express Scriptures in the New Testament Likwise as he cannot impede its exercise so he may not nullify its sentences by himself which he may do in the sentences passed by all powers derived from and subordinat to himself Arg. 6. The Christian Magistrat is by vertue of his Christian Profession bound to subject himself to the acts exercise of Church Government in the hand of Church Officers and is as much obleidged to yeeld thereto as any other Therefore Church power is not directly subordinat to him The antecedent is clear for all are commanded submission and obedience to Church Officers in the exercise of their power in watching overseeing and ruleing of the Church Heb. 13.7 17. to which exercise of their power we finde Magistrats in the word submitting as UZZIA who was by the priests confor me to the law separated and secluded from the holy things of God and communion with the Church in these yea it is given for the maine cause of all that heavy wrath and judgment that came on Zedekiah 2. Chron. 36.12 that he humbled not himself before Jeremiah the Prophet speaking the word of the Lord to him Obj. But this subjection in Magistrats to Church Officers is properly to Christ and not to them Ans we confess the subjection is primarily and cheifly to Christ Jesus whom such in the exercise of their Office doe represent yet the subjection is to them too whom all without exception of any in the Church are commanded to receive hear and obey so that in the dispensation of holy things they are superiour to all in the Church Magistrats and others as their constitut Rulers Overseers Governours and Watch men whom they ought to obey when acting in their Office agreable to the law of Christ which obedience is not CATACHRESTICAL or ABUSIVE as VIDELIUS speaks in the Magistrat but proper and really a debt they owe to the Ministers of the Gospel dispensing holy things as much as any other member of the Church their obligation to it being of the same kinde and nature with the obligation of others If any think other-wayes let them produce their reasons and Scriptures 2. If the fiery and zealous promotters of the Magistrats power in and over the Church of God did consider the true and real prejudice they do to Magistrats by exeeming them from that subjection that they with all others owe to Church Officers they would if there be any sense of Religion and its advantages remaining with men hold their hand and should have little thanks from Magistrats for their preposterous zeal who by their opinions in this mater do
necessare righteous from the Word of God before their obligation can be admitted received which we have laboured to doe in this following discourse And if from it our Covenants and Oaths doe appear to be just are we not assured that the corruptions and sins engaged against by such divine tyes and relapsed into contrare to these engadgments doe provoke our Holy and righteous God to the inflicting of all those plagues and judgments threatened in the word against the violators of such sacred bonds And if this be a truth as we hope none will deny what can we then expect to our selves posterity if reformation repentance doe not prevent but ruine and desolation according to every ones accession to these evils which no doubt are crying for vengeance on this declining Church Next We pray your Lo. to consider that we build our conclusions on no other foundation then our worthy reformers in this Church and others laid downe in their arguments and debates against popery which for its want of and opposition to the holy Scriptures they have condemned for an Antichristian defection from the doctrines of Christ We hold to the sufficiency and perfection of the holy Scriptures resolving thorow the Grace of God to admit of no other rule of faith and obedience in the maters of our God but these what they condemne we must renunce whatsoever doctrins or practises in the house of our God want their authority and approbation we cannot yea dar not admit The experience of the Church in preceding ages shews what mischeifs the opening of this door hath brought in upon her to the almost uter ruine of all her concerns The present grouth of popery and the quick advance it makes among all degrees of Professors in this and our nighbouring Churches sayes to all we suppose to your Lo. that the fasety preservation of the protestant reformed Religion does in all prudence require that its real and sincere friends should be encouraged and not thus persecuted with violence which no doubt tends so to the weakening of the Protestant interest cause that in one of Queen Elizabeths Parliaments it was judged a sufficient reason not only to restraine the rigide pressing of conformity but likewise to encourage all Non-conformists who in those times were looked upon as stout antagonists to popery and such as might be employed entrusted and made use of in opposition to it Is it not to be feared that the â—ope having his instruments and emissaries amongst us for working out of his designes on these Churches which all his former engines have not hitherto effected and finding through our confusions and distempers the occasion fitted for his purpose hath no question a secret active hand in influencing and increasing of this violence which if the Lord in his mercy to this many wayes afflicted and ruined Church doe not prevent will facilitat his longed for much endeavoured designes against the reformed Religion in these Ilands And however we are represented to your Lo. as unfriends to Religion and the interests of State as if they must ruine if we stand yet the experience of past and present times beside our publick confessions doth sufficiently witnesse how malitious our adversaries are in this unjust calumny We are no innovators nor pleaders for innovation in Church or State but do hold adhere to and resolve through the grace of God to maintaine the reformed Protestant Religion against all sorts of enemies as it is contained in the holy Scriptures summed up and breifly comprehended in the Confessions of faith of the reformed Churchs especially in the Confession of faith Larger shorter Catachismes of this Church in opposition to all Popish Arminian Socinian and Sectarian errors and innovations We hold for our maine rooted principle the holy Scriptures to be the Word of God the absolute perfect and only rule of faith and maners not needing any supplement of Ecclesiastical tradition yet we do not deny Antiquity its due respect use reverence and although we maintaine that every Christian of what rank degree soever ought to study be conversant in the Scriptures yet we acknowledge the necessity and great use of a Gospel standing Ministry and receive the directive authority of the Church not with an implicit faith but with the judgment of discretion We hold the teaching of the Spirit necessare to the saving knowledge of Christ but absolutly deny that the Spirit bringeth new revelations in maters of doctrines worship Government but only that he opens the eyes and enlightens the understanding that we may perceive and rightly take up what is of old revealed in the word by the same Spirit We rejoice in Christ Jesus having no confidence in the flesh or in a legal righteousnes desireing to be found in him who of God is made unto us wisdom righteousnes sanctification and redemption yet we constantly affirme good works of piety towards God of equity and charity towards men to be necessare both necessitate precepti medii our Ministers presse on themselves hearers the necessity of Regeneration as the solid fundation of good works the severe strict exercise not of a popish out side formal but of a spiritual real mortification and self denial We extol all ordinances of divine appointment but reject all humane inventions especially religious and significant not institute ceremonies in the worship of God It ought to have no little weight with your Lo. that by using of such violence the most sober judicious universally religious and industrious part of the subjects and consequently the most useful and stedfast to his Maj true interest and honour are exposed to dayly vexation and trouble to the great dammage and prejudice of this Nation and Kingdom We suppose that upon an impartial view it will be found that the choice and better part of the subjects is dissatisfied with the Government now introduced into this Church and consequently obnoxious to the severity of the lawes enacted against non-conformists and of what dangerous consequence this may prove to Church and State we leave to your Lo. most serious consideration We know the certaine issue of all maters is known to God only but if we shall take our measures in conjecturing at future events from the working of present causes there is all rational ground to fear that there are dismal and heavy times coming on this nation which by taking and fallowing of right wayes in the present juncture of affaires your Lo. may prevent and if not done will no doubt afford mater of bitter sorrow repentance to your Lo or children afterwards It is shall be our hearty prayer to God that your Lo. may have the Spirit of wisdome and of the fear of the Lord poured out upon you to foresee the evils that are hastening towards us and in time to hide yourselves this Church Kingdom from them Is it not apparent to all that conscience does not
and the persons qualified for and called thereto in his own way without dependance on the Powers of the earth being thereby constitute his Ambassadors and messengers and in special delegation sent from him as such to preach the Gospel to treat with sinners for reconciliation and obedience they by vertue of this institution and their special delegation or mission from him are bound to exercise the Ministery c office they are invested with till it be taken from them in the way by which he coveyed and conferred the same upon them If this be a truth as no Christian that doth acknowledge the divine authority of the holy Scriptures and subjecte themselves to its light and direction will get refused will it not follow that Ministers in their ministerial capacity are first and immediatly subject to Christ and not to men in their ministrations of the Gospel for they as his Ambassadours having and deriveing all their power from him are oblidged on highest paines be reason of their special relation to him and their comission from him which containes all their instructions to do the work of the Ministery cannot be superseded therein by any far less by them that acknowledge Christs authority in and over the Church to be superior to and above all other authorities whatsoever If they had their power and mission from men well might they submit to these in taking it from them but it not being so they cannot think themselves discharged of their office but in the way by which He conferred the same upon them Beleeve us in this lyeth a great part of our difficulty we are sure Ministers are Christs messengers sent by him whom they are bound to serve in preaching of the Gospel and dispensing of ordinances for the salvation of sinners from which obligation none can loose them but Christ Jesus their only master and head in this work 2. It does also natively flow from the former truth that all especially those in and of the Church are by vertue of Christs supereminent supream and absolute authority and their professed subjection to him indispensibly bound to subject to the ministerial authority and its exercise in the persons of those whom he sends and that on the account of their ministerial power office which is truely Christs and not theirs they acting according to the instructions contained iâ— their commission for they are Christs servants serving him by special delegation in the Gospel to which they are impowered commissionated and instructed by him they bear his name stand in his stead and represent him to his people as his Ambassâ—douâ—s being sent by him to all finners for attaining and carrying on the great ends of the Gospel thâ—â—r conversion edification and eternal salvation And seing it is so we must first renunce Christs authority and dominon over his Church before we can refuse and reject that power and authority of the Ministers of the Gospel who are thus sent by him to us the tâ—uth is thâ— not receiving of them is a rejecting of him a matter that should be tenderly seriously laid to heart by all for it draws exceeding deep upon all sorts of sinners high and low so that they not depending on any other infeâ—â—our authority and power except that by which they were sent their obligation to the work of the Gospel cannot be annulled by men Let us say it in this we contend not meerly for the ministerial authority that for the fountaine and ends thereof should be dear to us but for the prerogative of Jesus Christ whose right it is as King of his Church to constitute send Ambassadours in his own name if there be any thing that is the proper right of Soveraignity this is one which is the native consequent of it without which it cannot be shall we allow this in point of right to earthly Soveraigns and deny it to Christ the only Head and High priest of our holy profession Secondly Moreover Ministers in this relation they stand under to Christ Jesus have the Gospel its ordinances committed intrusted to them to be dispensed in his name for the conversion and edification of sinners for which they are called the stewards of the mysteries of God 1 Cor. 4 1. this is a talent they have received from their great Lord and master of which they must shortly give an account and which while they have it they are commanded in all highest paines to use for the gaining of sinners to him in the ways he directs them to in his word Now let all judge what a strait Ministers are cast into in these times If they forbear on the inhibitions of men to dispense the Gospel and its ordinances to sinners thus committed to them they prove unfaithful to their master betray their trust and incurre his heavy displeasure and wrath If they answer their trust and aime at faithfulness therein in preaching of the Gospel and labouring in the work thereof to gaine sinners they provock men and expose themselves to all sorts of suffering But they knowing the love and terror of the Lord have on mature consideration of this mater chosen and purposed in their master's strength to venture on the wrath of men seing they cannot in this juncture both please their Master them resolveing to prefer the necessity of suffering to that of sinne the much commended and cryed-up choise of Moses in the like â—ase proposed to all in the word for their imitation Thirdly Besides this trust of the Gospel there is likewise the heavy trust of immortal souls to whom they are sent committed to them of whom they are to give an account and for whose blood they must answer when they resigne and give up their stewardship and lay down their office and trust aâ— his feet from whom they received it Do any think the threats and inhibitions of men will discharge them of this trust at their master's hand If they think so they shall do well to produce something from him that will signify so much to them without which they cannot judge themselves exeemed from the care and oversight of souls whose blood will cry aloud in the ears of their master if they do not their part in what he hath commanded them for saveing of such We have heard of nothing yet from our Rulers to satisfy our consciences in this mater but peremptory lawes and acts commanding them to obey the same under great penalties If we were assured upon clear rational grounds that their voice and commands were the voice and commands of Christ Jesus releeving us of this pressing burden of immortal souls once laid on us how quickly and cheerfully should we obey their present laws but nothing can we learne from them or any other to ascertane us of this Let any that hath any true feeling of the natural state of souls judge what a cruelty it must be in us to behold souls perishing throw ignorance wickednesse hypocrisy a Spirit of delusion
who give it out to the world that we contemne a Ministery ordinances and are against hearing while our practice declares the contrare to all and for which we are dayly suffering We hold that as it is our duty to withdraw from and not to subject to the Prelaâ—â—â—s and their Creaturs so it is likwise our duty to cleave to our former Ministers in hearing of the Gospel and receiveing of ordinances from them as we can have access we have given reasons for the affirmative shall the Lord willing do the like for the negative 6 It would also be adverted that there is a great difference betwixt a Churches bringing in and carrying on of a defection willingly in a Church way and the Magistrats doing this of himself without the Church yea forcibly Ecclesia renitente ac reclamante although there should be no difference as to the mater yet there is much as to the maner and way to influence regular and diversifie ministers and Christians carriage under them all in the Church are to subject to the power proper and peculiar to her which they ought not to do to others usurping this power and taking it out of her hands 7 In this mater a difference or distinction is to be made betwixt the personal scandals and corruptions in ministers walk and administration of holy things and these that may be or are found in the way of their entry which may be such that although they do not invalidate their ministerie in their dispensing of the word and its ordinances to the rendering of these nullities yet may give sufficient ground to peoples withdrawing from and not subjecting to them as their lawful and sent pastours 8 There is a great difference betwixt a Church regularly constitute according to the Word of God in her ministerial political being enjoying the exercise of all ordinances in purity that comes afterwards while under that constitution to be intruded upon by the sole power of the Magistrat and persecuted in officers and members for adhereing to her constitution in opposition to the intruders and the corruptions brought in upon her by them against her consent and a Church declining from her former purity in doctrine worship and government abuseing her power to the bringing in and furthering of the said defection and universally concurred with and submited to in the same The first is our casâ— concerns the state of the question betwixt us and our opposites in the charge of separation thâ—y lay on us The question then betwixt us and our adversaries is not whether we may lawfully separat from publict ordinances for the corruptions and personal miscarriages of fellow-worshipers whether ministers or others as one in a little manuscript doeth maliciously or ignorantly state it we are still of the same minde with our worthy predecessours in their debats against the Brownists and Separatists as our practice this day doeth confirme in our assemblies and meetings for worship differing in nothing as to this from what it was before Neither is it whether it be simply or in it self sinful to hear receive ordinances from these who have entered by submitted to the prelates abstract from our present case for we grant the case may be in which it is lawful yea duty to hear and receive ordinances from such yea and hath been But the true state of the question is whether a Church or Churches constitute according to the rules of the word provided and settled with ministers regularly called and submited to should yeeld to the Magistrats and Prelates violently ejecting their ministers and thrusting in other ministers upon her not only without but against her consent in subjecting to such hearing and receiving of ordinances from them while the Magistrat does all this for furthering and perfecting a course of dâ—fection contrare to solemne Covenants and oaths by which they were oftener then once ejected and cast out of this Church To this we answer negatively that the Church should not subject to such in hearing and receiving of ordinances from them but ought to disowne and withdraw from these thus entered into the Church and complying with the introduced corruptions This conclusion we prove thus First They who have no just authority nor right to officiat fixedly in this Church as the proper pastores of it ought not to be received but withdrawne from But the Prelates and their adherents the Curates have no just authority nor right to officiat in this Church as her proper pastours Therefore they ought not to be received but withdrawne from It is expected they will not deny the first proposition all the debate will be about the second which we make out thus They who have entered into and do officiat fixedly in this Church without her authority and consent have no just authority and right so to do but the Prelates and their Curats have entered into this Church and do officiat therein without her authority and consent therefore they have not just authority c. The first proposition is clear and we suppose will not be gainsaid by our Antagonists seing the power of mission of calling and sending of ordinare fixed pastours is only in the Church and not in any other as all Divines do assert The Second is evident from maters of fact for there was no Church judicatory called or convocated for bringing of the Prelats into this Church all was done immediatly by the King acts of Parliament without the Church she being by violence disenabled to meet in her officers for fear of opposition from them a practice wanting a precedent in this and for any thing we know in all other Churches Object 1. But our Prelats were consecrat by the Prelats of the Church of England Ans What signifies that to the Church of Scotland and their just right to officiat in her suppone the office of prelacie were right and institute Does any think the Church of England would acknowledge the authority of Prelats consecrat here and subject to the same if all were done not only without but against her consent we suppose not Either the Church of Scotland at that time had no power of mission or els she had if she had none wanting prelacy then our Ministers were no Ministers of Christ Jesus and all ordinances dispensed in her for many years were nullities which some of our adversaties we hope will not say if she had the power of mission how came she to be neglected and usurped upon by another Church to whom she was not subordinat Object 2. But Presbyters cannot consecrat Bishops they being an inferior order Ans if it could be shown from Scripture that Bishops are not only an Order and office different from Presbyters but that they have a different ordination to their office from that of Presbyters it would say much but nothing of this can be made to appear from the Word of God But. 2. We ask whether consecration be different from ordination If
to obey these be asserted is there not a door opened to the introduction of any Religion what soever And a power granted to and established in the Magistrat to make void all obligation of obedience to God Which to us is terrible to think on Are not our Antagonists then forced either to assert this power on the Magistrat Or els to prove the mater of these Covenants to be sinful and unjust and consequently not obligatory on this Church One of these two they must do before they can expect our obedience to the present lawes anent it We grant some of that party have undertaken this task as to the last but with so small fruit that on a serious and impartial perusal of their Argueings about it we continue more confirmed in the contrare then before the said perusal whether this proceeds from our dulness and incapacity to reach their arguments or the weakness of the same we leave it to the unbyassed to judge 3 We assert that whatever the Magistrat may do either in causing or dissolveing of Church relations and engagments yet he cannot do this immediatly and of himself but by the Church and the reason is as the fixing and establishing of Churches relations and engagments betwixt Ministers and Churches does arise and flow from Christs institutions and precepts in his word so the application of these to individuals in the Church either in causing or dissolveing them is in the Church and not in the Magistrat he may command the Church to act her part in this but cannâ—â— do it himself for the power of calling and mission belongs to the Church not to the Magistrat as all Divines ancient and moderne assert and as we suppose is sufficiently proven afterwards Arg. 4. The way of the Curats entering into Congregations puts a bar on our subjection to them that we dar not owne them for the lawful pastors of this Church for as their entry is without the Church and the way that Christ hath setled in his hous for that end so they have come in on congregations in wayes which we judge corrupt and without all warrant from the Word of God the practice of the primitive times In the search of Scripture and pure Antiquity we find that ordination by Ministers the election and call of the people was the way by which Ministers entered into congregations and not the institution and collation of the Bishop nor the presentation of Patrons which as they have their pedegry and origination from Popery a part of the tyranny of that Hierachy so they are but late human inventions derogating from vitiating the institutions of Christ about this mater and that several wayes as 1. This way of their entry by the Bishops institution and collation does suppone that their ordination does not sufficiently impower them to the exercise of the Ministery without a further licence which is contrare to the end of ordination the nature of the Ministerial power that by vertue of its ends and the commands of Christ does bind the persons invested therewith to its exercise without which he cannot prove faithful to his Master â—or attain the ends of his Ministry the conversion 〈◊〉 edification of sinners It is true the Bishops dominion in subjecting of his Creaturs to him is strengthened thereby but it everts the very end and nature of ordâ—naâ—ion that by this device is only made to give poâ—entiam remotam not proximam 2 The Paâ—â—ons presentation as it takes away the peoples right of election and consent granted them by Christ Jesus so it suppons ordination to give no right to the mantainance or at least suâ—pends it the effect of presentations being in the grant of all to give a right to the stipend which we assert according to the word to be the effect of ones being the Pastour of such a people who by divine commands are bound to maintaine him in all outward necessaries for his incouragment in the work and enabling him to do those duties both common and special which he cannot do without it To say one is the Pastour of such a congregation and yet hath not just right to the provided maintenance is against the commands of Christ and the practice of the Church in many ages But as this is amongst the many other pieces of slavery unto which men throw ambition and lost have subjected the Church of Christ so the Curats entering this way we cannot receive nor give up ourselves to them as our guids and Pastours under Châ—ist Arg 5. Mâ—ny Congregations into which the Curats are entered are under a standing obligation to their former Pastours not only on the account of the pastoral relation betwixt them but for the engagments they came under to such an their call and reception of them which is not dissolved by any thing we have yet seen sure we are the Magistraâ— can not do it Obj. Solomon for the Crime of Tâ—â—â—son Committed by Abiathar against the state banished him from Jerusalem where the Tabernacle was and Confined him to Anathoth his owne inheritance by which he habitually disinabled him from exercising the priests office Therefore Magistrats may depose and exautorat the Ministers of the Gospel Ans How wide and inconcludent is this consequence it is only said in the text 1. Kings 2 26 27. that here moved him to Anathoth which is but a Civil sentence Obj. 2. It is said vers 27. that Solomon thrust him out from being priest unto the Lord. Ans Solomon did this consecutive and not formaliter it was a necessare consequent of his deserved sentence of banishment to which he was bound on the justice of the sentence to yeeld and submit a consequent that will necessarlie follow on the deeds of others to whom our adversaries will not grant the formal power of exautorating of Ministers suppone a man by smiting or a physician by administring unwholsome physick do habitually disinable a Minister to the exercise of his ministrie will it therefore follow that he doeth depose him from his ministrie or hath the formal power of so doing No wayes And seing the Scripture is plaine in shewing the accomplishment of the Lords word spoken against the house of Elie by Samuel in removing of Abiather and in him Elie's house from the High-priest-hood and also the way how it was done not by a formal sentence of deprivation devesting Abiather of his office but by a civil sentence of confinement to Anathoth that necessarly remoâ—ed him from the Tabernacle and disinabled him to â—o his office there why do men contend But ambition to gaine its designe will keep at any hold how weak soever Obj. 3. As this deed of Solomons did discharge Abiather of his former tyes and obligations to the exercise of this office in the Tabernacle and opened a door for bringing in another priest in his roome so we think the Magistrats sentence now does the same to the ejected ministers seing they are bound to submit to