An animadversion to Mr Richard Clyftons advertisement Who under pretense of answering Chr. Lawnes book, hath published an other mans private letter, with Mr Francis Iohnsons answer therto. Which letter is here justified; the answer therto refuted: and the true causes of the lamentable breach that hath lately fallen out in the English exiled Church at Amsterdam, manifested, by Henry Ainsworth.

The first point of difference: in the Letter.

1. Wheras we had learned and professed, that * 1.1 Christ hath given the power to receiv in or to cut off any member, to the whole body to∣gither of every Congregation, and not to any one, or moe members sequestred from the whole: now wee have been lately taught, that the Church which Christ sendeth to, for the redress of synns Mat. 18.17. is not to be understood of the whole body of the Congregation, but of the Church of Elders. And it being granted of al, that with the Church is the power, the Elders being the Church, have the power, and so not the whol body of the congregation togither.

And in the copie vvhich Lavvne printed.

The 24. Article [of the Confession of our faith,] (confirmed in our A∣pologie, pag. 60.62.63.) professeth that the povver to receiv in, or to cut off any member, is given to the whole body togither of every Christian Congregation, Mat. 18.17. &c. These have pleaded for the Eldership to be the Church, Mat. 18. and to have both rightful power and able power to excommunicate, though without & against the consent of the body of the Congregation.

The scriptures to confirm our former doctrine and practise, are in our Confession, Psal. 122.3. Act. 2.47. Rom. 16.2. Mat. 18.17. 1. Cor. 5.4. 2. Cor. 2.6.7.8. Levit. 20.4.5. & 24. 14. Num. 5▪ 2.3. Deut. 13.9.

The reasons in our Apologie are nine, the first referring to proofs of former positions, the other 8, confirmed by sundry arguments doctrines & practises gathered from the Prophetical and Apostolical scriptures.

For ansvver hereunto, their Advertisement telleth vs many things. First of their Treatise published on Mat. 18.17. touching vvhich, I also have spoken before. Neyther is this point of the Churches power therin plainly handled, but closely caried: neyther is ther any thing at al sayd, to take avvay the other 8. reasons, in our Apologie. Let the reader compare the writings, and judge. There be also

things formerly written both by others and by them selves, touch∣ing this of Mat. 18. and things lately published against M. Bernard about it: to these they give no answer at al, yet cal they upon us to write more.

2. Secondly they carp at this phrase, the Church of Elders; and would have it the Congregation or Assemble of Elders: saying that so men might sooner perceiv the vanitie of our error. And that I my self elswhere shew the word is sometime used for an Assemblie of Elders. I answer; 1. If they wil rase the word Church, out of the Bible, as unfit, they may doo so in Mat. 18. and in this controversie: or els they must give us leav, to keep wonted known words, which help men to discern the truth of matters. 2. Neyther shew they any one scripture for the phrase they would have, the Congregation of El∣ders: neyther did I ever shew or could see the word Church so to mean in al the new Testament: but in the old (which now is chan∣ged,) I have observed it in some few places. 3. But be it Church or Congregation, I wil not much contend: yet I know their eyes wil da∣zel that look hereby to discern in our doctrine eyther vanity or error. Albeit I confess these our opposites, have the Papists on their side; for so Card▪ Bellarmine † 1.2 expoundeth this Tel the Church, that is the Prelate, or the Congregation of Prelates; & * 1.3 Stapleton interpreteth the Church, Mat. 18. to be the Ministers. 3. Thirdly, they observe that the scriptures of the old testament are quoted for our 24. Ar∣ticle, as directly carying us for this matter to the Church of Jsrael; which now we would not be brought unto. &c. I answer; the first is true, for the scriptures cited doo shew that the people were interessed in those publike actions with their magistrates: and therfore there is no reason that now there ministers should claym the whole power to themselves. The latter is untrue; for we did consider and decide the matter between us, by the scriptures of the old Testament, compared with the new, and so are stil ready to doo. But alwayes with ob∣serving the differences between the state of the church then & now; which are many, as the Apostles doo teach us. Heb. 8. & 9. & 10. chapters. Gal. 4.1.2.3. &c. Heb. 12.1••.—28.

4. Their last observation hath two branches: the 1. that the power of receiving in & cutting off in Jsrael, was to be performed according to order; and not to weaken but to stablish thhe Elders authoritie. This we

willingly grāt: neither ever doubted of. But we observ withal, a de∣ceyt which they couch under this name Elders: which usually in the old Testament, is given to Magistrates▪ which are also caled in re∣spect of their autoritie Lords, Princes, Judges, yea and Gods, 1. Sam. 23.12. Num. 21.18. & 22.7.8. Deut. 19.17.18. Exod. 21.6. Psal. 8 2. and by the Apostles they are caled ••owers (or Autorities) and Glories, (or Dignities,) Tit. 3.1. 2. Pet. 2.10. But the name Elders, now in the Church of Christ is given to the Ministers, 1. Pet. 5.1. who are for∣bidden to exercise autoritie, or to be as Lords over Gods heritage, or to be caled by such stately titles, Mat. 20.25.26. 1. Pet. 5.1. Luk. 22.25.26. They streyn therfore too farr, vvhich wil proportion the authoritie and power of the Elders that should stand and minister to the Church (as † 1.4 did the Preists and Levites:) with the autoritie of the Elders the Magistrates, that * 1.5 late and judged in the gates. 2. The second branch of their observation is, that we must not be strangers from the policie of Jsrael; Ephe. 2.12. &c. I answer, by politie, they mean not, I hope, the inward faith which Israel had: but the outward order of administring in that Church: otherweise they reason neyther properly nor to the question in hand. Yea in this very place the Apostle distinguisheth the politie, from the covenants of promise. And so I deny that wee are bound now to keep the poli∣tie of Israel; neyther dooth the Apostle mean any such thing. For he putteth the Ephesians in mind of their estate being paynims, when they were * 1.6 uncircumcised, without Christ, without Israels politie, without covenāts of promise, without hope, without God. But now in Christ they were united & brought neer; but wherunto, to circumcision? nay, he sayth elswhere, “ 1.7 if they were circumcised Christ should profit them nothing? or, to the ordinances of worship in the Tem∣ple? nay, for he sayth † 1.8 we have an aultar, wherof they have no authoritie to eat, which serv in the tabernacle. Or were they now to goe up, as * 1.9 did the Tribes to the earthly Ierusalem, where thrones of judgment were set, thrones for the howse of David? nothing so, for Christ was ‘† 1.10 to destroy both Citie & Sanctuarie; so to force the Iewes to an end of their po∣litie. But now the Ephesians were come ؛؛ 1.11 unto the Father, by one Spi∣rit, and unto Christ, who † 1.12 abrogated through his flesh the hatred, that is, the law of cōmandements, which stood in ordinances; and was * 1.13 faith∣ful, as Moses, in al his house: and to be citizens with ‘† 1.14 the Saincts

and howshold of God; which are built, not upon Moses politie that is doon away, but upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, that is the † 1.15 doctrine which they taught of Christ and of the ordinan∣ces of his Testament, which is * 1.16 a kingdome that cannot be shakē, as was the cōmon-wealth of Israel according to the flesh. Look therefore what politie the Apostles have taught and taken from the Law; or Moses & the Prophets foretold should continue under the Gospel, so much wil we reteyn, the rest we leav to Iewes & Iewishly affected. And these are the things which they have answered to the first ob∣jection in the Letter: which whither they have proved the Elders now under the Gospel to be the Church which is to judge of syn and synners, and to have power as the Church, in their own hands; let al indifferent men judge: as also what cause they had to conclude that we oppose against Jsrael, Moses and the Prophets, and to cry out a∣gainst us as they doo, that such is our error, and so great is our trans∣gression and iniquitie. But because of the printed copie, they set up∣on us afresh, with many observations, and questions, and by matters, with longsomnes ynough: wheras a few sound arguments, would much better have cleared the controversie, and contented the rea∣der. They † 1.17observ 1. that the scriptures of the old Testament are quoted in our Article, as wel as of the new. 2. That Mat. 18. is to agree with the other scriptures cited. 3. That it must be understood with proportion to the manner in Jsrael. 4. That therfore their understanding is according to the ancient faith; and not ours, who would make them strangers from Jsrael, and would perswade them that Christs doctrine in Mat. 18.17. is a new rule &c.

I answer; these are in effect the things we heard before, and which in my answers I have partly granted, partly refuted. 1. The pro∣portion they speak of, is a disproportion concluding from Magistrates authoritie in the Common••wealth▪ to Ministers in the Church; which is against Christs doctrine Mat. 20.25.26. And if they wil not learn it of Christ, they may learn it of Cato, an alien from the common wealth both of Israel and of Christ, who yet sayd to such * 1.18 Jt becomes yow to be mindfull of your condition, that yow are not Magis∣trates but Ministers. 2. It is a mayn pillar of Poperie, to proportion the Church now, in the outward politie to Israel. The Rhemists would have the † 1.19 the see of Rome, in the new law, to be answera∣ble to the chair of Moses. Cardinal Bellarmine “ 1.20 maketh his first ar∣gument for the Popes judging of controversies, from the Preist &

Judge that was appointed in the Law, Deut. 17. And as Moses sate as Prince of the Church, and gave answer to al doubts arising about the Law of God, Exod. 18. so by proportion † 1.21 he wil have now in the papacie. And in deed, for show, the papists proportion to have one supreme court above al, to end weighty causes and ap∣peals; more resembleth Israel, then dooth these mens Eldership in every particular Church. 3. It is an argument that others (except papists) have disclaymed. D. Bilson, (whose learning and goodwil hath holpen the prelacie as much as any mans, and whose understanding of Mat. 18.17. these our opposites in some points doo now follow,) he ؛; 1.22 confesseth that to reason from the Magistrate to the minister, from the sword to the word, from the law to the Gospel &c. the leap is so great, that cart-ropes wil not tye the conclusion to the premisses. ‘† 1.23 D. Whitakers, {punctel}; 1.24 D. Iunius, and others, refuting the Papists, disalow the reasons drawn from the law, and magistra∣cie of Israel; which these our opposers make their cheifest bulwark. M. Cartwright answering D. Whitgift, sayth * 1.25 the argument is not good from civil government to ecclesiastical. When Bellarmine “ 1.26 allegeth the civil Monarchies to justify the ecclesiastical: Iunius answereth, the ؛; 1.27 exāple is altogither unlike, of temporal empire and spiritual ministery: be∣tween these, there is not, neyther ought, neyther can a proportion or comparison be rightly made. 4. It is an argument that is yet hid, and by our opposites themselves unmanifested how the proportion they speak of, shal be shaped. For in Israel ther were Magistrates in the cities, & Preists and Levits, in the Tabernacle, and Ministers in the Synagogues. Let them shew us who now are proportionable to the Magistrates, who to the Preists; and who to the Ministers in the synagogues. The Magistrates also were of sundry sorts, as * 1.28 Elders, Heads, Judges, & Officers. The Judges agayn differing both in num∣ber and power. In † 1.29 all the cities throughout the tribes, were Jud∣ges, (which the Iew••doctors call the ‘† 1.30 lesser Sanhedrin or Session, and say it consisted of 23. Iudges,) and ‘* 1.31 Officers which “ 1.32 they say were weaponed, and executed the Iudges sentences. In the cheif City * 1.33 Ierusalem were also Iudges and Preists, for the weightiest and hard causes: this * 1.34 they caled the great Sanhedrin, or Session, and it had * 1.35 71. Iudges, of whom first Moses was cheif, and suc∣sessively, one caled * 1.36 Nasi the Prince, next whom they place * 1.37 A••¦beth di••••, the Father of the judgment hall, besides other officers as

two Scribes to write the causes of the condemned & the absolved: ‘† 1.38 Sh••lc••••h ••••th din, the Messenger (or Angel) of the Court, even as ther was also in other cases Shelia••h ••sibbur, the Messenger or Angel of the Church or Congregation, in the synagogues: wherunto it may be thought that in Rev. 2.1. &c. hath allusion. Agayn they make an other court ‘*’ 1.39 of three, for lesser strifes and mony matters▪ caled d••ies m••••monoth: the lower Synedrion of 23. judged matters of life and death di••••i nephashoth: & the high Senate of 71. judged weigh∣tiest matters of state, of warrs, of a Tribe, of a False prophet, of appeals brought &c. Also among the Preists and Levits, ther were * 1.40 divers orders and functions, some chief, some inferior, some ministring in the sanctuary by course, some overseers and judges, some Musicians, some Tresurers, some Porters &c. In the syna∣gogues ther were ‘† 1.41 alwayes lecturers and preachers of the law and prophets, in every citie, and in Ierusalem it self were * 1.42 many syna∣gogues, besides the Temple there. Now they that would pro∣portion their power with Israel, showld shew whither they mean al these fore-spokē, or but some. They should tel us to whō the Pastor is proportionable, to whome the Teacher, to whom the ruling Elders. And seing they wil have that rule in Mat. 18. to be as it was in Israel, they should tel us to which of those Synedrions, or Preists, or Rulers, Christ sendeth. Whiles these things are not clea∣red, but we are told generally of a p••oportion with Israel, we are led as in the clowds; and know not into what errours we may fall.

5. They referr us in the beginning of their Treatise on Mat. 18.17. to a place in Mat. 5.22.23. &c▪ where Christ (they say) teacheth the offending brother how to cary himself, as in Mat. 18.15. &c. he dooth the brother offended: & that in both places Christ sheweth to whom the offender may be brought, viz, to the Church or Congregation Mat. 18.17. to the Sy∣nedrion or sitting of Elders, Mat. 5.22. which must be eyther all one with the other, or ells how should his hearers then understand him, or these things then be observed, or these two places be reconciled?

I answer; Christ might farr better be understood then, then our opposites may now: his words are cleare, but not to the purpose that they cite them. Christ there speaketh not of men judging on earth, but of Gods judging in heaven. For men had not power to condemn to * 1.43 hel fyre, there spoken of: neyther could they by Mo∣ses law, condemn a man to death for unadvised anger, as Christ there

God would doo: neyther was every mā, that caled his brother Ra∣ka, to be brought to the Synedrion at Ierusalem, the lesser courts in the cities, could hear and end such matters. The Iew Doctors say, † 1.44that such as bring an evil same on their neighbours, were to be judg∣ed, by the Court of 3. or by that of the 23. but for the high Synedrion, both they and Moses “ 1.45 law shew it was for the more weighty and difficult cases. Our saviour in Mat. 5. interprets the law otherweise then did the scribes. They sayd, ‘† 1.46 whosoever killeth shalbe culpable of judgment, that is, he should ‘* 1.47 dye by Gods law: and further then outvvard actual murder they went not. But Christ sheweth 3. kinds of kylling otherweise then with the hand: the least wherof, even * 1.48unadvised anger, should be punished with death by God; and as it did increase and shevv it self in evil speeches, so should their punish∣ment be increased in hel: which he setteth down by allusion to the sundry civil judgments in Israel. And so he procedeth to teach men the true keeping of the law, by love and reconciliation; with∣out which they should be cast into a 1.49 the prison of hel: how ever such synns were not punishable by men. But in Mat. 18. Christ speak∣keth of judgments b 1.50 on earth, in this life; and that not of the civil punishments by the Magistrates sword; but of c 1.51 binding and loosing by the word of God, to be performed by d 1.52 the Church, that is, (as Paul e 1.53 sheweth) the ecclesiastical assembly gathered in Christs name. Wherfore the church in Mat. 18▪17. is not the Synedrion in Mat. 5.22. as these would have it. Or if it be, then is it meant of the Magi∣strates, and not of the church ministers, unto whom these would now draw it. For, were * 1.54 the Ministers and preachers of the law in the synagogues; judges in the synedrion? Sheliach Isibbur, Ange∣lus ecclesiae, the messenger of the Congregation, was he the cheif of the sy∣nedrion, as the Pastor (vvho they say is Angelus ecclesiae) is now cheif in the Eldership? If Christ must needs speak to the understanding of the Ievves, and order his Church like their cōmon vvealth; ther must be more then one court or Synedrion; and he could not give that to f 1.55 2. or 3. gathered any vvhere in his name, vvhich belong∣ed to the Senate of the Realm.

6. So vvheras they say we would perswade them Christs doctrine in Mat. 18.17. is a new rule which Jsrael had not: I think it wilbe good for them to yeild unto this persvvasion. For the Elders in Israel, to vvhom they g 1.56 referr us, by Psal. 82. Josh. ••0.4.5.6. Num. 35, 12.24.25.

29. Deut. 19.11.12.16.17. and other like places, being Magistrates, that had povver of life and death; if Christ sendeth unto such, the Ministers of the Church, I hope vvil not intrude into their places. Wherfore eyther let them acknovvledge the * 1.57 nevv Testament, to have nevv rules and ordinances: and that the kingdome being changed aswel as the Preisthood, there must needs be † 1.58a change of the law therof also: or els, let them leave it to the Magistrate, vnto vvhom it belongeth.

Next this, they give us “ 1.59 a distinction between the sentence of excō∣munication, and between the execution therof. As in Jsrael, the Elders, & Preists, had a rightful power to giue out the sentence of death & of leprosie ac∣cording to the law, without asking the peoples consent, yea though it should have been without and against it; Deut. 1.16. & 17.8.12. & 24.8. with 2. Chrō. 26.16.20. Levit. 13. &c. and then it was for the people to perform the execu∣tion accordingly: so the Elders now may by office give out the sentence of excō∣munication according to the law of God, & the people should accordingly put it in execution, by avoiding the excōmunicate persons til they repent. I answer; this comparison is faulty many wayes. First, it speaketh onely of a rightful power, wheras the thing they should answer to, is both right∣ful and able power, as themselves once distinguished: or let them say, whether the Church that Christ sendeth to for redress of syn, hath not able power to excōmunicate. 2. Secondly it matcheth the power of the Ministers in spiritual things, with the power of the Magi∣strates in civil things: which what is it, but to make the one Lords spiritual, as the other are Lords temporal; according to the Popish hierarchie? 3. Thirdly it misseth in the proportion of the Preists judging leprosie; for Gods law in Lev. 13.2. is, that the suspected person should be brought to Aarō the Preist or to one of his sons the Preists; and the * 1.60Preist should look, and pronounce him unclean, or clean, as he discerned it. The proportion hereto now, is one Bishop or Minister, rather than a Church of Ministers: for if one Preist might judge then, why may not one Minister judge now? Doe not the Papists, which † 1.61allege this very example, and apply it to one Preist: make a fitter proportiō, then they that deny this power unto one, and yet apply it unto many? 4. Fourthly, thus farr I grant this proportion, that as every Preist then might according to the law, declare what was leprosie: so every Minister now, may and ought by the law to declare what is syn and heresie; and this though it be

without and against the consent of the Church & of all the world. Ezek. 3.17,—21.2. Tim. 4..1.2. Tit. 1.9. But as then, not the preist onely, but the * 1.62 children of Israel, put every leper out of the host: so now, not the minister onely, but the childrē of Christ, the church, are to ‘* 1.63 put the wicked out frō among them, as the Apostle shew∣eth. 5. Fiftly, if the Elders the Magistrates, might (as these men say) give sentence of death against a man, though without and against the peoples consent; & then it was for the people to perform the execution: then that people, I say, were in great subjection and servitude to their Elders, that must execute that man, to whose death they cō∣sented not: and to shape the Ministers power now accordingly, is to make them Lords, and the Church their subjects and servants: yea the Pope himself never had men in greater slaverie. I know, when Gods law condemned a man, if it were shewed by all or any one of the Iudges, or Preists, or Prophets, yea or Israelites; the peo∣ple should in order have executed him: but oft times the heads of the people a 1.64 judged for rewards, the Princes b 1.65 as Lions, the Iudges as Wolves devoured them, the Preists polluted the sanctuarie, and wrested the law. And then the people of the land, c 1.66 whose duty al∣so it was to look to open wickednes, were neyther to folow d 1.67 the many nor mighty in evil. And that the Iudges had power to put any man to death, whom the people judged innocent, I find not, but would see it proved. I find how in Naboths case (though it were a wicked fact,) ther was e 1.68 a solemn fast and assemblie of the people with the governours: how in Ieremies case, he was accused f 1.69 to the Princes and people, made his defense to princes and peo∣ple, and was acquitted by princes and people. When g 1.70 King Saul sware that Ionathan should dye; the people sware the contrary, & saved him from death: when the high preists & scribes would have kylled Christ, they feared the people, Luk. 20.19. & 22.2. and the people as wel as the rulers, were caled before Pilate about Christs death, Luk. 23.13. and by their voices prevayled, Mat. 27.20.22.25.26. Luk 23.23. So that to prove the Ministers sole power now, for to cut off a man from the Church, by the Magistrates power then to cut off a man from Israel, neyther is the proportion just, if it were so, neyther yet is it manifested that so it was in Israel. 6. Sixtly, the proportion which they here make, is so misshapen; that I marvel wise men would ever bring it forth to the view of the

world. For they make the avoiding of the excommunicated person by the people, to be the executing of the sentence of excommunication; wher∣as this censure is properly executed by him that in the name of Christ and with consent of the Church, delivereth the wicked man to Satan, as the Apostle willeth, 1. Cor. 5. which being doon, the man is certaynly excommunicated, whither the people avoyd his com∣pany or not. And if they otherweise here understand the word execution; they doo but deceiv the reader with an aequivocation.

This their other example of the sentence of death, and the execution therof, wil plainly manifest. For Pilate ‘†’ 1.71 gave sentence of death upon Christ; the ‘*’ 1.72 souldjers that kylled him with nayles and spear, they executed the sentence of death, as we commonly speak and understand. Then “ 1.73 Ioseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, embaulmed him with myrrh, wound him in a sheet, and layd him in grave: shal we say that these two now were the executioners of Christ; because they caryed themselves towards him as towards a dead man? Or if any refreyned from touching a dead man that had been hanged, least by him they ‘* 1.74should be polluted: did they here by execute him? No more doo they properly execute the sentence of excommunication, which avoyd the company of one excommunica∣ted. 7. But because al the weight of their wrested proportion frō Israel, is couched herein: let us look upon it a litle more. In their Treatise on Mat. 18. there † 1.75 they say: in Jsrael, such as would not hear∣ken to the Preists and Judges, were to dye by the hands of the people, Deut. 17. Agayn they say, * 1.76 delivering to Satan, in 1. Cor. 5. is in sted of death in Jsrael. Levit. 20.11. By this, one would think, that the people now should deliver a wicked man to Satan, when the Elders have judged him worthy: otherweise, how stands the proportion? But they mean nothing less: for a litle after, they “ 1.77 tel vs, in the Churches excommu∣nication, ther is the giving of a sentence judiciarie, which perteyneth to govern∣ment and authority; there is also in particular, a delivering to Satan, by the power of our Lord Jesus Christ &c. which likewise implieth authority; & that it is proportionably answerable to the taking away by death &c, that it is a spe∣cial use of the keyes given by Christ to the Apostles; that the force herof is such, as therby a man is not onely cast out of that particular Church wherof he was a member, but is cutt off & excluded from all churches vpon earth: as on the contrary by baptisme, wee are entred into communion with al Churches of Christ in the world. By these things compared togither, we may

observ: 1. that the church elders may by their sole authoritie give judiciarie sentence, that a man shalbe excommunicated: answerable to the Magistrates in Israel, that gave sentence a man should be put to death. 2. That the Elders may also by authoritie in particu∣lar deliver a man to Satan by the power of Christ; which is proportiona∣bly answerable to the taking away by death: which in Israel, themselves grant, was to be doon by the hands of the people. Thus doo the Elders now chalenge by proportion in the Church, that which be∣longed both to Magistrates and people in the cōmon wealth. But because they fear the † 1.78 people, they shape them this deceitful pro∣portion, that their avoyding the excommunicate person, is the executing (or putting in execution, as they ambiguously speak) of the sentence: answerable to the peoples stoning of a malefactor in Israel; how fit∣ly, let al that have understanding judge. For whether the people avoid him or not, the man is judged and delivered to Satan, and so cut off from the church: as on the contrary, when one is bapti∣sed by the minister, whether the people keep company with him or not, he is made a member of the church: and as a man behead∣ed in Israel, was surely dead, whether the people refreyned from touching him or no. 2. Agayn they give no more to the people of that Church wherof he is a member, then to the people of all o∣ther churches, that are bound to avoid the excōmunicated person, as wel as they. 3. Yea they give hereby their people no more power, then the Pope dooth to his marked servants; for he also wil have the people avoyd such as he dooth excōmunicate: and if this be the boasted right and libertie of the people, they had as much in the greatest bondage of poperie, as now when they are caried thus blindfold by propertions. But they tel the people, † 1.79 that if any can except against the Elders proceedings they shalbe heard. I answer, First before whom and unto whom, shal any man except against the Elders: is it not before and unto the Elders themselves? And is it meet that they should be judges in their own cases? In Israel when any complayned of wrong in the Synagogues or Cities, ther was an * 1.80higher Court to control unruly Elders, and to help the oppressed. But now 2. or 3. Elders in a Church, bearing themselves upon their forged authoritie from Mat. 18.17.20. may be lawless; and who shal let them in their proceedings? Secondly, how should the people except, when by these mens doctrine, they are not bound

to be present at the hearing and deciding of the controversie: wil it not be a just blame upon them, if they except against a matter, which they have not heard discussed? Thirdly, when the party ac∣cused shal except against the Elders proceedings, (as commonly he wil doo, for if he acknowledged himself to have synned, he should not need to be excōmunicated:) may the people now re∣quire to hear the case debated between the Elders and him? nay, they plead in their Treatise on Math. 18. saying, * 1.81 But where hath the Lord appointed a rule of further proceeding, beyond that of the Elders & governours, for hearing the brethrens causes, and judging between a man and his brother? &c. And agayn, the Elders also are the Churches officers, &c. so as when they have heard, examined, admonished, and iudged according to the word of God, it is to be estemed as doon by the Lord and the Church &c. Thus let the mā except what he wil, the judgm^t is at an end, the Lo: hath doon it, the Church hath doon it, because the Elders have doon it: and it must be presupposed, that they have doon it according to the word of God, though the man except never so much: and though the scriptures foreshew of judges that were † 1.82wolves not sparing the flock, and latter dayes abundantly confirm the same. And thus when a Naboth is condemned by wicked Elders, if any except on his behalf, they wil * 1.83take him in a snare that reproveth in the gate: perhaps he shal hear it sayd, by what authoritie doo you speak? &, are you one of the Church spoken of in the 1••. of Matthew? for the Elders have power to deal with him also that shal except, and can easily bring him within the compass of a contentious person, or an oppugner of gover∣ment, and cast him likeweise out of the Church; that a man some∣time were as good take a Lion by the paw, as except against the El∣ders proceedings.

Next folow their many questions; and other matters imputed unto us: wherein we observ how when arguments fayl them for their own cause, they seek to darken the truth, by casting clowds before the readers eyes. 1. First they ask, whither in Jsrael the Lord abridged the people of their right and libertie &c. I answer, No: but these men that by wrested proportions, give the ministers of the church, the power that Magistrates, Preists and people had in Isra∣el; doe abridge the people of their right, as before is manifested.

And for the further clearing of it, seing ther were diverse gover∣nours in Israel, as the ‘*’ 1.84 Preists and Levites in the Temple; the

† 1.85ministers in the synagogues; the ‘†’ 1.86 Elders or Magistrates at the gates of the cities, and these also divers and of unequal power, as before ‘*’ 1.87 is shewed: I ask of them agayn, whither now the Elder∣ship of every church, be proportionable in power and goverment, unto al those governours: and if not unto al, unto which of them?

2. Secondly they ask, whither the people have any more right and au∣thoritie in the churches goverment now, then the people of Jsrael had in those dayes. I answer, they should not seek to intangle by ambiguitie of terms. First, we give not to the people goverment, as before ‘†’ 1.88 I have shewed, but a right and power to ‘*’ 1.89 observ and doo al the com∣mandements of Christ, touching his prophetical preistly and kingly office, by the Elders teaching guiding and governing of them in the Lord. 2. The goverm^t in Israel was diverse, by Magistrates in the gate, by Preists in the sanctuarie, by ministers in the syna∣gogues. To the Magistracie, al Christians are to be subject “ 1.90 now, as they were then: for it is an ‘†’ 1.91 humane ordinance, tending to civil peace, and concerneth al men whither within the church or without, indifferently. The external Preisthood of Israel, is ac∣complished in Christ and now abolished, Heb. 7. yet in Davids Kingdom, and Levies preisthood, ther was * 1.92 a figure also of the kingdom and preisthood that ‘*’ 1.93 Christ bestoweth on the saincts. Who have as much more power and libertie in the Gospel now, than the Iewes had; as the heyr when he is of yeres, hath more then in his childhood; Gal 4.1.2.3. yet alwayes in order, and with sub∣mission to the ministerial goverment of their ‘*’ 1.94 Leaders. And I ask of these agayn, whither the Christian Magistrates now, are not to have their voices with the ministers of the church wherof they are, in the admonishing & censuring of synners ecclesiastically, and in other publik questions and controversies of religion.

3. Thirdly they ask, Whether the people of Jsrael were not Kings and Preists &c. as wel as the Christian people are now, Exod. 19.5. Psal. 149.1. &c. with 1. Pet. 2.9.10. Rev. 1.6. I answer, first as touching the cōmunication of their external kingdom and preisthood, it is evident, that the Israelites were not so the natural seed of David & of Levi, as Christians now are the spiritual seed of them in Christ, Jer. 33, 22. Secondly, for communication with the spiritual king∣dom and preisthood of Christ by them shadowed, the Israelites were Kings and Preists as well as we, but with differences. For Is∣raels

state and ours, are not simply opposed, yet doo they differ in manner & degree. They were Kings and Preists as they were Chris∣tians, and partakers of the Anoynting, and that is, as they were under the nevv Testament. But they were † 1.95 not so under it as we are: neyther are we so under the old Testament as were they. They were heyres of the heavenly things, but as children, and so (as Paul * 1.96sayth) under tutors and governours, & in servitude under the rudiments of the world, until the time appointed of the Father, that is until Christs comming. The scriptures which they quote, doo confirm this. For the promise in Exodus 19.5.6. is legal, if they kept Gods cove∣nant; as in another place “ 1.97 if they did his statutes, they should live by them, which Paul a 1.98 sheweth to be a speech of the law, not of the gos∣pel. Now that condition, Israel b 1.99 kept not, neyther c 1.100 could: ther∣fore not the law, but Christ hath made us Kings and Preists, Rev. 1.5.6. and until Christ came, Israel was kept under the law, as under a d 1.101 scholemaster, & had an external preisthood, which could give them no e 1.102 perfection, and therfore is abolished, and our state much bettered, as is shewed at large, Heb. 12.18, 19, 20.21, 22. &c. as the prophets also foretold, Jsa. 61, 5, 6. Jer. 33, 15.—22. Mal. 3.3.4. & of this estate under the gospel, is the 149. psalm a prophesie, (though in their mesure they then also fulfilled it,) and the place of Peter confirmeth it. Whereunto we may add the testimonie of the Iewes Rabbies touching their estate, vnder that scholemaster of the law. † 1.103With three crownes (say they) was Jsrael crowned: with the the crown of the law, and the crown of the preisthood, and the crown of the kingdom. The crown of the preisthood was bestowed upon Aaron and his seed, Num. 25.13. The crown of the kingdom, was bestowed on David and his seed, Ps. 89.36. The crown of the law, loe it is appointed stablished and confirmed unto all Jsrael, as it is written, Moses cōmanded vs a law, the inheritance of the congregation of Ja••kob. In that they al had the law to use so freely, & were so restreyned frō the kingdom & Preisthood; it argueth their childhood: yet might they see by faith their inheritance in those types: how all Christians should by participation of Christs * 1.104 an∣oynting, be that seed of David and of Levi, promised Jer. 33.22. Rev. 5.9.10. & 20, 6. And here I also ask of our opposers, whither the Ministers of the Gospel, be Kings and Preists now, by their office of ministery in the Church.

4. Fourthly they ask, whether the Churches power be not a ministerial

power onely. I answer, the power it self is * 1.105 Christs; and so royal or kingly: but al that the Church dooth, is onely to administer that power, under Christ. And I ask of them agayn, whether they think the Elders have the whole power, which Christ hath given to his Church.

5. Fiftly they ask, whether the Elders power be not ministerial, under the Lord, in and for the Church. &c. I answer, an ambiguous questi∣on cannot be answered til it be cleared. First this word power is large, and they must shew how they limit it: for by comparing this question with the former, they seem to put al the Churches power into the ministers hand; which I deny. They have also misshapen the proportion of their power from the Magistrates of Israel, as be∣fore we have heard; contrary to Christs commandement, Mat. 20, 25, 26. 1. Pet. 5.3. Secondly the vvord ministerial is also diversly u∣sed: in a special sense, the Officers onely are caled “ 1.106 Ministers; in a general sense the whole Church are † 1.107 Ministers, and doo admi∣nister and dispose the manifold graces of God: & the word Cohen, Preist, given to all saincts, dooth properly signify a Minister. Third∣ly for the Elders function, I grant it to be ministerial under the Lord, in and for the Church; but also unto, yea and under the Church secon∣darily, as the * 1.108 spowse of Christ, in that sense that Paul speaketh, the spirits of the Prophets are subiect to the Prophets, 1. Cor. 14, 32. And I ask of them agayn, whether the Ministers of the Christian “ 1.109 syna∣gogues now, have any more authoritie, then had the Ministers in the Iewes synagogues, or then they to whom it was sayd, Serv the Lord your God, & his people Jsrael. 2. Chron. 35, 3. Ezek. 44.11. But here (before they have our answer) they conclude, that therfore ther is no weight in our obiections about the Elders power, as if it were not the chur∣ches &c. I answer, first they conclude not the question set down in the article, but because it was too heavy, they leav it and turn to other matters. Secondly they conclude with an aequivocation in this word power, which is not in the same sense to be applied to the Elders, as it is to the body of the Church. Thirdly the Iesuites doo in this wise conclude also for the Pope. For the power & govern∣ment vvhich they dispute for, is not “ 1.110 absolute, but such (they say) as may be in ministers and stewards, 1. Cor. 4, 1. And that the povver vvhich the Pope and prelates execute, should be the Churches povver, it is the thing that they † 1.111 vvould have. So vvheras our op∣posites

tel us of the Elders power that in deed it is the Churches; the papists also tel us the same: but the more is their syn that deprive the Church of it, by ingrossing it into their own hands alone; thus did the Pope clime by steps unto his primacie. And it is (say they) to be ministred by the Officers: but not (say I) by them onely; therin is the deceyt. The whole Church is a * 1.112 kingdom of Preists, that is of ministers: who are to be † 1.113 guided and governed by their Officers, (caled also “ 1.114 ministers in more special manner,) for the holy and orderly practise of the power. And thus the Prophets foretold the state of the Christian Church, saying, ؛ † 1.115 strangers shal stand and feed your sheep, and the sonns of strangers shalbe your plowmen and dressers of your vines; but ye shalbe named the Preists of the Lord, & men shal say unto you, The Ministers of our God. Where the Officers of the Church are cō∣pared to pastours & husbandmen, (as the new testament also † 1.116 cō∣firmeth,) vvhich should be of the converted Gentiles: and the Church it self, is the Lords * 1.117 preisthood, and his Ministers.

Sixtly they ask, whither we in the Churches goverment, as the Ana∣baptists in the sacraments would not make them aliens from the cōmon wealth of Jsrael, &c. I answer, this was in their fourth observation before, and ‘* 1.118there is by me answered, I trust without absurdity, or ungodly∣nes, errors or evils, all which they here insinuate against us, for to fyll up their mesure. But here agayn the reason deceiveth the reader, for in sted of cōmon-wealth or politie, they bring in one body, one Lord, one faith of theirs and ours: &c. Ephe. 2. &c. Al this we grant: but the outward politie & goverment, we deny to be the same, it being chan∣ged by Christ both for Citie & Sanctuarie, Dan. 9.26. There was al∣wayes one Lord & faith of the Church: but not alwayes one politie. The kingdom and preisthood were first executed by one person, as in a 1.119 Melchisedek: afterward these functions were divided, & Kings might b 1.120 not doo the Preists work. Also the civil government in Isra∣el was c 1.121 changeable, somtime without a King, sometime with one: yea sometime by hethen Kings, as Nebuchadnezar, Cyrus, &c, to whom the Israelites were bound d 1.122 to be subject, but not so in their sacraments: that ther is no just consequence to be drawn frō the one of these to the other. We rather may ask of our oppo∣sites, whether they as the e 1.123 Papists would not draw us frō the testa∣ment of Christ, (vvho was f 1.124 faithful as Moses in al his house,) to the Ievvish politie novv abolished. And let them tell us vvhether ther

may be novv Archbishops, over other Bishops and Ministers, as in Israel there were Archpreists * 1.125 over other Preists and Levites; or a superior court † 1.126 to hear the appeals from particular synagogues & cities now, as was then: and whether the ministers of the Church, now, may be captayns of politik armies, as ‘* 1.127 Benajah son of Ie∣hojada the cheif Preist, was general of the feild in Ioabs room? Such orders have been heretofore in Israel.

Seventhly they ask, why we speak not of our selves, what we pleaded to be the church spoken of Mat. 18, 17. &c. I answer, because our plea is already set forth in sundry books, as the ‘† 1.128 Discovery, the “ 1.129 Re••i∣tation of M. Gifford, the ‘* 1.130 Apologie, ؛* 1.131 the Treatise of the Ministerie a∣gainst M. Hildersh the ؛† 1.132 Answer to White &c. And I ask of them agayn, why they answer not the things already published in so ma∣ny treatises, but fish for more matter by subtile questions, as if men had nothing ells to doo, but answer al things that they write and demand: and to let them range at wil, without orderly answering as is meet.

They say, some of us taught it to be the whole church, alleging to that end Num. 15.33. & 27.2. and 35.12.. I answer, first, we taught then no otherweise then as them selves taught heretofore with us. Secondly we alleged many other scriptures and reasons both * 1.133 from the Prophets and Apostles, though it please them to omitt those, and cull out these against which they think they have more colour to contend. For hereupon they thus argue, 1 Jf this rule be found in the book of Numbers &c. then it is not a new rule first given in Mat. 18.17. I answer, they wrong us, and would deceiv the reader: we alleged not those scriptures to prove the rule to be the same then and now; but to give light unto the question, by shewing what was the peo∣ples right then, under the law, and under the Magistrate: which may be more, but can not be less now under the gospel, where the church ministery, hath not † 1.134 the power of Magistracie over Gods heritage. The Apostle applieth many things from Aarons preist∣hood ‘* 1.135 to Christ: yet he maketh Christs preisthood not to be af∣ter Aarons order ‘† 1.136 but Melchisedeks: should men now thus carp at his allegations?

Then they say, those scriptures speak of civil goverment, which we ex∣cept about the Elders, but they suppose we wil not give to the people civil au∣thoritie. I answer, first them selves grant that the people have as

much right and power now as they had in Israel: but we deny, & they can never prove that the ministers now have as much autho∣rity over the people, as had the Princes of Israel: so our reasoning is good, though theirs be naught. Secondly for civil authoritie as we never chalenged it: so neyther should it be objected to them, but that they wil have it to be no new rule. Then say we, it must be left to the Magistrate, and ministers may not intrude into their place. And seing they thus urge it, let them, if they please, clear them selves, whither they think not that the Elders of the church, may have civil authoritie also, as had the Elders in Israel.

Thirdly they say, that by these and the like scriptures it is certayn, sinners in Jsrael were brought before the congregation of Elders. I answer, if they mean Elders onely, (as they must if they reason to the mat∣ter in hand,) I deny it: and ther is no weight in their proof. For, it is also certayn that Paul imposed hands on Timothee, 2. Tim. 1.6. but elswhere it appeareth, others also imposed hands as wel as he. 1. Tim. 4.14. So, the Apostles and Elders came togither about a controversie, Act. 15.6. but the whole Church came togither also, verse 22.23. Titus was left to ordeyn Elders, Tit. 1.5. but was he to doo it, himself alone? The keyes were promised to Peter, Mat. 16.19. but were they meant to him onely? In Rev. 2.1. Iohn wrote to the Angel (or Messenger) of the church: but by Rev. 1.11. & 2.7. it is plain the whole church was intended. So in Israel, the law sayth in a case of mariage, let her goe up to the gate to the Elders: Deut. 25.7.8.9. but the practise of this sheweth, that the people were also interested with the Elders, Ruth. 4.2.7.9.11. Jn Exod. 5.1. Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh, but by Exod. 3.18. we may gather that the Elders of Israel went with them also. So in the place cited Num. 15.33. they brought him to Moses and to Aaron, and to al the Congregation; the people are here meant with the Magistrates, for God then sayd, † 1.137 let al the congregation stone him; and * 1.138 al the Congregation brought him without the host and stoned him. Now by M. Iohnsons own grant, they whom the Iudges condemned, did dye †’ 1.139 by the hands of the people: who is it then that cannot see, the Congregation here to mean both Elders and people? So in the other place, Num. 27.2. when they stood before Moses, and Eleazar the preist, and before the Prin∣ces, and al the Congregation, this distribution of the persons, togither with the place, the dore of the Tabernacle of the Congregation; may shew

that the Elders onely were not meant: besides in the same chapter, Iosua being there ordeyned over the Congregation &c. it cannot with any colour be gathered, that the Elders onely were the congregation, Num. 27.16.17.19.20. &c. Wherfore when one scripture men∣tioneth the Elders, Jos. 20.4. and an other the Congregation Num 32.12. Jos. 20.6. we should not restreyn it to the lesser, but let the scripture have the largest sense, unless apparant reason doo urge a restreynt, which is not here, but the contrary. For if they were to dye by the hands of the people, conscience required the people, to hear their cause tryed also, seing the law charged every one, † 1.140 thou shalt not slay the innocent and the righteous: and it was not safe for them to trust their Iudges, which so often and so many wayes corrupted judgment * 1.141as al the prophets doo complayn. It is therfore an evil argument to say, in Israel by one scripture men were sent to the Elders, & by an other to the Congregation, therfore it was the congregation of Elders, and not of the people also. For by such wrested reasons, one might prove that the Elders onely were bound to keep the passover, because in one place it is sayd, speak to all the Congregation of Israel, that every man take to him a Lamb, Exod. 12, 3. and in an other place it is sayd, Moses caled al the Elders of Israel, saying chuse out & take for every of your howsholds a Lamb; Exod. 12, 21. ther∣fore it was meant of the Congregation of Elders, and so the other peo∣ple were not bound to this service. Agayn, it was cōmanded, Ex∣od. 19, 3, 5. tel the children of Jsrael, if ye wil hear my voice and keep my covenant, ye shalbe my chief treasure &c. afterwards it is sayd, Mo∣ses caled † 1.142 for the Elders of the people, and proposed unto them al these things: shal we now conclude, therfore the covenant was made with the Elders onely? Who seeth not the weaknes of such conse∣quents: and that it is usual in scripture, to name but the principal of a company, and yet to include others with them? Notwithstan∣ding between Israel and us, there were two mayn differences, the one, that Church ministers now, have not such ecclesiastical autho∣ritie over the people, as is proportionable to the Magistrates auto∣ritie then: for this is forbidden, Mat. 20, 25. vvher Christ sayth, the rulers of the nations have domination over them, and they that are great exercise authoritie over them: but it shal not be so among you. And 1. Pet. 5.2, 3. Feed the flock of God &c. not as having domination over (his) heritage. The other is, that they vvere a national Church, & the Magistrats

in the gates of Ierusalem, the Preists in the Temple, being for the whole Realm; it could not be that al the people should be present at the dayly judgements of the Magistrates, or sacrifices of the Preists. And therfore it vvas not required so of them; as novv it is of us, vvho are but particular Churches, to be present at al publik administration of Christs kingdom and preisthood. Yea even in their most solemn assemblies, they could not doo, as vve ar bound to doo. For they did eat the passeover * 1.143 in their private hovvses, because al the thovvsands of Israel could not eat it in one room: but vve are bound to eat the passover now (I mean the Lords sup∣per) in † 1.144 the publik Church, and not otherwhere.

Wheras therfore they next except, that the people were 600. thow∣sand men, and would we have them to think that they came togither to hear examine and judge the cases of syn &c. I answer, no: neyther al the El∣ders. For I have before shevved, there were divers officers, for se∣veral causes. And Boaz took but * 1.145 ten of the Elders of Bethlehē to hear his cause. The Elders also did meet by themselves as ther was occasion: and so are † 1.146 they to doo now. Secondly for this ex∣ception of so many thowsands in the wildernes, that could not come to hear and judge: they should mind how the same lyeth a∣gainst the execution. When God sayd of the blasphemer, * 1.147 let all the Congregation stone him: wil they say six hundred thowsand men came together to doo it? yet themselves grant this vvas to be doon by the people. It vvas as easy for them to come to hear his cause tryed, as to come and stone him: and care of equity taught them to doo the first, as vvel as the last, as before is shevved.

Next they except against our expounding the Kingdom of Heaven, Mat. 18.1. &c. to be the church under the gospel, since Christ: this they say is not sound, because the same phrase is spoken of the church of the Jewes, Mat. 22.2. &c. I answer; this their reason is unsufficient, for I could so except against the exposition almost of any scripture, by shewing a diverse use and meaning of the words. When th'Apostle proveth Christs excellencie above the Angels, because † 1.148 of his name, the Son of God: the Iewes might allege, that the Angels are also caled * 1.149 Sonns of God, yea holy † 1.150 men have the like title: but were this a sufficient answer? Wel, I wil not st••ive with them, about the phrase (although in some places they may see the Kingdom of Hea∣ven opposed to the state of the Iewes church, as Mat. 11.11) but

as the prophets tel us of * 1.151 new heavens under the Gospel, so wil I distinguish and cal the Iewish church the old heaven, (as that which is † 1.152 shaken and removed,) and the Christian church the new heaven; of which the Gospel usually speaketh, as Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand, Mat. 3.2. & 4.17. Now vvhen the disciples asked Iesus, †’ 1.153 who is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven? ther might be reason of their demand touching the Christian church then to be planted: but to ask such a thing about the Ievvish church; I see litle reason. They knevv already the state of it, and vvho vvas cheif therin. Secondly Christs ansvver leadeth us here∣to: for ther being great expectation of that Kingdom, and an er∣roneous persuasion that it should be a glorious vvorldly state, Christ tells them the contrary, that it vvas for the † 1.154 converted and humble sovvles to enter into: that many scandals and offenses should arise herein, both from ؛* 1.155 the vvorld, and from mens cor∣ruption ‘.’ 1.156 in them selves, and from * 1.157 their brethren. Against al vvhich he armeth his disciples, and teacheth the orderly vvay to redress them. And that his rules should not be despised, he assu∣reth them that their censures executed on earth, shalbe ratified ‘{inverted †}’ 1.158 in heaven: the ground vvherof is his *’ 1.159 name vvherin they should be gathered togither, and his presence in the mids of them. And this phrase of Christs name, leadeth us also evidētly unto the church under the gospel: for it meaneth the clear manifestation of Christ with the power and profession of him, as Act. 2, 38. & 3, 16 & 4, 12, 17. 2 Tim. 2, 19. In respect wherof, Christ sayd to his disciples, hi∣therto have ye asked nothing in my name, Joh. 16, 24. These rules therfore, doo most properly serve for the Church since Christs comming: & therfore he sendeth not his disciples to the Iewes synedriōs, much less to the hethen magistrates, for redress of the synns that should arise in his kingdom. But our opposites doo except, what is here taught that the Jewes should not observ as wel as we? should not they be humble, harmless, &c. I answer, that which the gospel teacheth touching faith, repentance, humility &c, the Iewes were also bound unto; though these and the like things are otherwise opened and urged now under the gospel, Rom. 16.25.26. but ther was to be an other form and order of the Christian church, than of the Iewish: and in that respect, Moses politie must give place. Ye▪ they proceed and inferr, that the offender if he repent not should be

brought to the Congregation of Elders. This I deny in their under∣standing, who make this to be one with the Synedrion or Council of Magistrates, in Mat. 5.22. (which place I have also treated of * 1.160be∣fore,) and I affirm it to be the Christian Church or Congregation of faithful people, the spowse and bride of Christ, with whom his † 1.161power is left to judge al synners within the same; their Elders gui∣ding and governing them in their judgments. For the outward form of the Iewish Church was abolished * 1.162by Christ; the common wealth of Israel dissolved, and given up to the Romanes, whose Caesar † 1.163 they preferred before Christ. The Temple ‘.’ 1.164 ruinated, the ministerie “ 1.165 also changed, and the ordinances, though in ma∣ny things proportionable with Israel: but for Ministers authoritie over his people, to govern them Magistrate like, it is forbidden Mat. 20.25, 26. Luk. 22, 25. 1. Pet. 5, 3. 1. Cor. 3, 22, 23. and for any church of Elders, the whole new Testament knoweth it not; nor any such practise as these would bring in: but that the same church which * 1.166 came togither to the word and sacraments, came also to∣gither † 1.167to judge and cast out obstinate synners, and were ‘* 1.168 all bla∣med for the neglect of this duty, as for any other. And for deciding controversies, the Apostles, Elders, and brethren did “ 1.169 come togi∣ther with one accord. And such order continued in Churches some yeres after the Apostles, for Tertullian relateth the manner of Chri∣stian assemblies in his time, †’ 1.170 how they came togither into a con∣gregation, for to pray unto God, and for to rehearse the divine scriptures, and with holy words to nourish faith, styrr up hope, and fasten confidence. How there also were exhortations, reproofs and divine censures; and judgment given with great deliberation: the approved Seniors being presidents in the assemblies. And Cy∣prian Bishop of Carthage a 1.171 sheweth how with him mens causes were handled not onely before the Elders but b 1.172 the whole multitude: with∣out whose consent also, c 1.173 nothing was doon.

Next foloweth their exception about women and children; asking if they should in a controversie be the greater part, whither then they be the church spoken of? Also, whither in the congregation and presence of the El∣ders, the women and children have authority by vertue of that rule Mat. 18.17. to examine, rebuke, admonish their husbands, parents &c. for, they that are of the church there spoken of, may examine &c. I answer; first they o∣mitt what heretofore wee answered them, when they fished about

this matter: namely that the whole church of men women & chil∣dren are to be present at ecclesiastical judgments, as at al other publick administrations of the church, wher whatsoever is perfor∣med, is doon † 1.174 by prayer and the ministration of the word, that al may receiv instruction by the word there ministred, and as is written * 1.175 al Israel may hear and fear and doo no more any such wickednes. But no other to have voices or suffrages in excommunications &c. then they that have voices in election or deposition of officers. And they know wel, it was never our judgment or practise, that in Elections women or children should give their voices, the ‘.’ 1.176 Apostle and nature it self requiring women to be silent in the church: they also themselves have thus professed and practised with us many yeres. Secondly they have seen Mr. Robinsons answer ‘؛’ 1.177 to M. Bernard (cavilling likewise about women and children,) to the same effect. Yet wil they take no notice of his answer, or of ours; nor make any reply, but thus trouble the world, and us in special, to answer agayn and agayn whatsoever they please to demand. For after in pag. 43. of their book, they are twise up agayn with these questions of women and children, as if we had nought ells to doo, but to answer and answer their tautologies. Thirdly seing they thus deal, to make the truth seem odious, and to set the more co∣lour upon their prelacie, imitating the papists and popish affected, they shal have the like things demanded of them, not by us, but by others. Themselves as yet allow popular election of officers, be∣cause they say † 1.178 to give voices in election is not a part of government, but a power right and libertie that the saincts and people out of office have and should use. Now those of the prelates faction which deny this power of the people, say thus unto them; * 1.179 By this reckning men women and children (for al the faithful be interested) shal have voices in election of their ministers; if any dissent, al must be dashed. Jt had been very requisite that our authour for the appointing of these Democratical elections the better unto vs, should with proof out of scripture for every particular have shewed whether wo∣men or children of some reasonable discretion, should have voices in election of their Minister? whether he should be chosen by all, by the greater part, or by the better part? whether the wives voice should be accounted several, or but one with her husband, or whether she might dissent from her husband, or the fa∣ther from the son? &c. They that compare these two writers, may see how they wrote by one spirit, and almost with one pen. Yet be∣cause

in this point of popular election they doo differ: wee leave it for our opposites to answer these demands to the Prelates; and then if need be, they shal hear further of us, touching popular excō∣munication. Fourthly, if some would thus cavil against Moses lavv, which requireth * 1.180 the hands of al the people to stone a wicked man; and ask, whether women also and children must be present & cast stones: he might have as good colour for his question as have these, if not better. For these say, † 1.181in Jsrael, such as would not hearken to the Preists & judges, were to dye by the hands of the people: and the proportion that they cast for the people now, is “ 1.182 that they shal put the sentence in ex∣ecution, by avoiding the excōmunicated persons. Now, I think, they wil have women yea and children also, to avoyd excōmunicated persons; so then by proportion, women & children in Israel must cast stones at malefactors. Yea this may be further urged against them, by rea∣son of a pregnant note which they give in their * 1.183 Treatise on Mat. 18 that that is such a church, as where women may speak & are to be heard in their cases and pleas as wel as men, but, it is not permitted to women to speak in the Churches of the saincts, &c. wher eyther they aequivocate with this word speak, using it in divers senses, (a cōmon † 1.184 prac∣tise of such as would deceiv,) or they must permitt women to have voices and suffrages as wel as men, in al their churches of Elders: and so, by their proportion, women were to cast stones in Israel. For if women are to do execution now, why not then also?

5. Now wheras they intimate to the reader, as if we vvould have al men examine, rebuke, admonish in the presence of the Elders; they doo but labour the disgrace of the holy order in the church: wher the Minister as the mouth of the congregation, propoundeth exa∣mineth and carieth matters: and then the people if there be de∣fect or default, may speak in due order, but if in matter or manner they transgress, they are to bear their rebuke. Al things in the pu∣blick judgments of the church being caried holily, peaceably and by the government of the Elders, even as in elections of officers, in prophesie, or any other thing wherin men have libertie for to speak. And when the Ministers cary things well, we commonly find it as in Act. 15.12. that al the multitude keepeth silence: otherwise strife (and sometime disorder) dooth often arise, by the evil deal∣ing of the Elders. 6. It is also to be observed how these our opposites wil require by their proportion from Israel, children

to stone their parents, wives their husbands, and servants their maysters, by avoiding their cōmunion: yet wil they not have thē to be of that church which is to hear, examine & judge of the cau∣ses why their parents, &c. should be stoned and excōmunicated; not bound to be present at the trial of their case? Did ever any cō∣mon wealth in the world require such execution at the hands of wives children and servants; and yet teach them so little to honour and regard their parents, as not to think themselves bound to hear their case tried, but upon the Elders report, to stone their own fa∣thers, husbands, maisters, which doo take it on their death that they are innocent?

Against 1. Cor. 12.21.—26. which was by some alleged, they ex∣cept, 1. that the Apostles purpose is not to speak of cases and pleas about syn, and of the manner of dealing therin: but of the diversity of gifts and fun∣ctions, given for the help and service of all, to the building up of the body of Christ. I answer; 1. the Apostle speaketh generally of the * 1.185 di∣versities of gifts, Ministeries, and operations in the church, as they are given to to “ 1.186 every man to profit with all; and nameth in particular the * 1.187gifts, operations and ministeries, and among the rest the † 1.188 gover∣nours or governments: and ther is no church action, which the A∣postle purposeth not in that his dispute to comprehend: their first exception therfore is not true. 2. Neyther dooth it agree with it self: for if he speak (as they confess) of the diversity of gifts and fun∣ctions given for the help and service of all, to the building up of the body of Christ: then can he not but speak of cases and pleas about syn: seing they are to be judged by the gifts and functions * 1.189 of the church; they are for the help and service ofa 1.190 all; they help to b 1.191 build up the bo∣dy of Christ. Vnless they would have us think, that the Elders pre∣lacie which they strive for, is none of those gifts or functions, nor for the help and service of all, nor for the building up of Christs body but of Antichrists: this we wil grant them to be true.

2. Secondly they except, the Apostle sheweth it by the similitude of the natural body and faculties; and applieth it to the feeblest members, even the yongest children newly baptised, vers. 13▪••22. to whom he appointeth not the cases of syn to be brought to judgment and censure, as we hereupon would inferr. I answer; in thus speaking they injurie us, and the truth it self. Would we inferr, that the judgmēt of syn should be brought to infants newly baptised; because we say, not the Elders onely but

the church is to judge, as † 1.192 Paul teacheth? And would th'Apos∣tle also inferr (think they) that infants should rebuke and judge un∣beleevers, because he sayth, * 1.193 when the whole church is come togither in one, if al prophesie, and ther come in one that beleeveth not, he is rebuked of al, & is judged of al. And did Iosua also mean, that the yongest children newly circumcised threw stones at Achan, be∣cause he sayth, ;؛; 1.194 al Jsrael stoned him? we had not thought wise men would ever have made such inferences. And what vveight is in their reasoning from infants? that if other besides Elders may judge synners, then infants: if not infantes, then no other but Elders. Might not men thus elude al Pauls arguments? As when he sayth † 1.195 the manifestation of the spirit is given to every one to profit withal; they to conclude, therfore the yongest children newly baptised can mani∣fest the spirit to the profit of others. We have bene “ 1.196 all made to drink into one spirit: therfore infants also were partakers of the Lords sup∣per. ‘† 1.197 Jf one member be had in honour, all the members reioyce with it: therfore even the sucking babes▪ for they also are members. But did not these men think to find babes of us, that they have given such an answer to our allegations?

3. Thirdly they except that this similitude, might likewise be applied to Jsrael: which we grant. Also we acknowledge that it may not ey∣ther then or now pervert Gods ordinance about the Elders hearing &c. They say, the governours are set in the Church for that use: I answer, not the governours onely: this is that which they should prove. They are to govern the Church in al actions, but not to doo them alone. Also they say, al members have not fit gifts for examining of persons, deci∣ding of questions &c. I answer, that is true, for infants (as they ex∣cepted,) have not. But that onely the Elders have fit gifts for such purposes, is untrue: the ‘* 1.198 scripture, and dayly experience tells us the contrary: yea some other mēbers may have fitter gifts then the Elders. And they thēselves that now are officers, had they not gifts fit to examine judge decide &c. before they were chosē into office: or did their election give them gifts, which had none fit before?

4. Fourthly, they wil have this scripture direct against us; in that it sheweth how some have a more cheif place then others, as the head and eyes & hands in the body. This is not against us at all, for we grant so much. But they say we litle regard it, who in cases of controversie wil look where the greatest number of people is, (though they may be of the most simple) and

wil have them to be the church, and to have the power &c. as if the multitude should stil be folowed, and that ther were no difference of gifts, of office, or other respect at al to be had. I answer, 1. they keep their wont, in abu∣sing us before the world: we look not in any case to the greatest num∣ber, eyther of people or Elders: but in al cases we look to Gods law and testimonie as we are † 1.199 commanded; vvhich vvhen it is shevved by vvhom soever, al ought to yeild unto. We knovv neyther the multitude, * 1.200 neyther yet the mightie or Rabbies are stil to be folowed; there are differences of gifts and offices in the church, yet no mans gift or office (no not though he vvere ؛;؛ 1.201 an Angel from heaven,) may ca∣ry us from the vvritten vvord, by vvhich the Godly people tried e∣ven the Apostles doctrine, ‘†’ 1.202 and vvere commended. Although therfore the Church hath that libertie vvhich al societies (that have none to exercise dominion or authoritie over them) have, namely that the greater number overswayeth the lesser, when al accord not: yet the faithful are not so to look unto or folow the greater number, as to decline from the least of Gods commandements. This we may see in the 12. tribes of Israel, where the greater nūber, even ten of the tribes fel to false worship, and they caried away with them, not onely the tribute of a 1.203 two hundred thowsand lambs and ramms, which were due yerely from Moab to the Kings of Iu∣dah, & were wrongfully chalenged and taken by the Kings of Sa∣maria: but caried away also the title of the Church, being usually even by al the Prophets b 1.204 named Jsrael, wheras Iudah and Benja∣min were Israel as wel as Ephraim and the rest, yea in deed they were the onely Israel of God, as the scripture c 1.205 counteth Israel. Yet did not the faithful respect this greater number, but left † 1.206 them with their title, and usurpation, and went to the lesser part which was the better.

2. But is it not strange that these our opposites wil object these things to us; when in some things they doo the same, and in their new establisht hierarchie much worse? For in their popular electi∣on of officers (which they stil allow, if it may continue,) must not the greater number of voices cary the thing? And yet there is no action of the church, that needeth more wisdom, government or circumspection then this. And therfore many precepts are left for the careful and holy performance of it, 1. Tim. 3. & 5. Tit. 1. And wil not the Papists now cast the reproches on their own faces, as

they that would have the multitude stil folowed, as if there were no diffe∣rence of gifts &c.

3. And touching their hierarchie the Eldership they wil not I think deny, but the greater number of voices among them must prevayl. Now that being so, a Church having a Pastor, and a Tea∣cher that are learned, and 3. or 4. ruling Elders, which are as un∣learned as the other of the people, taken of trades men and the like: these 3. or 4. Rulers (whose power they have proportioned with the Princes of Israel,) shal by their number of voices cary matters, though it be against Pastor, Teacher, and 500 brethren. Yea these may excommunicate or depose the Pastor and Teacher, and cast out of the brethren: but none can excommunicate them, or depose them joyntly from their offices. The utmost that we can find these men to allow * 1.207 the Church in these exigents, is when they have doon al they can, to separate from them: and this power any man hath in the church of Rome. But I hope every one that ••avour∣eth the things of God aright, wil abhorr such an unruly prelacie. For if these Elders prove such as Paul foretold of, † 1.208 greevous wolves not sparing the flock, but speaking perverse things to draw disciples after thē; & as the Church hath had woeful experience of, now so many hun∣dred yeres: what havock & miserie wil not they bring upon Gods people? And if we add unto this their other opiniō of Gods cove∣nant to continue with a Church, though they fall into so many horrible synns, idolatries & blasphemies as the Romish synagogue hath doon, which now they plead for to be stil the true church of Christ: what wil not a presumpuous Eldership doo, and yet bear out themselves with this that they are the true church, and al that leave them (for what cause soever) are schismaticks.

4. Let the reader also observ their manner of pleading, when they speak of the Elders proceedings, they annex, according to the Law of God: but speaking of the people, they annex, † 1.209 though in er∣ror, and though never so erroneously caried, and though they be of the most simple: as if they would perswade men, that the Elders usually through their wisdom and godlynes walked aright, and the people through simplicitie and errour went astray. Wheras if eyther the scriptures be searched, or humane histories, or the present state of churches be looked upon, we shal see the greatest errours, heresies, schismes and evils to have both arisen and been continued by the Elders,

preists and learned Rabbines in al ages: even Christ himself found no greater enemies then the † 1.210 high preists, scribes and rulers of the people, which turned to his reproch then, (wherof his church now is made partaker,) so that they sayd, dooth any of the Rulers or of the Pharisees beleev in him? but this people which kn••w not the Law, are cursed. John. 7.48.49.

5. Neyther (if it were true) dooth their supposition that the Elders wil judge according to the law, bear out their supremacie, which Christ † 1.211 hath forbidden. For (besides that one man may judge ac∣cording to law,) both the princes of * 1.212 Israel, and the princes of ؛؛; 1.213 other nations, were bound to the lawes prescribed: yet may not the ministers now by proportion have princelike authoritie, 1. Pet. 5.3. The philosopher could say ‘† 1.214 They that bid the Law bear rule, doe bid God to bear rule by his own voice: but they that bid man bear rule (mea∣ning without law) doo bid a beast to bear rule.

6. Here also they doo violence to the Apostles similitude of a body, and say, ؛; 1.215 when a part of the body is hurt, the hand is not used nor sought unto to see withal, nor the foot to hear, neyther dooth the head take them to consult and determine what to doo, but when the head it self hath considered and determined, then it useth the help of the hand or foot &c. as ther is need and occasion. I answer, 1. first much abuse may be offred to al parables, by wresting them beyond their general scope, as is here to this. For by this manner of reasoning the Elders as the head, have al the wit, and the people as the hands and feet, have none at al. The Elders as the eyes, see al things: but the people see no more then the ears. For if the people have some understanding and insight into matters as wel as the Elders, why should they not be used also in consulting and determining publick things which cōcern al. Vnless the Elders now have such abundance of wisdom, as they can afford ynough to al, and need supply from none. But the scripture tells the contrary, saying, who is sufficient for these things? 2. Cor. 2.16. And what meant the Apostles and Elders of Ierusalem, to have al the people with them at their consulation & determina∣tion of a controversie, Act. 15.2.—22, 23. And why did th'Apostles being the eyes, speak to the multitude, (which it seemeth saw no more then doo the hands and feet,) to look out men of wisdom, for office among them? Act. 6.2.3. But what if there be of the peo∣ple that see more then all their Elders, being illuminated as was

David * 1.216 by Gods precepts: & what if the Elders be blind guides as a 1.217 Christ caleth some, & without understanding, b 1.218as the prophet cōplay∣neth? Then men must leav the blind Eldership, and goe to the pru∣dent brethren, and they must consult and determine, yea without the Elders, if these men say true. Doe not these things manifest how they have wrested the similitude? 2. Secondly, it is di∣rect against the Apostles meaning: who because of dissentions in the church of Corinth, sheweth c 1.219 by that similitude of a body, that the chiefest members have need of the inferiour, and the head d 1.220 can∣not say to the feet I have no need of yow: but now the Elders can say to the people, we need not your help to judge and determine questions and controversies, this gift and duty is ours; neyther are yow bound to be present to hear and decide publick causes; but when we have judged, you shal execute our judgments. And if the people agayn should say to the Elders when they are about choise of officers, we need not your help, or counsel: you are not bound to be present when we doo this busynes; the feet have no more need of the eyes to goe, then the eyes have of the feet to see. Were not this to make a division in the body,† 1.221which th'Apostle there condemneth. 3. Moreover, it is vayn to think that any officer or brother in the Church should so be one special member of the bo∣dy, as that he cannot be an other. The Prophets in Israel were * 1.222 Seers, and so in sted of eyes in the head: but when they “ 1.223 looked out vayn things, then as the Lord saith, the Prophet that taught lies, was the tayl▪ Jsa. 9.15. The Elders, by directing the church in the right way, are as eyes to the body; by administring the sacraments and censures, they are as hands; when they are sent on the Churches message, they are as feet; when they reprove synns, they are as the mouth, when they are reproved for their synns, they should be as ears; and so other Christians in their places and imployments. And as God hath bestowed his graces upon any, so is he to be regarded of al, without respect of person: neyther should the Elders be min∣ded like Achitophel “ 1.224 and take it yll, if at any time their counsel be not folowed. A man may see that in the Church, which Solomō saw in the beseiged citie, a 1.225 a poor wise man, that delivered the citie by his wisdom: though both he and his wisdom were despised. A b 1.226 wo∣man in Abel when it was in danger to be spoyled, c 1.227perswaded al the people with her wisdom to cut off Shebaes head; and so preserved

the city. Was she in this action, a part of the foot, or of the hart and head in that body, may we think? 4. Finally, this their reasoning is one with the Iesuits, that exclude the people frō church affayrs. The Church (sayth d 1.228 Bellarmine) bindeth and looseth, but by their Prelates, not by whomsoever: even as the body speaketh, but by the tongue, not by the hand. Thus dooth the Cardinal answer M. Luthers argu∣ment, and thus doo these men answer ours.

6. Yet have they not sayd ynough, but they will make it e 1.229 Anti∣christian servitude, to have the people bound to come to the publick ecclesiastical judgements; unless perhaps when the Elders call them togither to execute their sentence, for then I trow they are bound to come. And is not this agayn to divide the body, when the head must be present, and the showlders with the other parts and mem∣bers may be absent? The Apostle writing to the Church of Co∣rinth, how to doo when † 1.230 they came togither for the Lords supper, writeth also to them how * 1.231 when they were gathered togither, they should deliver the wicked unto Satan. We find no difference, but they were bound to come to the one as to the other. And if they answer, they are bound to assemble for to excommunicate him, but not to hear him by the word convinced in the trial of his cause; they may as wel teach the people they are bound to come to eat the bread and wine in the Lords supper, but not bound to hear the word teaching and preparing them here unto. We doo so un∣derstand Gods law, that when it commandeth us any thing, it dooth also command us to use al means for the right and holy per∣formance of it: and al wil be litle ynough. The people therfore that were bound to stone an idolater in Israel, were bound by that law ؛’ 1.232 thow shalt not slay the innocent, to look that he were duly convic∣ted of the crime: and now by this law, ‘† 1.233 be not partaker of other mens synns, keep thy self pure, every sowl that is bound to cast out a man condemned for heresie or other syn, is also bound to see him con∣victed, least * 1.234 Diotrephes cause to cast out faithful brethren. He that stands out to excommunication, wil cōmonly plead his cause to be just; and complayn that the Elders have perverted judgmēt: with what comfort of hart can the people now excōmunicate him, if they have not heard the proceedings against him, and yet must execute the Elders sentence upon him? Let wise men judge whither this be not spiritual tyrannie which the Elders would bring upon

the consciences of the Church.

But they allege further, the Elders are to have maintenance for the do∣ing of it and of the other duties &c. I answer, let them then excōmu∣nicate alone, as wel as try the case alone: seing they have mainte∣nance for both, and let the people be bound to come to neyther: no nor to the Pastours ministring of the word and sacraments (if this reason be good,) because he is more worthy maintenāce than the ruling Elders, as th'Apostle sheweth. But then, they say,* 1.235 men must leav their trades, women their families, children their scholes, ser∣vants their work, and come to hear and judge cases that fall out between bro∣ther & brother. I answer, 1. First they restreyn things too much, when they say between brother & brother: for what if it be a publick case of heresie or idolatrie, as that mentioned Deut. 13, 12, 13, 14. &c. wil they say women children and servants were then, or are now bound to leav their callings, & come togither to trie out the matter? 2. Se∣condly many cōtroversies between neighbours, are for civil things of this life: such are * 1.236 not church matters, nor there to be heard, but by † 1.237 Magistrates, or “ 1.238 arbiters chosen. 3. Thirdly for doubt∣ful cases ecclesiastical, people are to inquire the law ‘* 1.239 at the Preists mouth, and to ask counsel of their Elders severally or joyntly, who are to have their ‘† 1.240 meetings apart for such and other like ends: so many things may be composed without trouble of the Church. 4. Fourthly, when apparant synners so convicted by witnesses, are to be judged by the Church: ther is no time more fit then the sab∣bath day; wherin all men are * 1.241 bound to leav their own works, & tend to the Lords, of which sort this is. Or if that day suffice not, they may take any other for them convenient: for unto publick affayrs the Church is to be assembled, 1. Cor. 5.4. Act. 14.27. & 15.4, 30. & 21.18.— 22.

Against this I know, they except saying, ‘†’ 1.242 who can shew such an ordinance of God? find we such a course used in Jsrael on the Sabbath dayes? Did they not meet on the Sabbath, in the temple and synagogues for Gods wor∣ship &c. and the Elders sit in the gates on the week dayes to hear controversies &c.

I answer; for this later point they bring not any one scripture to confirm it: yet wil I not strive ther about, for I think it is true▪ Sure I am, the Ievves canon lavves so declare; * 1.243 Jt is not lawful (they say) to judge on the Sabbath, or on a festival day: yea further, that † 1.244 mat∣ters of life and death may not be judged on the evening of the Sabbath, or on the

evening of a festival day, least [the accused] be found guilty, and it be impossible to kyl him on the morow. I account civil controversies, of things perteyning to this life (as * 1.245 Paul caleth them,) to be of our own works, which by the law, “ 1.246 are to be doon in the six dayes: and therfore think it not lawful for Magistrates to keep courtes or Assises, to judge and execute malefactors on the Sabbath. And this, among other things, sheweth a mayn difference between the Eldership of the Church, and the Magistracie of Israel. But for ecclesiastical works by preists or people, they were to be doon on the sabbaths, as a 1.247 circumcision, b 1.248 kylling, slaying, cutting and burning of sacrifi∣ces, which was very laborious work, and even a c 1.249 breach of the sab∣bath in outward shew, but that the different nature of the action made it blameless. Now the church judgments are the Lords works, not ours, and therfore fittest to be doon on the Lords day: they belong to Christs kingly office, and therfore are holy, as the works of his prophetical and preistly office. These our opposites them∣selves d 1.250 compare the casting out by excōmunication, with the con∣trary receiving in by baptisme. Al churches baptise on the Sab∣bath, and also excommunicate on the Sabbath: why should not the cause be heard, as wel as the judgment executed on that day? We find, ecclesiastical controversies were disputed on the Sabbath dayes in Israel, as the Apostles practise sheweth, Act. 13.44.45.46. & 17.2.3. & 18.4. It was lawful on the Sabbath to e 1.251 heal the body: and is it unlawful to heal f 1.252 the sowl? It was lawful to save a g 1.253 sheep from dying in a ditch: and is it not lawful to h 1.254 save a sowl from death, and cover a multitude of synns? Seing therfore the Sab∣bath is to be sanctified by the word of God, and prayer: and al that the church ministers are to doo, belongeth unto these, as th'Apos∣tles teach us, Act. 6.4. we think it is too Pharisee like to carp at church judgments on the Sabbath: and then servants (which are i 1.255 the Lords freemen) and al other, resting from their own works, may attend to the Lords, without such inconveniences as these would cast in their way. And hitherto of the first point in contro∣versie.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Confess. art. 24. Apol. p. 62.63.
• † 1.2

  De Verbo Dei, lib. 3. c. 5.
• * 1.3

  De autor. eccles. cō∣tra Whita∣ker. l. 1. c. 1▪ S. 5.
• † 1.4

  Num. 16.9. 2. Chro. 35.3.
• * 1.5

  Ier. 26.10.
• * 1.6

  Eph. 2.11.12.
• “ 1.7

  Gal. 5.2.
• † 1.8

  Heb. 13.10.
• * 1.9

  Psal. 122.4 5.
• ‘† 1.10

  Dan. 9.24 26. Luk. 19.41.44.
• ؛؛ 1.11

  Ephe. 2.18
• † 1.12

  verse 15.
• * 1.13

  Heb. 3.2.
• ‘† 1.14

  Eph. 2.19
• † 1.15

  1. Cor. 3.10. &c.
• * 1.16

  Heb. 12.27.28.
• † 1.17

  Advertis. p. 32.33.
• * 1.18

  Plutarch. in Cat.
• † 1.19

  Rhem. an∣not. on Mat 23.2.
• “ 1.20

  De Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 1.
• † 1.21

  Bellar. de verb. Dei, l. 3. c. 4.
• ؛; 1.22

  Perpet. goverm. ch. 4.
• ‘† 1.23

  Prolect. de Rom. Pont. Con. 4. Q. 8. c. 2. •• 2.
• {punctel}; 1.24

  Animadv, ad contr. 1. l. 3. c. 4. et ad. cont. 3. l. 1, c. 2.
• * 1.25

  T. C. 2. Repl. p. 614
• “ 1.26

  De Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 9.
• ؛; 1.27

  Animad. in Bellar. ibid.
• * 1.28

  Iosh. 23.2.
• † 1.29

  Deut. 16.18.
• ‘† 1.30

  ••almud Babylon. tract. San∣hedrin, c. 1.
• ‘* 1.31

  Deut. 16.18.
• “ 1.32

  Maimon. in Sanhe∣drin, c. 1.
• * 1.33

  Deut. 17.8 9.2. Chrō. 19.8.
• * 1.34

  Talm. ibidem.
• * 1.35

  Num. 11.••4. &c.
• * 1.36

  Maimon, ibidē.
• * 1.37

  Ibidē.
• ‘† 1.38

  Maimō. Sanhedrin. chapt. 15.
• ‘*’ 1.39

  Talmud Sanhedr. c. 1.
• * 1.40

  1. Chron. 23. & 24. &. 25. & 26. chapt.
• ‘† 1.41

  Act. 15.21.
• * 1.42

  Act. 24.12.
• * 1.43

  Mat. 5.22.
• † 1.44

  Talmud Bab. tract. Sanhedrin. c. 1.
• “ 1.45

  Exod. 18.22. Deut. 17.8.9.
• ‘† 1.46

  verse 21.
• ‘* 1.47

  Exod. 21.12.
• * 1.48

  Mat. 5.22.
• a 1.49

  verse 25.
• b 1.50

  Mat. 18.17.18.
• c 1.51

  verse 18.
• d 1.52

  verse 17.
• e 1.53

  1. Cor. 5.4.5.12.
• * 1.54

  Luk. 4.20.
• f 1.55

  Mat. 18.20.
• g 1.56

  In their Treat. on Mat. 18.
• * 1.57

  Heb. 8.8.
• † 1.58

  Heb. 7.12.
• “ 1.59

  Advert. pag. 33.
• * 1.60

  verse 3.6. &c.
• † 1.61

  Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 5. c. 8.
• * 1.62

  Num. 5.2.
• ‘* 1.63

  1. Cor. 5.12.13.
• a 1.64

  Mich. 3.11.
• b 1.65

  Zeph. 3.3 4. Isa. 1.23.
• c 1.66

  Levit. 20.2.4.
• d 1.67

  Exod. 23.2.7.
• e 1.68

  1 King. 21.12·13.
• f 1.69

  Ier. 26.11.12.16.
• g 1.70

  1. Sam. 14.39.44.45.
• ‘†’ 1.71

  Luk. 23.24.
• ‘*’ 1.72

  Ioh. 19.23.34.
• “ 1.73

  vers. 38.— 43.
• ‘* 1.74

  Num. 19.11.
• † 1.75

  pag. 19.
• * 1.76

  ibid. p. 20.
• “ 1.77

  ibid. p. 26
• † 1.78

  Act. 5.26.
• † 1.79

  Advert. pag. 34.
• * 1.80

  Deut. 17.8 9. 2. Chrō. 19.8.10.
• * 1.81

  pag. 16.
• † 1.82

  Zeph. 3.3.
• * 1.83

  Isa. 2••.2••.
• ‘*’ 1.84

  Num. 18.
• † 1.85

  Luk. 4.20
• ‘†’ 1.86

  Deut. 16 1••.
• ‘*’ 1.87

  pag. 16.
• ‘†’ 1.88

  pag. 10.
• ‘*’ 1.89

  Mat. 28.20.
• “ 1.90

  Rō. 13.1.
• ‘†’ 1.91

  1. pet. 2.13.
• * 1.92

  Ier. 33.21.22.
• ‘*’ 1.93

  Rev. 1.6.
• ‘*’ 1.94

  Heb. 13.17.
• † 1.95

  Heb. 8.8.9. &c.
• * 1.96

  Gal. 4.2, 3.
• “ 1.97

  Levit. 18.5.
• a 1.98

  Gal. 3.12.
• b 1.99

  Heb. 8 9.
• c 1.100

  Rom 8.3
• d 1.101

  Gal. 3.23 24.
• e 1.102

  Heb. 7.11.19.
• † 1.103

  Maimon. in Treat. of the dis∣cipline of the law; ch. 3.
• * 1.104

  Ioh. 2.27.
• * 1.105

  1. Cor. 5.4 5.
• “ 1.106

  1. Cor. 4.1.
• † 1.107

  Isa. 61.6. 1. Pet. 4.10 11. 1. Cor. 14, 31. Act. 13.2.
• * 1.108

  Ioh. 3.29. 1. Cor. 3.22 23.
• “ 1.109

  so caled, Iam. 2.2.
• “ 1.110

  Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 5.
• † 1.111

  ibid. c. 6.
• * 1.112

  Exo. 19.6. 1. Pet. 2.9.
• † 1.113

  Heb. 13.17.
• “ 1.114

  Colos. 4.17.
• ؛ † 1.115

  Isa. 61.5.6
• † 1.116

  Eph. 4.11. 1. Cor. 3.9.
• * 1.117

  1. Pet. 2.9. Rev. 20.6.
• ‘* 1.118

  p. 14.15.
• a 1.119

  Gen. 14.18.
• b 1.120

  2 Chron. 26.18.
• c 1.121

  Deut. 17.14. 1. Sam. 8.
• d 1.122

  Ier. 27.6.8.12.
• e 1.123

  Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 1.
• f 1.124

  Heb. 3.2.
• * 1.125

  Nū. 3.6.32 Nehem. 12 7.12.
• † 1.126

  2. Chron. 10.8.10.
• ‘* 1.127

  1. Chro. 27.5.1. Kin. 2.34.35.
• ‘† 1.128

  Pag. 242.243.
• “ 1.129

  p. 75. — 81.
• ‘* 1.130

  p. 60.—64
• ؛* 1.131

  p. 61.74.
• ؛† 1.132

  p. 55.56▪
• * 1.133

  Ruth. 4.9.11. Ps. 149.6.—9. Ier. 26.11.12.16. Mat. 18.18.—20. & 28.20. Act. 15.22.23.30. & 11.2. &c. & 21.18.— 22.1. Cor. 5 4— 13. Rev. 2.7.11 29.
• † 1.134

  Math. 20.25.26. 1. Pet. 5.3.
• ‘* 1.135

  Heb. 5.4. & 9.6.7. & 13.11.12.
• ‘† 1.136

  Heb. 7.1••.12.••5.
• † 1.137

  vers. 35.
• * 1.138

  vers. 36.
• †’ 1.139

  Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 19.
• † 1.140

  Exod. 23.7
• * 1.141

  Isa. 1.23. 1. Sam. 8.3. Zeph. 3.3.
• † 1.142

  Exod. 19.7.
• * 1.143

  Luk. 22.10 11.12. &c.
• † 1.144

  1. Cor. 11 20. &c.
• * 1.145

  Ruth. 4.2.
• † 1.146

  Act. 21.18
• * 1.147

  Levit. 14.14.
• † 1.148

  Heb. 1.4.5
• * 1.149

  Iob. 1.6. & 2.1.
• † 1.150

  Deut. 14.1.
• * 1.151

  Isa. 65 17 & 66.22. 2. Cor. 5.17.
• † 1.152

  Heb. 12.26.27.
• †’ 1.153

  Mat. 18, 2.
• † 1.154

  vers. 3, 4.
• ؛* 1.155

  v. 7.
• ‘.’ 1.156

  v. 8.
• * 1.157

  v. 15. &c.
• ‘{inverted †}’ 1.158

  v. 18.
• *’ 1.159

  v. 20.
• * 1.160

  p. 17.18.
• † 1.161

  1. Cor. 5.
• * 1.162

  Dan. 9, 26. Isa. 65, 17. Heb. 8. & 9 & 10. chap.
• † 1.163

  Ioh. 19.15
• ‘.’ 1.164

  Mat. 24.2
• “ 1.165

  Eph. 4.11 1. Cor. 12.
• * 1.166

  1. Cor. 11.20.—33.
• † 1.167

  1. Cor. 5.4.—13.
• ‘* 1.168

  vers. 1.2.
• “ 1.169

  Act. 15.23 25.
• †’ 1.170

  Tertull. in Apolo∣get.
• a 1.171

  Cypr. l. 3. epist. 14.
• b 1.172

  apud plebē uni∣versā.
• c 1.173

  ibid. epist 10.
• † 1.174

  Act. 6.4.
• * 1.175

  Deut. 13.11. & 17.13.
• ‘.’ 1.176

  1. Cor. 14.34.
• ‘؛’ 1.177

  Iustisic. p. 204.205.206.
• † 1.178

  Adver••. p. 46.
• * 1.179

  D. Cou∣sins, answ. to the ab∣stract. p. 99▪ 100.
• * 1.180

  Deut. 13 9 10.
• † 1.181

  Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 19.
• “ 1.182

  Advertis. pag. 34.
• * 1.183

  pag. 8.9.
• † 1.184

  Aristot. in reprehens. Sophist.
• * 1.185

  vers. 4▪ 5.6.
• “ 1.186

  vers. 7.
• * 1.187

  vers. 8 &c.
• † 1.188

  vers. 28.
• * 1.189

  1. Cor. 5.7 12.
• a 1.190

  Iam. 3.2.
• b 1.191

  Gal. 6.1. Ephe. 4.12. —16.
• † 1.192

  Cor. 5.12
• * 1.193

  1. Cor. 14.23.24.
• ;؛; 1.194

  Ios. 7.25.
• † 1.195

  1. Cor. 12.7.
• “ 1.196

  verse 13.
• ‘† 1.197

  vers. 26.
• ‘* 1.198

  Act. 25.22.—25.
• † 1.199

  Isa. 8.20.
• * 1.200

  Exod. 23.2
• ؛;؛ 1.201

  Gal. 1.8.
• ‘†’ 1.202

  Act. 17.11.
• a 1.203

  2 King. 3.4. Isa. 16.1. 2. Sam. 8.2.
• b 1.204

  Ier. 3.8. Ilos. 4.15. 1. King. 12.19. & 15.9.16.17. &c. 2 Chron. 10 16, 17. &c.
• c 1.205

  Ps. 7▪3.1. & 125.5. Gal. 6.16. Rō. 9.4.6.
• † 1.206

  2. Chron. 11.16.
• * 1.207

  In their Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 25.
• † 1.208

  Act. 20.2•• 30.
• † 1.209

  p. 28.40.
• † 1.210

  Mat-26.3 4. & 27.1. &c.
• † 1.211

  Mat. 20.25 26.
• * 1.212

  2. Chron. 19.5.6.
• ؛؛; 1.213

  Plato de repub. l. 4. & 5.
• ‘† 1.214

  Aristot. 3. Pol. c. 11.
• ؛; 1.215

  p. 41.
• * 1.216

  Psal. 119.99.100.
• a 1.217

  Mat. 15.14
• b 1.218

  Isa. 56.11
• c 1.219

  1. Cor. 12
• d 1.220

  verse 21.
• † 1.221

  verse 25.
• * 1.222

  1. Sā. 9.9.
• “ 1.223

  Lā. 2.14.
• “ 1.224

  2. Sam. 17.
• a 1.225

  Eccles. 9.13 14. &c.
• b 1.226

  2. Sam. 20 16. &c.
• c 1.227

  verse 22.
• d 1.228

  De sacra∣ment▪ in gen. l. 1. c. 25.
• e 1.229

  pag. 41.
• † 1.230

  1. Cor. 11.18.33.
• * 1.231

  1. Cor. 5.4 5.
• ؛’ 1.232

  Exod. 23.7.
• ‘† 1.233

  1. Tim. 5.22.
• * 1.234

  3. Ioh. 9.1••.
• * 1.235

  1. Tim. 5.17.18.
• * 1.236

  Luk. 12.14
• † 1.237

  Rom. 13.
• “ 1.238

  1. Cor. 6.4.5.
• ‘* 1.239

  Mal. 2.7.
• ‘† 1.240

  Act. 21.18.
• * 1.241

  Exo. 20.10
• ‘†’ 1.242

  Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 17.
• * 1.243

  R. Ios. Ka∣ro, in Cho∣shen ••a∣mishpat, tract. de Iu∣di••. ch. 5.
• † 1.244

  Maimony Tract. San∣hedrin, ch. ••1.
• * 1.245

  1. Cor. 6 4.
• “ 1.246

  Exod. 20.••.
• a 1.247

  Ioh. 7.23.
• b 1.248

  Num. 28.9. with Le∣vit. 1.
• c 1.249

  Mat. 12.5
• d 1.250

  Treat. on Mat. 18. p. 26.
• e 1.251

  Luk. 13.15.16.
• f 1.252

  Psal. 41.4
• g 1.253

  Mat. 12.11.12.
• h 1.254

  Iam. 5.20
• i 1.255

  1. Cor. 7.2••.