A brief refutation of the errors tolleration, erastianism, independency and separation delivered in some sermons from I Job. 4. I, preach'd in the year 1652 : to which are added four sermons preach'd on several occasions / by Mr. James Fergusson ...

SECT: III. A BRIEF REFUTATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF Erastianism.

Head I. That there is a Church Government held forth in Scripture.

HAving thus show'n that the Doctrine of Tolleration is not of God, I proceed to De∣monstrate this also in some other of the most Dangerous Errors of the Times; We shall be∣gin first with these Errors which are about the Go∣vernment of the Church; and that because the Govern∣ment

of the Church is the hedge of the Doctrine; for if once the Government be brangled or shaken the wild Boar of the Wilderness cometh in easily and corrupteth the Doctrine: therefore it is that the Devils main design hath been against the Govern∣ment of the Church to blast and storm this Wall on all Hands.

The summe of what we have to say in this is, to make out these four points: First, That there is a Government appointed by Christ in his Church distinct from the Civil Government. Se∣condly, We shall show that this Government is not in the hands of the Civil Magistrate, but in the hands of Christs own officers, which he hath appoint∣ed for Governing his house, By inflicting of Church Censures, enacting of Church canons, so as they are not to act by derived power from the Magi∣strate, and Appeals are not to be made from them to the Magistrate. Thirdly, we shall endeavour to prove, That this power of Church Government is not in the hands of private Christians, or the com∣munity of the Faithful: but in the hand of Christs own Officers, Ministers and Elders. And Lastly, We shall endeavour to prove that this Authority and Go∣vernment is not in the hand of particular Congre∣gations or particular Elderships, Independently from other Judicatories above them: but that this power is given to them, so as they must be subject to Superior Judicatories. In which propositions we will meet with these Errors that are most dange∣rously opposite to Church Government at this time.

The First two propositions are contrary to the Doctrine of Erastians, and the last two are contrary to the Doctrine of Independents (as they are com∣monly designed) First, we shall engage with Erasti∣anism and our Scope in this shall be as in the former, to show that however it pretend to the Spirit, yet when it is brought to the tryal it will be found not to be of God.

This Doctrine or Error hath its name from the prime Author of it called Erastus, a Doctor of Me∣dicine who upon some discontent did first vent it: to wit, That Ministers should only meddle with Preaching; but should have no power to meet in Church Judicatories, Sessions, Presbyteries, or such like, nor should they punish Scandalous sins with Church Censures, Such as Suspension or Excom∣munication; But that all power whatsoever in a Nation, both in Church and State, should be in the hand of the Civil Magistrate. This Doctrine so soon as it was vented, did get, and does yet get many followers, chiefly among state Divines, and Christians that know more of wordly policy than Christian simplicity, so that in a short time if God prevent it not, it is like to swallow up all other Controversies about Church Government, so plausible and pleasing it is to the powers of the World, who cannot well endure to have Christ Reign∣ing besides them. Psalm: 2. 3. Let us break their bands assunder, and cast away their cords from us. Both Sectaries and Malignants do aggree in this Error, to take the power of Discipline out of the Churches

hand's. The spiritual power of Church Censures in the hands of Christs officers, is an eye sore to both of them.

But to come nearer to the point, There are two heads of this Erastian Doctrine which we shall labour to refute. The First, is most gross, whereby they affirm, That there is no particular Church Govern∣ment set down in Scripture; In a word, that there is no Government in the Church by divine right; but that this Government is left in the hands of the Civil Magistrate, whether to erect any Government at all in the Church, or not: or if he please to erect one, That he may establish That Government which suits best the well-being of the Civil state: So that according to this Doctrine the Civil Magistrate may establish Episcopacy this year, the next year he may establish Presbytry, and the third year he may cast both and establish Independency; And if he like, He may find out a Government different from any of these, and establish it. The Second Erastian Er∣ror is this, whereby they affirm whatever Govern∣ment be in the Church (whether grounded in Scripture or not) that according to Scripture it is in the hands of the Civil Magistrate and that he is the chief fountain of Church Government.

In opposition to the first Error we lay down this Conclusion, which (God willing) we shall make good, That Jesus Christ the King and head of his Church hath established a particular form of Church Go∣vernment in his word, which to alter is not in the power of any State whatsoever. He hath set down a way for

punishing Scandals, for inflicting Church Censures, Enacting Church canons; And hath not left this in the Arbitriment of Kings or Parliaments to set down any Government they please. In prosecuting which point we shall follow that Method we keeped in refuting the Doctrine of Tolleration. We shall First clear the State of the Question. Secondly, We shall bring Arguments to confirm the Truth. Third∣ly, We shall Answer these Arguments the Adver∣sary brings against the Truth: And so we shall apply all to Use.

I. And First, for clearing the State of the Question, take thir two assertions: First, we do not affirm that all the Circumstantials of Church Government is set down expresly in the word; But only first, That all the substantial parts of Church Government have a warrand in the word and are therein so fixed and e∣stablished, as they are unalterable by any State what∣soever. And Secondly, As to the Circumstantials that relate to this Government; we say, they are set down under general Rules, sufficient for the order∣ing of them: such as, let all things be done in order and to edification. Our Second Assertion is, we are not to enter here to show, what is the particular kind of Government that is appointed in the word, and what things falls under the power of Church Go∣vernours, and in what relation they are to handle them, what are the nature of these Censures, and how in all these things they differ from the Civil power: It would take long time to clear these. The thing we aim at is only, this general: That Jesus Christ the

King of his Church and Lord of his House hath set down in his word a particular way for Governing of his house distinct from the Civil, which is not in the power of any State to alter. We proceed now to Arguments for comfirming this Truth.

II. The first Argument is this, If so be that under the Old Testament, there was a particular form of Church Government different from the Civil, set down in the word; then there must be also the like set down under the New; but▪ so it is that there was a particular way set down under the Old Testa∣ment for Governing the Church: Therefore, there must be the like set down under the new. For making out this Argument, there are two things we have to clear. The First is, That there was such a Government as this under the Old Testament warranted by the word. The Second thing to be cleared, is, that therefore and upon the same Reason there must be also the like under the New. For proving of the First, that there was a particular Go∣vernment of the Church different from the Gvern∣ment of the state under the Old Testament, We shall clear two things. First, That they had Church Judicatories different from the Civil Judicatories; And to prove this we shall cite two places of Scrip∣ture: The First is, in 2 Chron: 19. 8, 9, 10. Ye may read the place at leasure; but there are these things in it proving that there was a Church Judi∣catory distinct from the Civil. First, We see that there is a Judicatory made up of the Church-men of the Levits and Priests, in verse 8. Secondly, We

see that the things they judged of were spiritual matters distinguished from Civil things by calling the the first sort, The matters of the Lord, And the Se∣cond, Matters of the King, v. 11. Thirdly, We see that in this Judicatory a Church-man was Modera∣tor, in the 11 verse And behold Amariah the chief Priest is over you. And Fourthly, We see that the sentence of the Court was Execute by Church-men in the end of the 11 vers—Also the Levits shall be officers before you. All which being laid together, makes out clearly that under the Old Testament ••••••re was a Church Judicatory different from the Civil. The Second place is in Jeremiah. 26. 8. 9. 10 Where we have these things to make out the present point. First, We see that there were two Judica∣tories in the 8 v. There is a Judicatory of the Priests and Prophets condemning Jeremiah as a false Prophet: again in the 10. and 1••. v. We see there is a Civil Judicatory made up of States-men When the Princes of Judah hard these things, then they came up from the Kings house—&c. So it is plain they had a Church Judicatory for Church matters, as well as a Civil Judicatory for Civil matters.

The Second thing that we are to speak to in order to the proving of the first point, to wit, That there was a Government of the Church different from that of the State among the Jews, is this, that as they had Church Judicatories different from the Civil, so they had also Church Censures different from Civil punishments, as we have amongst us. And First, publick confession of Scandalous sins was in

use among them, we shall clear it from one place of Scripture Ezra 10. 10. 11. And Ezra the Priest stood up, and said unto them, Ye have transgressed—Now there∣fore make confession unto the Lord God of your Fathers, &c. There is confession of sin appointed for a fault that was Scandalous to wit, their Marrying with strange Wives. Now this confession was not only private to God, nor on a Fast day, but a personal publick acknowledgment, after particular Examination of all one by one. And we gather this from the 13. v. where it is said—Neither is this a work of one day or two—&c. And in the 16. v. Three moneths was spent on the business, so that this was a personal acknow∣ledgment given by every one of them, after the Examination of their guilt, as we do in our Church Judicatories. Secondly, Besides this publick Confessi∣on they had the Censure of suspending Scandalous men from the Ordinances, as we do suspend from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper; we will find this in David his appointing of the offices of the Priests. Among the rest it is recorded of Jehoiadah 2 Chron. 23. v, 19. And he set the porters at the gates of the house of the Lord, that none which was unclean in any thing should enter in. They were suspended from the Ordinances because of their uncleaness, And for the neglect of this the Priest's are reproved in Ezek. 22 v, 26. Her Priests have violated my Law, and have prophaned my Holy things: they have put no dif∣ference between the unclean and clean neither between the Holy and prophane. They let all come rushing to∣gether to the Ordinances: And for this they are re∣proved.

Thirdly, They had among them the sen∣tence of Excommunication, which is set down un∣der the name of Cutting off from among the People. And in the new Testament it is expressed by the name of casting out of the Synagogue, which certainly was Excommunication. It is a Ridiculous alledgence that they say, by cutting off, was meaned the inflicting of Temporal death by the sword of the Magistrate; for the uncircumcised Man-child, he that had touched a dead Body and did not wash after it, were to be cut off; now who would think that such were to be put to death.

The Second thing to be made out is, That there∣fore there must be a Church Government under the New Testament, seing it was so under the Old; and the Reason is, because no necessity can be alleadged for a ••hurch Government then, but the same neces∣sity is now. Is not the Church a mixed multitude now, as well as then? is there not as great need to separate betwixt the precious and the vile now, as then? Is not the Church now a feild of Wheat and Tares as well as then? Is there not need to keep the Ordinances pure now, as then, by the fence of Government? Is there not need now to suppress sin as well as then? Is not Christ perfect in all his House as well as Moses? Yea, in a word there can no∣thing be alleadged for a necessity to have a Church Government under the Old Testament, but the same may be brought to prove the necessity of it under the New.

The Second Argument we bring to prove this

point is taken from the native end of Church Go∣vernment which is spiritual, to wit—For the edify∣ing of the Body of Christ: Ephes: 4. 12. To gain the Soul of our offended Brother to Repentence Matth: 18. 15. It is—that the Spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. 1 Corinth. 5, 5. So the end of the Church Government is a spiritual end, and therefore it must have a Divine Original: Church Government whose end is spiritual can be no humane Ordinance, for such produceth no supernatural effects; therefore it must have a higher warrand for it than that of the Magistrate.

Our Third Argument is taken from this, that all the substantials of Church Government are set down expresly in Scripture, from which we make this Argument: That Government whose substantial parts are all set down expresly in Scripture, the Ma∣gistrate hath no power to alter it, or put an other in its place; but so it is that all the substantial parts of Church Government are set down expresly in Scripture: Therefore, the Magistrate hath no pow∣er to alter it. The thing we have to make out in this Argument is this, That all the substantials of Church Government are set down in Scripture; And to clear this we shall reckon up five things. First That Church officers have their warrand from Scripture Thess: 5 12. 1 Tim: 5. 17. Let the Elders that rule well, be counted worthy of double honour, espe∣cially they who labour in the word and Doctrine. There is a Ruler, or an officer with power to rule, esta∣blished in Gods house. What they say, That by

Ruling there is meaned Preaching, because Ministers guide People by Preaching, is a frivolous Excepti∣on: and that because of what is in the end of the Verse— especially they who labour in the word and Doctrine. So labouring, in the word and Doctrine, is one thing, and Ruling is another thing, and not one and the same, as their Exception affirmeth. But we shall find a more clear place for it in Heb. 13. 17. Obey them that have the Rule over you, and submit your selves There are Officers established with power to Rule, and the People are commanded to submit and give Obedience to them, and so there are Rulers, Offi∣cers established in Gods Church. Secondly, The Courts and Judicatories of the Church have a war∣rand in Gods word; and for this see Matth: 18. 17, 18. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the Church—Verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven—The Adversaries are so shamless that they say, by the Church is here meaned, the Civil Magistrate, and that the com∣plaint should be made to them: But it is sure the Civil Magistrate is not here meaned. And to prove it, The Judicatory here meaned is that whereof the Apostles should be Members, and therefore in v, 16. It is said whatever ye [to wit the Apostles] shall bind on earth—&c. Now sure it is Jesus Christ gives no power to his Ministers to sit in Civil Courts, and to judge of Civil business. The third substantial of Church Government that hath warrand in the word is, the subordination of lesser Judicatories to great∣er;

and this is warranted in Act: 15, 2. Where Paul and Barnabas come up from Antioch, to a General Council at Jerusalem (because the controversie in hand could not be ended at Antioch) where there is a Court with power, They determine the Question, Censure the Schismaticks, giving them the name of Lyars v. 24. The Fourth substantial of this Govern∣ment set down in Scripture is, the order of pro∣ceeding in relation to Censure. 1. By private Ad∣monition, Then more pub••ick Matth: 18. 15. The fifth thing is, The nature and kind of thir Censures, which are not bodily, as taking•• way the life; but spiritual, to wit, Admonitions, reproofs, Casting out of the Church, Matth: 18 17—Let him he unto thee as an Heathen and a Publican. Now from all this, It evidently appears that Christ hath set down all the Substantials of Church Government in his word: And seeing he hath done so, what man dare alter it, taking any prudential way for the good of the Church at his pleasure: Yea there is a charge given to preserve all these inviolable till Christs coming; 1 Tim: 5. 21. I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect Angels, that thou observe these things, without preferring one before another, doing no∣thing by partiality. So that which Christ hath set down concerning the Government of his house is unalterable by any person whatsomever, till the coming of Jesus Christ. So much for the third Argument.

There is a Fourth and it shall be our last, which is this, If so be that Christ hath left his House without

any particular Government, only referring it to the Civil State, to appoint what Government they please▪ it would reflect much on the wisdome of Jesus Christ; For the Church visible is his Kingdom, his House, his Vinyard▪ his Garden; And shall we say that he hath appointed no Laws to Govern no Courts to guide this Kingdom, but left it to the Ci∣vil Magistrate, to appoint by whom and how it pleaseth him best: A King of Clay would not do so with his Kingdom, much less he who is the King of Glory. This for the Arguments to confirm the Truth, we shall in the next place Answer their Ob∣jections.

III. The First is (say they) from 2 Tim: 3, 16. The word of God is able to make a man perfect; and therefore there is no need of Government. We An∣swer, This same Argument may as well strick a∣gainst Magistracy. But Secondly, We say (which we made already appear) That the Government of the Church is grounded on the Word; Hence their Argument proveth not, because the Government of the Church is a part of the Word, and is command∣ed by it; and so it is not an adding to it: But if they say the bare Preaching of the word is enough; We Answer, Not to detract any thing from the word Preached, which is the mean appointed by God to save Souls, yet the Exercise of Dicipline is necessary also. It is necessary (we say) for Three Reasons. 1. To keep the Ordinances of God from being polluted by the rushing foreward of Dogs, and Scandalous Persons. All the Preaching that can be, to bid

Scandalous men keep back, will not do. Then 2. It is necessary for keeping the Church from being infected by the contagion of Scandalous men. Hence sayeth the Apostle Paul, a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump: Therefore put the incestous man from among you. 3. It is necessary for the good of the Soul that is censured: So in the 2 Thess: 3. 14— note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. And 1 Cor: 5. 5. Excommunica∣tion serveth for the Destruction of the Flesh, that is, To tame and mortify its Lusts: And so although the word be only the necessary mean for the converting of Souls, yet it doth not follow that the Government of the Church should not be exercised, to wit, that the word may work the better.

The Second Objection is this, That all the Argu∣ments we have to establish a Church Government by Divine right are taken from the Churches pra∣ctice in the Apostles time, and commands given them; but it does not follow that what was then, should be a rule now; and they give this as the Rea∣son of the difference; because the Magistrate was then a Pagan, and so would not meddle with these things; but the case is now otherwise when the Magistrate is turned Christian. We Answer First, By this it is granted, that Church Government was an institution of Christ, at least in the primitive times, Now sure it is that every thing instituted by Christ layeth on a perpetual obligation, except Christ in his word hath set a period, that it should be only so long: So if this Argument of theirs have any force, they

must show from Scripture that Christ hath appoint∣ed this period for Church Government, so as it should be only in force under an Idolatrous Pagan Magistrate: And that the Power of it should cease under the Christian Magistrate: But no place of Gods word can be given for the proof of t••is; But on the contrary a Command is given, That which Christ delivered to the Apostles, 1 Timoth. 6. 14 Should be keeped to his second coming, And therefore it remains a perpetual Ordinance. Secondly, We An∣swer, That if this were true, then the Case of the Church should be worse under the Christian than the Pagan Magistrate; If so be that under the one, they have an Intrinsecal Power to purge and keep his Church free from Scandals, but not under the other, would not this be hard. Thirdly, We Answer, That the reasons for which the Church did exercise Government, in the primitive times, were taken from common Equity, and so are binding to the Church at all times. We find this 1 Cor. 5. 5. Where a command is given to exercise Discipline by Ex∣communicating of the Incestuous person: The rea∣sons given are, First, The good of the Mans Soul verse 5. Secondly, The good of the Church to be keeped from Infection, vers. 6. Now the Church is bound to see to these at all times.

We come to the Fourth thing, which is a word of Vse: And it serves 1. To reprove those who think debates about the Government of the Church useless and of no value: To what purpose is it (say they) what be the Government, and who governs, if sin

be punished, and the Word Preached. I answer' it is of much moment: For, from what is said it ap∣pears that Church Government is an Ordinance of God, a part of his word, and they who evert it, or gives way to the everting of it, give way to evert a part of the Word of God; yea to the bringing down of the Government of Christs own House. It is a point of Truth that concerns no less than the Royal Diadem of Christ, and all who have got good of Truth are bound to stand for it; yea it is more than an ordinary Truth: The question is concern∣ing Ch••ists Kingdom, if he have a Kingdom of his own distinct from the Kingdoms of the World; If he shall have ••is own Laws, Office-bearers, Courts, Censures, according to his will in his Word; or if all he hath left to that purpose be to scra••ched out, and the Civil Magistrate to appoint what Laws, Rules, Courts, he pleaseth in Christs House: So it is a point relating to his Kingdom, a Doctrine to be avowed, and a point of Truth worth the Sustering for, and which some have suffered for and boasted in it, yea it is a point of Truth that hath this advan∣tage beyond other Truths, That Christ hath suffer∣ed for it himself in his own person, for it's clear that this was the only point he was accused on by P••∣late, and he avowed it Luke 23. 3. That he had a Kingdom, though not of the World, yet in the World. We shall find, that this point was chiefly laid to Christs charge in John 18. 33. 34, 35, 36, 37. And this was the p••int that was driven home by the Jews 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Christ, John. 19. It was his 〈◊〉〈◊〉 on the Cross,

Jesus Christ of Nazareth King of the Iews. And this was the point that straitned Pilate most, and put him to it to make Christ suffer, Joh. 19. So this point hath this advantage, that in a special manner Christ s••ffered as a Martyr for it: Should any then think it a little thing to suffer for? God forbid. Yea we may think it an Honour.

The Second Use, If so be that Church Govern∣ment is an Ordinance of God, then those intrusted with it, such as Ministers and Elders, would discharge it as Service to God, so as to be countable to him; t••ere should be an other frame of Spirit, when Men are in Church Judicatories, than when they are in Ci∣vil Judicatories: These are Ordinances of Men, thir of God, and require more than a common frame of Spirit. Alas (we may say) for the Unministerial like Carriage of Ministers and Elders, may justly provoke God to thro us out altog••ther.

A Third Vse of this point is, That seeing Church Government is an Ordinance of Jesus Christ, then ye that are people should obey and submit to those that are over you in the Lord, otherwise if it be not t••us looked on it may provoke the Lord to remove the Hedge from us; and if this were, God knoweth what we would be: we are evil now, but if people got leave to do every thing that seemeth good in their own eyes, we could not but be much worse: Ye see what ye are with it but know not what ye will be without it. And so much for the first Head of Erastian Doctrine.

Head II. The Power of Church Govern∣ment belongeth not to the Ci∣vil Magistrate.

THe Second Head of Erastian Doctrine, which we are to prove not to be of God, is, That whereby they affirm, That all the Power of Church Government is in the Hands of the Civil Magistrate. And here there are some differences a∣mong themselves: some giving him all Power to dis∣pence all Church Ordinances, and this as a Magi∣strate, without a Call from the Church; and so to Preach and to Administrate the Sacraments: Others again content themselves to ascribe to him only a Power of Jurisdiction to make Church Laws, to in∣flict Church Censures. And herein they also differ, some puting this Power wholly in the Hand of the Magistrate: Others conjunctly with the Ministers; a third placeth it in him as the fountain, and in Church-men but as his Deputes; so that they are to act by vertue of a Commission from him, and meddle only with these things that he gives them Warrand for, and so to meddle with them as to be lyable to an Appeal to him as the supream Judge in all

Church matters. We contrary to all these shall make out this following Assertion: To wit, That the Civil Magistrate as a Magistrate hath no Power either to Preach, or Administrate the Sacraments, nor yet to make Church Laws, or inflict Church Censures, either by himself or others as his Deputes; but all this power doth belong wholly to Church Officers, Ministers, and Elders: Which power they are to execute without Dependency on the Civil Ma∣gistrate; so that they are not lyable to Appeals to his Court▪ neither hath he Power to rescind the Sentence pro∣nounced by them.

In following out of this point, we shall go on as in the former, we shall First clear the state of the question. Secondly, We shall bring Arguments for the Truth, Thirdly, We shall bring their Argu∣ments against the Truth, and refute them. Fourthly, We shall apply the whole to some use.

1. First, For clearing the State of the Question take this assertion; that however we do not give the Civil Magistrate Power of Church Discipline, or the power of governing the Church, yet we give him much Power about Church matters. Our Divines follow∣ing the word of God, give the Christian Magistrate a threefold Power about Church matters. 1. A de∣fensive protecting Power. 2, A ruling Power. And 3. a Punishing Power.

First, They give him a Defending Power, and that is grounded on that Promise made to the Church in Isa. 49. 23. And Kings shall be thy Nur∣sing Fathers, &c. By this Power the Christian Ma∣gistrate is to do three things. 1. By his Power he

is to encourage, countenance, and advance by his Authority and example the publick exercise of all Gods Ordinances; and so defend the Church in her Liberties that are given to her by Christ: This was the practice of those Godly Kings under the Old Testament: So did Asa, 2 Chron. 15. to verse ••8. and Jehoshaphat. 2 Chron. 1. 8, 9. 10, 11. And other Godly Kings. They encouraged others in the Ser∣vice of God; they countenanced them, and by their Authority and example allured others to the practice of Godliness; which I ower Christian Magistrates have yet. 2. By this Power they are to provide the Church with all external Necessaries; as publick convenient P••aces of meeting for Gods Worship, and publick Mantainance for the Church Officers,&c This we see was Hezekiah's practice 2 Chron. 31. 4. Moreover, he commanded the People that dwelt in Jerusalem, to give the portion of the Priests, and the Levites, that they might be encouraged in the Law of the Lord. And it was Jo••••ah's practice 2 Chron. 34. He repaired the House of the Lord, The publick place of Gods Worship. 3. By this defending Power of the Christian Magistrate, he is to remove all outward Impediments lying in the way of God's Worship, such as Propha∣nity, Idolatry, Heresy, and Blaspemy, as we did prove at length in the former Controversy.

Secondly, We give to the Christian Magistrate a Ruling Power about Church matters: By this Power 1. He may convocate Church Judicatories, com∣mand them to meet, and to enact Canons, and to make rules for Governing the Church; although

he cannot make Church Laws himself: So pious Magistrates under the Old Testament did call Sy∣nods, as David 1 Chron. 23 2. And he gathered toge∣ther all the Princes of Israel, with the Priests and Levites. 2. By this Power the Christian Magistrate is to con∣firm the acts of the Church Judicatories, and to give the force of a Civil Law: Only herein we differ from the Papists, They say the Magistrate should do this blindly, he is only (say they) the Churches Echo to ••ay Amen to what they conclude: But we say the Magistrate is not to do this blindly, we allow to him a judgement of Discretion to try whether what they conclude be right or not, and accordingly he is to add his Authority or not; and yet this makes him not a Judge in Church matters, but only a Judge of his own Actions. 3. By this Power the Magistrate is to take Inspection of the Carriage of Church Judicatories, so that all things be rightly managed by them; so as if they should conclude a point of Injustice, though he may not rescind their Act him∣self; yet he may command them to resume the the matter, take it to their second Thoughts, give Reasons to the contrair, exhort them to their Duties from time to time, until the matter be rightly con∣cluded: Only it is still the Church Judicatory that must rescind their own Act. By this ruling Power the Magistrate may do much: When the Church is corrupt he may reform it: That is, when Church Judicatories are all wrong, that they will do nothing for his upstirring, In this case the Magistrate may lay the Church Judicatory aside, and do that himself

which they should do: His Power in this case is ex∣traordinary, he may reform by his own Power, as Godly Josiah did 2 King 23. And as Asa and Jehosha∣phat. At such a time Magistrates may do much this way: But extraordinary Cases are not to be made ordinary Rules.

Thirdly, We give to the Magistrate a Coactive pu∣nishing power about Church-matters, and by this power we affirm that all the persons of Church-men, and their goods are lyable to the Civil Magistrate in things Civil: According to that, Let every soul be subject to the higher powers (contrary to what the Pa∣pists teach) so that if a Church-man should commit a Civil crime, the Magistrate by his own power may punish him; as Solomon did Abiathar. 2. By this coactive punishing power he may see to the Observation of Divine and Church Laws, and pu∣nish those that are contemners of them by Civil pu∣nishments. There are several examples of this; as that of Josiah He made all the People stand to the Co∣venant. Now, by all that is said ye may easily per∣ceive, that We give to Caesar that which is Caesars; although we give him not what is Gods: We give him much power about the Church, but not the power of Governing the Church. We shall clear this by a simile, how the Magistrate may have much power about Church-matters; although not power of Governing the Church: Ye know the Civil Magistrate, or Church Sessions, have much power about matters belonging to husband and wife, Pa∣rents and Children, so as to censure and punish them

for their unnatural carriage towards each other, and to see every one do duty to another; and yet neither the Civil Magistrate nor Church Session hath Ma∣rital or Husbandly power over the Wife, or Paren∣tal power over the Children so as they might chal∣lenge the same duties from them, to be done to themselves, which the Wife oweth to her Husband, or the Children to the Parents; the Husband and Parents only have that power: So it is here, The Magistrate hath much power about Church matters, but he hath no Church-power properly so called; that belongeth only to Christs own officers. Second∣ly, For clearing of the question take this Assertion, what we deny to the Christian Magistrate in the power of Governing the Church, we deny it to him only as a Magistrate; for so we laid it down in the conclusion to be proved, A Magistrate as a Ma∣gistrate hath no power in Governing the Church, other∣wise if a Christian Magistrate be chosen an Elder, he hath power of Church Government, being joyned with the rest: Only we say as a Magistrate he hath no power to Govern the Church.

II. We come to the Second thing which is our Arguments to confirm the Truth, And the first Ar∣gument is this That Jesus Christ hath given no warrand to the Civil Magistrate for the Government of his Church, and therefore he hath no right to it. 1, We say, that Christ in his word hath given no warr∣and to the Magistrate for Governing his Church: And this will appear from all these places where mention is made of any warrand given to any, of Church

Government; There is no word of the Christian Magistrate in any of them, only mention is made of Apostles, Ministers and Elders: so in Matth: 16. 19. The power of Governing the Church to bind and loose is given to Peter in the name of the rest of the Apostles, but no word of the Civil Magistrate. And Matth: 18. 17. the power of Excommunication is given to the Church and if he shall neglect to hear them 〈…〉〈…〉 be—&c. The Church of Ministers and Elders hath the power, but no word of the Civil Magistrate And so in Timoth: and Titus the scope of which E∣pistles is to instruct Ministers concerning the right way of Governing the Church, what is spoken there, is spoken to them and to Ministers succeeding to them, but there is no mention of the Civil Magi∣strate. And therefore we may conclude he hath no right from Jesus Christ for Governing the Church: And what he would challenge of that kind is but an usurpation and intruding unto that, to which he hath no right.

Our second Argument is, If the power of the Church Government belong to a Magistrate as a Magistrate, then it belongeth to every Magistrate but this were absurd. We say, if the power of Go∣verning the Church did belong to a Magistrate as a Magistrate▪ then it should belong to every Magi∣strate, for whatever belongs to one as such, belongs to all such. Now this hath many absurdities fol∣lowing on it; For by this Rule Heathen Magistrates might have power of Church Government, and be Church Governours, which were absurd; For they

are not Church Members. Then Secondly, Women might be Church Governours, for they may be Ma∣gistrates in some cases, and yet they may not speak in the Church. Yea Thirdly, By this it should fol∣low that Children not come to age might have the power of Church Government, for they may be Magistrates, when Magistracy goeth by succession; Now Children cannot have the power of Church Government for that power is not to be Exercised by deputies, but by the persons themselves who are intrusted with it.

A Third Argument to confirm the Truth is this, That Magistrates as Magistrates are not Church Of∣ficers; And therefore they have no power to Go∣vern the Church. The consequence is clear, for if Magistrates have power to Govern the Church, then they must be Church Officers, if any thing make a man a Church Officer, then power to Go∣vern the Church will do it, for State Government and State Officers are Relata, and have a mutual Re∣lation one to another, and so must Church Govern∣ment and Church Officers have a mutual Relation one to another: But in the next place it is evident, That a Magistrate as a Magistrate is no Church Of∣ficer, and that because among all that roll, set down in the word of God, wherein Christ reckons up his Officers, there is no mention made of the Civil Ma∣gistrate. Ephes: 4. There is a roll verse 11. And he gave some Apostles, and some Prophets, and some E∣vangelists and some Pastors, and teachers. But no word of the Civil Magistrate: and in Rom: 12, 6, 7. There

is an other roll of Church officers, but no word of of the Civil Magistrate—whether prophecy, let us prophecy according to the proportion of Faith: Or Mini∣stery, let us wait on our Ministering: or he that teach∣eth, on teaching: &c. But neither in this place or any other is there any mention of the Civil Magistrate: Only some of our Adversaries mutter somewhat of 1 Cor: 12. 28. That by Governments there men∣tioned is meaned the Christian Magistrate, but it is easily refuted, for the text speaketh evidently of such Governours, as the Church had at that time; And God hath set some in the Church—&c. Now the Church at that time had no Christian Magistrate, nor for above 200 years after. So by Governments can∣not be meaned the Christian Magistrate but the Ruling Elder, who is often spoken of in other places.

Our Fourth Argument to prove this point is, That the Church did enjoy full power of Government within her self, and accordingly did exercise it, near 300 years, before any Magistrate was a Christi∣an, and so the Church hath this power within her self yet. For the first part of the Argument, it is evident if we consider: First, That which is not controverted, to wit, that in the space of 300 years after Christ, there was not a Magistrate a Christian: If we consider, Secondly, That all this time the Church had full power of Church Government with∣in her self; and therefore Paul sayes to Timothy 1 Tim: 4. 14. Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the

hands of the Presbytery. So they had power of Ordi∣nation, Power also to dispence Censures, as Excom∣munication. 1 Cor: 5. 4, 5—When ye are gathered together—To deliver such a one unto Satan, for the de∣struction of the Flesh, &c. And they had power to relax from Excommunication: So 2 Cor: 2, 6. Where Paul commands to relax the Excommunicate man from that Sentence, Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. v. 7. So that contrariwise, ye ought rather to forgive him, &c. Fourth∣ly, They had Synods meeting together, making binding Canons to guide the Church. Act: 15. The Synod of Apostles, Elders, and Brethren meet to∣gether, determine a controversie, and Censure those who had troubled the Church. Thus the first part of the Argument is made out, to wit, That the Church did enjoy full power of Discipline within her self long before any Magistrate became Christian, And therefore it followes that this power is yet in the Churches hand, and not in the Magistrates. And that because if the Church at that time had right to dispence this power, as undoubtedly she had, then they must make it appear how Christ took this right from her and transferred it to the Civil Magi∣strate, which they cannot do.

Our fifth Argument is to obviate that which they say, That Ministers are but the Magistrates deputes: From which we argue thus: If Church Officers in in∣flicting Censures be the Magistrates deputs, then whatever the Church Judicatory does the Magistrate may do it also, for none can delegate more right to

ther than what he hath himself: And so by this it should follow that the Magistrate might ordain Mi∣sters himself by imposition of hands, he might Ex∣communicate; And if he may do this, by consequence he might also Preach, Administrate the Sacraments &c. For what right can be pretended to the one, which may not be extended to the other; and so there should be no need of Pastors and Teachers, but the Magistrate might do all.

Our last Argument is taken from the distinction which the Scripture holdeth out betwixt Ecclesi∣astick and Civil power, Scripture condemneth Church-mens usurping the Civil power, and States∣mens usurping the Church power: Church men are forbidden to judge or meddle with Civil things by Christ himself Luk: 12. 13, 14. 22 25. And so the Civil Magistrate may not meddle with Church pow∣er either: There are two Kings we read of to be heavily punished for their Transgression in this kind; Saul, for offering a Burnt-offering 1 Sam: 13. 13. And Vzziah, for burning Incense 2 Chorn. 26. 19. He would go in and burn Incense; And therefore the Lord smites him with leprosie. And surely Rea∣son would say, if it be a sin for Church Officers to Exercise the Civil Government, then it is a sin for the Civil Magistrate to take to himself the only su∣pream power of Church Government, and ingross it wholy to himself.

III. We come to the Third thing we promised to speak to, And that was the answering of the Oppo∣sites Arguments. The first Argument they bring

against this Truth is, That Godly Magistrates under the Old Testament had the power of Church Go∣vernment: And therefore so should Christian Ma∣gistrates have it under the New. Wee Answer, That their Argument proves nothing, except they also prove, that what power of Church Government Magistrates had then, they had it as Magistrates: For we grant indeed what did belong to Magistrates as Magistrates under the Old Testament, does be∣long to Magistrates under the New; But it may not be granted, that that which belonged to Magi∣strates then under other respects, doth belong to Magistrates yet. For clearing of this, It is to be observed that there were many Magistrates extraor∣dinary men under the Old Testament. So Moses gives out Laws and Ordinances for ordering the Church; But we find in Deut: 18. 15. Moses was a great Prophet and a Type of Christ. The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee, of thy Brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken. So David appointed the office of the Le∣vites that divided their courses; But David was a Prophet 2. Chron: 8, 14. And he appointed according to the order of David his father, the courses of the Priests to their service: Thus in another place it is shown how David did this at the direction of other Prophets, 2 Chron. 29. 25. And he set the Levites in the House of the Lord with Cymbals, with Psalters, and with Harps, according to the Commandment of David, and of Gad the Kings seer, and Nathan the Prophet: For so was the Commandment of the Lord by his Pro∣phets.

And so from these and such like practices they can no more infer the Power of the Magistrate now in Church matters, than we may infer the Power of Church-men in Civil-matters from the example of Church-men under the Old-Testament: For Church-men did meddle with Civil-Matters in extraordinary Cases: As Eli the Priest, He go∣verned the State: And Samuel, in cutting Agag in pieces. Elisha in Anointing Jehu to be King: And Jeho••ada the Priest, in causing kill Attaliah the Us∣urper, and making Joash King. All which we grant were extraordinary Acts, and so cannot be an ordi∣nary rule for Church-men to have such Power in Ci∣vil things now: And so must they grant concern∣ing these extraordinary practices of Civil Judges, in medling sometimes with Church matters.

The Second Argument they use is this, If so be that Magistrates were set over Church Officers to re∣ceive Appeals from them, it would make them afraid to go beyond their Duty: But if they have none above them, there is danger of their Ambition and abusing of Discipline. To which we answer, First, Ministers are Men indeed, and as other men, are ready to abuse their Power; But if the danger of abusing Power be a good Argument to take Power from them, then there should be no Power in the Hands of any: For what kind of Men are there to be found, who are not in danger to abuse their Power, and so all must be left in Confusion. We give a second answer, That the same Argument may be used against the abuse of Preaching the Word,

and administrating the Sacraments, For the danger is as great; and yet the Erasitans (the most part of them at least) will not say that the Magistrate, for preventing of this abuse, may step into the Pulpit himself and Preach better, and Administer the Sa∣craments better, There is another way to curb that abuse; and so is it in the matter of Governing the Church, there is danger indeed of abusing that Power: but we say in like manner, that for that the Magistrate may not sit down and take the Power of Church Government himself: There are other means left to prevent this danger: Which shall be our Third Answer, Wherein we shall show some of these means appointed by God for preventing the abuse of Power in the hands of the Church-Officers: First, There are some Remedies in the Church Power it self, to wit, The Subordination of Judi∣catories: So that although a Congregational Elder∣ship should wrest Justice; yet there are above them Presbyteries, and above them Synods, and above them General Assemblies. Now it may be conceived that an Act of Injustice will hardly get through all those, before it be branded with some deserved mark: But Secondly, Though all Church Officers should con∣nive one at another, and so the Faults of Ministers go through unpunished, yet there is some remedy left even in the Civil Power: For although, for the reasons foresaid, he may not take upon him the Power of the Church Judicatory under pretence of Righting their Abuses, no more than he may take upon him to Preach, for preventing their abuse of

Preaching: Yet he may do several things. 1. If Church Officers commit a civil Crime, he may curb them by his own Authority. 2. If Church Judica∣tories meddle to judge in Civil things which con∣cern a mans Life or Estate, the Magistrate may make null what they conclude and punish them for abuse of Power; for therein they medled with what belonged not unto them. 3. Grant the matter be meerly Ecclesiastick wherein they abuse their Power, yet the Magistrate may do somewhat here also: He may command them to resume the matter, he may compear in person and reason the matter, and bid them see to it in the Name of the Lord, and stir them up to judge it better, and he may go from one Judicatory to another till he get this done: As for example, If it be a censure wrongously inflicted; But yet it is still the Church Judicatory that must ranverse their own Censure.

The Third Argument they use against this Truth is, If the Power were put in the Hands of the Civil Magistrate, it would be a mean to decide all the whole Controversies about Church Government, which are managed with so much Animosity on all hands: Prelates plead that They should have the Power of it: Independents That particular Congre∣gations: Presbyterians, That Sessions, Presbyteries, Synods, General Assemblies, should have the Power of it, the former being Subordinate to the latter, Ses∣sions to Presbyteries, &c. Hence ariseth all our De∣bates: Now were not this good to take it from all, and give it to the Magistrate. We answer. It is a

way to end the Difference, such as Solomon did to the two Women striving about the living Child, It shall be none of yours, A way that relished not with the kindly Mother of the Child, 1 Kings 3. 25. Se∣condly, We answer, This Argument may take with natural Hearts who would buy Peace at any rate; but not with those who are taught of God To buy the Truth and not to sell it; For it holdeth out a way to end Controversies, which is not God's: His way is to establish what is right, and to quite what is wrong: But this way tends to suppress both right and wrong, such Peace-makers will not be Blessed.

Thirdly, The Presbyterians may borrow this Ar∣gument against Prelates, Independents, Erastians, and have better right to it, and so it will run thus: If Church Government were put in the hands of the Presbytery, It would establish and settle all Differen∣ces in the matter of Church Government betwixt Prelates, Independents, and Erastians: Now if this Ar∣ment be good when they use it for them, it must be al∣so good when it is used for us: But I doubt if they will admit of such like reasoning, and so neither can we.

There is a Fourth Argument they use, say they, Jeremiah appealed to the Civil Magistrate Jerem: 26. and so Paul Act: 25. He appeals to Caesar. We an∣swer, let that place of Jeremiah cap. 26. be read, and nothing will be found to prove that Jeremiah makes any appeal to the Civil Judicatories: But Secondly, Though he had appealed, yet it does not prove that it is Lawful to appeal to the Magistrate in a Church business; for the Sentence which the Priests had

past on Jeremiah was Civil, Thou shalt surely die, v. 8. Now it was the Princes Duty to see to it. That Innocent Jeremiah should not be put to Death, espe∣cially by those who had no Powet to inflict such a pu∣nishment. As for that instance Acts 25. 10, 11. about Paul's appealing to Caesar, it makes nothing to these purposes; He appeals only from Festus, an Inferior Civil Magistrate to the Superior; And this we are not against. But Secondly; Though Paul had ap∣pealed from a Church Judicatory, yet this makes nothing to confirm their Doctrine: For the cause here whereabout Paul was to be judged, was a Ci∣vil cause, to wit, Treason against Caesar, And a thing worthy of Death. Now we do Teach, that a Church-man may appeal to a Civil Magistrate, when he is questioned about his Life▪ and for a Civil crime; But hence it followeth not, That we may appeal from a Church Judicatory, when the cause is Ec∣clesiastick and no wayes civil.

Their last Objection is taken from 1 King. 2. 27. Whereof they make much, The words are, So Solo∣mon thrust out Abiathar, from being Priest unto the Lord: From which they argue thus: Here is a civil Magi∣strate inflicting a Church Censure, to wit, Depositi∣on of a Church-man, to wit, of Abiathar the Priest, Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being Priest unto the Lord: Therefore, Christian Magistrates have Power to Dispence Church Censures: Yet we answer, So∣lomon did nothing here but what we yeild to any Magistrate, for a civil Magistrate may inflict a civil Punishment on any person whatsomever for a ci∣vil

Crime; and so was the present case: Abiathar's Fault was Treason, in assisting Adonijah to the Crown against Solomon, appointed by God to it. Secondly, The Censure inflicted by Solomon was not a Church Censure, but civil, to wit, Banishment to Anathoth, as appears from verse 26. And therefore what is men∣tioned in verse 27. He thrust out Abiathar from being Priest unto the Lord, Is not the Censure directly in∣tended by Solomon, but that which followed upon his Banishment from Jerusalem, ipso facto; because the Office of the Priests could not be exercised but at Jerusalem.

IV. In the last place it follows, That we give a word of use from all we have said. The First use, If so be that Jesus Christ hath appointed a Govern∣ment in his House, as is proven, to be exercised by his own Officers, Then know that those Magistrates that would ingross this Power to themselves, so as to have his Courts and Censures depending on them, or rather taken away, and others put in their place, do highly incroach on the Regal Power of our King Jesus Christ. And this seemeth to be the great sin of the Times, Atheists, prophane Men, plead for it; as looking for more forbearance to their Lusts from civil Powers, than from Christs own Courts. Ci∣vil Powers plead for it; They are not content that Christ let Them reign, and that they let Christ reign besides them; But they must have him thrust out of his Throne, and made to plead at their bar; And so no wonder Christ overturn Kingdoms and Go∣vernments: It was the Parliament of England's fault,

They feared lest Christs Courts should have wrong∣ed their Priviledges; Hence they would not allow him his Priviledges: They set up indeed a Govern∣ment in Christ's House, but it was a Lame one; They durst not give Christs Courts their full Power, but so as to be their Deputes: And therefore they have dashed themselves against that corner-stone Christ Jesus, until they are struck in pieces, Their Fear is come upon them. What they feared from Christs Courts, they have met with at the Hands of their own Servants: Our Kings have still been afraid of this, and Malignants also going under the Name of Royalists; They thought they could not get Their Throne secure if so be Christ got leave to reign besides them; And this among many others hath made their Throne shake. O that Kings would be wise and kiss the Son, It would be their Wis∣dom to be faithful in what is committed unto them; But for the Government of his House it is not in their Charter, and so a thing that will not thrive in their hands, their prudential Laws and Rules will do no good.

Secondly, Yee would ground your self in this Truth; It may cost you much, and though it should stand you never so much, it is worth the avowing. Christ himself suffered on this account (as we have already shown) and others of his servants have thought it their Glory to be called unto suffering for it. Who am I (saith Master Welsh)

That he hath not only called me to be a Preacher of glad things, but also to be a sufferer for his cause and King∣dom;

To wittness that good confession, That Jesus Christ is the King of Saints, and that his Church is a most free Kingdom; Yea as free as any Kingdom under Heaven: That she is free in her Government from all other Jurisdiction on Earth except only Christs: We are waiting (saith he) with joyfulness to leave the last Testimony of our blood for the confirmation of this Truth; If it would please our God to be so favourable, as to honour us with that dignity.

Thus He. And who knowes how soon he may honour some of us with that dignity: A dignity indeed to suffer for the Royal Crown and Diadem of Our Lord Jesus.