A peaceable and temperate plea for Pauls presbyterie in Scotland, or, A modest and brotherly dispute of the government of the Church of Scotland wherein our discipline is demonstrated to be the true apostolick way of divine truth, and the arguments on the contrary are friendly dissolved, the grounds of separation and the indepencie [sic] of particular congregations, in defence of ecclesiasticall presbyteries, synods, and assemblies, are examined and tryed / by Samuell Rutherfurd ...

CHAP. XIX. (Book 19)

Doubts against Presbyteriall government discussed, as a∣bout ruling Elders, Deacons, Widowes, the Kings pow∣er in things ecclesiasticall. (Book 19)

Quest. 1. HOw doth Calvin and Cartwright deny that the Apostle speaketh of ruling Elders, Tit. 1. and yet Junius and Beza,* 1.1 that both a preaching and ru∣ling Elder are there comprehended,* 1.2 So the authour of the sur∣vey of discipline.

Answ. A great question anent the latitude of an haire; how doth many Formalists make the Prelate an humane creature, and some jure humano, and yet Land of Canter∣bury

and D. Hall maketh him, jure divino.

2. An office may be described two wayes. 1. Direct∣ly and expressely, as the Pastor, 1 Tim. 3. 2. Indirectly, as many things agreeing to the Deacon, as that he hold the mystery of saith in a good conscience, ••e be sober, grave, faith∣full in all things, &c. all which are required in the Doctor and Pastor also.

Quest. 2. How are the ruling Elders, 1 Tim. 3. omit∣ted where the officers are named? Paul passeth from the Bishop to the Deacon, omitting the ruling Elder: So is hee omitted, Ephesian. 3. 11 Philip. 1. 1. it is like they are not of Christs making, who are not in Christs rowle.

Answ. Either the Prelate or the Presbyter is omitted, 1 Tim. 3. Phil. 1. not the preaching Presbyter, as is cleare by the description agreeing onely to him. Ergo, the Prelate is out of Christs rowle.

2. Doctors are omitted, Phil. 1. 1. 1 Tim. 3. and yet are set downe, Eph. 4. 11. yet are ruling Elders in other places, as Rom. 12. 1 Cor. 12.

3. Paul, 1 Tim. 3. is not describing offices, but giveth Canons, which generally agreeth to all Church-officers, howbeit he giveth instance in two, yet in such two as includeth all the rest, as he that laboureth in tea∣ching and governing, and he that taketh care of the Church goods. When Moses describeth the Judge, he sheweth what a man the King, the Justice of peace, the Sheriffe, the Major of a City, the Lord of the pri∣vy Councell should be, howbeit these be not named in the Text. Hence, because they are not named, it fol∣loweth not that they are omitted, and not spoken of in the Text.

Quest. 3. But Elders are not, 1 Cor. 12. 29. nor yet, Rom. 12. but only governours (saith Whytgift and Dr. Field) and it is an ill argument, à genere ad speciem affir∣mativè, he nameth gouernours, it followeth not therfore he na∣meth your governing Elders.

Answ. 1. Where Paul setteth downe in order officers by their speciall names, ordinary and extraordinary, as

first Apostles, secondarily Prophets, thirdly Teachers, &c. he cannot reckon out generals only, for so Apostles, Prophets, Teachers, should be also but generals, for the words in Scripture also signifie generals.

2. The enumeration should halt, which yet is orderly set down, if it were composed of a number of particulars and the generals of some easten in amongst them.

Neither can some here well understand the civill Magi∣strate. 1. Because he speaketh of the Church as the body of Christ consisting of divers members ecclesiasticall, And God hath set some i•• the Church, and also he spea∣keth of the Church, Rom. 12. 5. seeing wee being many are one body in Christ, and in that place the ruler is clearly differenced from the teaching Doctor, v. 7. from the exhorting Pastour, and him who showeth mercy in the Church, but the civill Magistrate is not a Church officer whom God hath set in the Church, as hee hath set Apostles, Prophets, &c. for God hath set him in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in the Common-wealth, and his in∣fluence in governing Gods house is meerely civill, co∣active and regall, not pastorall, ecclesiastick and mini∣steriall.

Neither yet can the place be meant of the governing Prelate. 1. Because the Prelate is thought to be the Apo∣stles successour and is first in the roule, but the governours heere are some steps posterior to Apostles, Prophets, &c. 2. Because the Prelate giveth himselfe out to be a certaine preaching creature, such as it may be, 1 Tim. 3. 2. Tit. 1. 9. but the governours here in this lincke are contra-distinguished from Prophets and Teachers, and so the Prelate should either be a sole lord governor and no teacher, or then he shall be twise, yea thrice named in one verse, 1. under the name of an Apostle, next under the name of a Prophet, and lastly, should come in as a go∣vernour, so the Prelate, as in Church and State, so also in the Bible, he should carry too much booke. Now see∣ing here are governours in the Church, contra-distingui∣shed from Prophets and Teachers, from a just enumerati∣on

they must be ruling Elders, and it is to be observed that the Apostle saith not, Are all Arch-bishops? are all Primates? And surely the Jesuites have no l••sse roome without th••ong to pinne in, in this wall, under the name of helpes and governments, their regular Canons and secular Priests,* 1.3 as Formalists can alledge for Prelates and their long tayle. What Tilenus saith against this place is fully answered by Didoclavius, for because the Apostle confoundeth or rather reckoneth together in one enumeration ordinary and extraordinary functions in the Church, will it follow he doth not here speake of ruling Elders? If that reason be good, neither is the Prelate here, nor is the Pastor or the Doctor here, and if there be who excell in the gift of governing, who yet ar•• not called to preach, who can deny the necessity of this office?

Many answers are given to elude the force of that place,* 1.4 1 Tim. 5. 17. The Elders who rule well, &c. shall ever inforce that loytering Pastors, who labour not in the Word and Doctrine are commended by the Spirit of God, as worthy of double honour. For wee reason thus.

If these sort of Elders who rule well, and especially these who labour in the Word and Doctrine are wor∣thy of double honour, then are there two sorts of Elders, some who rule well, and some who labour in the Word and Doctrine.

But the former is said, 1 Tim. 5. 17.

Ergo, The latter must be true.

The proposition in terminis almost is our thesis, if two sorts of Elders bee worthy of double honour, then are there two sort of Elders, for à qualitate & ab adjuncto subjecti ponitur subjectum ipsum: Al∣so if Paul make the well ruling Elder worthy of double honour, and more especially the teaching Elder, then hee acknowledgeth some well-ruling Elder worthy of double honour, howbeit, hee labour not in the Word. A reason is; because the

positive and comparative are ever differenced, and ma∣keth a number, when both are specified with particula∣rities as here, they are by (well-ruling) and (labouring in the word and doctrine.) The Author of the Survay durst not looke this place in the face. Bilson, Field and Tylen deny our major proposition.

If one should say (say they) a preacher is worthy of dou∣ble honour, especially a painfull Preacher, he should not say there be two kinds of Preachers, some Preachers thus and thus, and some painfull Preachers, and a King is worthy of honour, especially a iust King, he should not make two sorts; some are Kings, and some are iust Kings, as Deacons and Pastors are two sort of Offices.

Answ. He who saith a Pastor is worthy of honour espe∣cially a painfull Pastor, should clearly insinuate that two sort of honours were due to Pastors two wayes con∣sidered; For in the former part he should speake of the office, which indeed is worthy of honour; In the latter part he should speake of the officer in concreto, laudably discharging his office; but Paul speaketh not so; for he speaketh not of the office, and the officer, of the abstract and concret, of the office, and the use and exercise of the office, as is here alleadged; but he speaketh of officers in the exercise and use of their of∣fice in both: He saith not Elders are worthy of ho∣nour, for that might well beare this sense; that the office of an Elder is worthy of double honour, which sense should be most true; for the office of an Elder is worthy of double honour, which sense should be most true; for the office of an Elder is worthy of honour. Suppose the man be wicked; but the Apostle speaketh not of the office, but the officers, and the praise-worthy exercise of the office: The Elders who rule well are wor∣thy of double honour, and so the example is not alike.

2. If Paul had put downe a generall onely in the former part, and said, an Elder is worthy of honour, this answer might have had some colour (howbeit but a colour) But now Paul putteth downe a speciall: El∣ders

who rule well are worthy of double honour; and with these another speciall sort of Elders, especially these who labour in the word and doctrine; and so clearly he set∣teth downe two particular species and sorts of Elders: Now to make good the sense of the objectors of this, they must say, a worthy Preacher who ruleth well is wor∣thy of double honour, but especially a worthy Preacher is worthy of double honour; Therefore of necessity some Elders who rule well must be meaned in the former part, who are not meaned in the second, and these can in good reason be no other but ruling Elders and tea∣ching Elders; for these same sort of Elders cannot be un∣derstood in both places.

3. And this sense, suppose it should stand, should have but a colour of reason, because you shall never find the Spirit of God commend and praise the simple exercise of an office; but the right and conscientious exercise thereof. Gods Spirit will not say, he who ruleth, and he who preacheth is worthy of double honour; but he who ruleth well and preacheth well is worthy of dou∣ble honour.

4. By this wild interpretation men may be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, well-governing Pastors, who labour not in the word and doctrine, and so the dumbe Prelates, who hold it all one to be damned to a Pulpit, and to a man∣mill, shall be Pastors worthy of double honour. Now Paul will not say this of a right Bishop, 1 Tim. 3. 2. Tit. 1. 9. because good governing in a Pastor includeth labouring in the word and doctrine, as the whole in∣cludeth the part: For preaching is a speciall act of overseeing and well-governing of soules, Jer. 1. 10. 2 Tim: 4. 2. Because the word is the instrument of pastorall governing, how can Pastors rule well by using aright the word of God, except they labour in the word, which is the shepheards staff: of right governing and painfull preaching, Heb. 13. 17. Acts 20. 28, 29, ••0, 31. And so the Apostle shall say one thing twice; to wit, these Pastors who rule well in labouring in the word

are worthy of double honour, especially these Pastors who labour well in the word and doctrine.

5. To labour in the word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 1 Cor. 3. 8. 1 Cor. 15. 38. 1 Thes. 1. 3. Mat. 11▪ 28. is a word in the posi∣tive, and not in the superlative degree: And let it be a word of the superlative degree, if the well-governing Elder here signifie the Prelate (as the currant exposi∣tion of Formalists is) and the Elder labouring in the word and doctrine signifie the painfull preaching Pres∣byter, then the Presbyter who is a poore Pulpit-man is more worthy of double honor and double maintenance, and the Lordly benefice, then my Lord Prelate. This glose will offend the proud Prelate.

Doctor Hall fetcheth from Scul••etus another poore in∣terpretation:* 1.5 The Elders who rule well, that is, admini∣ster the Sacraments, make publike prayers, and privately ad∣monish faithfull people are worthy of double honour, especi∣ally these who excell in the gift of teaching, which is more ex∣cellent then baptizing, 1 Cor. 1. 17.

Answ. 1. We have a new office brought in in odium tertij, out of hatred to ruling Elders, and this is a crea∣ture who can baptize, administer the Lords Supper, and pray far off a print booke, and admonish in cor∣ners, but cannot preach; but first I aske this fellowes name.

2. Where is such an officer in Gods word?

3. By what warrant hath one power to administer the Sacraments, and that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, well as a well-governing Elder, who cannot preach the word and pray, this is but the reading Priest, who saith service for hire; and yet he baptizeth ex officio, by his office: Christ con∣joyneth the publike preaching and baptizing, Mat. 28. 18, 19. as two parts of an office, and here they are se∣parated and given to different officers.

4. How is a man called on that ruleth well, because he baptizeth well, and readeth faire in the booke? and is not called on who ruleth well, because he preacheth well? For it cannot be conceived how baptizing be∣longeth

rather to well governing then good preaching. 3. Good governing is the Prelates element; for so he saith himselfe; but to preach base, it's for his Chap∣laine; and by this, to read service, to baptize, to ex∣hort privately shall make the Prelate a good governing Elder, but worthy of lesse honour then the preaching Presbyter: But the right Bishop, 1 Tim. 3. must both be apt to teach, and one who can governe well, and this maketh the Prelate in office only a Reader.* 1.6

But neither can Doctor Fields other glosse stand. The guides of the Church are worthy of double honour, both in respect of governing and teaching, but especially for their paines in teaching, so he noteth two parts or duties of Pres∣byteriall offices, not two sorts of Presbyteries.

Answ. 1. By this it is the Prelates glory to preach, but he cryeth up courting and Lordly command, and in his practise cryeth downe preaching.

2. This interpretation wrongeth the Text: For the divers Pronounes must note divers persons, as is cleare in the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and it is all one as if Paul should say, That Archippus who ruleth well is worthy of double honour, especially that Archippus who la∣boureth in the word and doctrine, where as it is one Ar∣chippus who ruleth well, and laboureth in the word and doctrine. None use to speake so supersluously, or igno∣rantly,* 1.7 who understandeth the Greeke Language, ex∣cept by way of excellency persons be noted which is not here: Also it should be untrue that any should be worthy of double honour for well governing, except only he who laboureth in the word and doctrine which is against reason, and the words of the Text.

Neither can these words (Tell the Church) stand in a particular Congregation, if ruling Elders be removed, especially where there is a Pastor in the Congregation: For then the Church should either signifie the multi∣tude of beleevers, which I have abundantly refuted, or the Pastor with the Deacons; but Deacons have no ju∣risdiction in Gods Church by the word of God: Or

thirdly the word Pastor it alone should signifie the Church which is Popish; therefore of necessity there must bee some Rulers with the Pastors which make the ministeriall Church, of which our Saviour spea∣keth.

Neither can the famous Councell at Jerusalem, con∣sisting of Apostles, Elders and Brethren, exclude ruling Elders.* 1.8 D. Field citeth Cyprian, Tertullian, Hierom, Am∣brose for ruling Elders,* 1.9 but doth no way satisfie the Reader; for he maketh them all preaching Elders, and maketh all the Presbyters to be preaching Presbyters,* 1.10 that he may fill the field with Prelates.* 1.11

But 1. the Ancients by way of question, and as it were doubting at least polimickely determine that the Councell and voices of Elders should be had in gover∣ning the Church; but seeing they all, and most expresly Hierom acknowledge, that Episcopus and Presbyter are all one, they must either understand other Elders then preaching Elders, otherwayes it was a question amongst them, if Bishops had voices in the government of the Church, which was never heard in all Antiquity.

2. Cyprian complaineth that seniores had been debar∣red in discipline, but acknowledgeth that Presbyters were so proud that they were Masters of all, and ruled all absque consensu seniorum; therefore he acknowled∣ged preaching Presbyters, and governing seniores to be diff••rent.

3. We are not to doubt but Hierom knew the mind of Antiquity better then D. Field, and that Hierom was not singular in this knowne to all: Quid facit Episco∣pus, quod non facit Presbyter exceptâ ordinatione? Hence Pastors have had in the ancient Church all power of ju∣risdiction with these who were, as Hierom saith, Bi∣shops or Prelates, consuetudine, non dominicâ dispositione, by the Churches custome, Prelates above Pastors, and this is the judgement of all our Divines, who have ever jud∣ged the contrary Popery, and a step to the Popes Chaire. I might cite Calvin, Beza, Junius, Bucan, Pareus, Vr∣sine,

Luther, Melancthon, Polan. Piscat••r, Sibrandus, Are∣tius, Danaeus, Fenerus, Kickerman, Rivet, Walleus, Pro∣fessors of Leyden, Gil, Voctius, and many others. Now if Antiquity tooke Episcopus and Presbyter for all one, ex∣cept in the sole act of ordination, and in all other points of jurisdiction they were equall, what meaned that word that the Ancients all approved, none gains••ying that ever I saw who are not parties or corrupted by Prelates: Episcopi nihil faciunt sine consilio Cleric••rum; and nihil sine consilio Presbyterorum. The meaning must be ridiculous, except ruling Elders be understood. Pastors doe nothing without the advise of Pastors, and Bishops doe nothing without the counsell of Bishops; for Bi∣shops and preaching Presbyters are all one, except in the act of ordination. We never read 〈◊〉〈◊〉 soun•• anti∣quity that Bishops domineered over Bishops,; Yea it is knowne the Bishop of Constantinople,* 1.12 and the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 had the dignity above the Bishop of Rome, and the Ch••rch of Rome. Ambrose or as venerable a man. The Jewish Church or Synagogue, and after the Church had Seniors or Elders, without whose counsell nothing was done in the Church, which by what negligence it grew out know not, unlesse it were by the sloth or pride of the teachers, whilest they alone would seeme to be something. Here are Elders di••••erenced from teachers: It is ignorantly replyed by Field, that none were teachers but Prelates, and all others teached by permission from the Prelate, because Valerius Bishop of Hippo gave Augustine a Presbyter leave to preach.

Answ. That none were teachers but Prelates is most false. What then, suppose we grant that? were none called teachers but Prelates? he dare not say that. Ter∣tullian, Irenaeus, Hierom, Augustine, Cyprian, Ambrose, Chrysostome, Oecumenius, Theophylact, Cyrillus, Prosper. Hillarius a thousand times calleth all Pastors, Doctors, teachers: And what, howbeit Christ be the only Arch-doctor and teacher, and all others teachers by his grace and gracious permission, are not Apostles, Bishops, Pa∣stors

called teachers, a hundred times in Gods word? and this man will not give the Ancients leave to call poore Presbyters teachers, and yet Paul giveth them this name, as they are contradistinguished from Apostles, Eph 4. 11. 1 Cor. 12. 29.

Q. 4. But the Ancients knew no Lay-Elders.

Answ. Nor doe we de iure know them, they are Church-men, and should be for all their life-time en∣tertained upon the Churches charges, what our Church, de facto, doth tolerate by reason of our Churches poverty, is another question.

Q. 5. How is it that your ruling-Elders doe not give imposition of hands,* 1.13 and blesse Pastors,* 1.14 when they are ordained, and so the lesser should blesse the grerter? So the author of Survay. So D. Field.

Answ. If they judicially cons••nt to imposition of hands, it is sufficient.

2. There is no inconvenience that a ruling Elder, as a part of the Presbytery blesse one, who is not yet a Pa∣stor, but to be ordained a Pastor: For the ordainer as he is such is greater then the ordained.

Q. 6. Beza giveth the keyes to both Pastors and El∣ders.* 1.15 Cartwright denyeth the koyes to any except only to Pastors.* 1.16 But Daniel Ni••llius,* 1.17 the keyes (saith he) were given to Peter,* 1.18 ratione officij, by his office, and not to the Apostles only, but also to all who were to be sent to preach and govern••.

Answ. The keyes by the preaching of the Gospell, Potestas concionalis clavium, were given to Peter as repre∣senting all Pastors and Doctors, tanquam subiecto adae∣quato: The keyes by way of disciplinary binding and loo∣sing were given to Peter, ta••quam, subiecto virtuali, re∣presenting not only Pastors, but also Doctors and ru∣ling Elders, who were to be called and sent of God.

Q. 7. How can any voice in matters of Religion, but only Pastors, for ruling Elders are not Pastors. So Field.

Answ.* 1.19 It is Jesaite-like to reason thus with Bellar∣mine, who saith, it is a pastorall act to define in Coun∣cels;

and therefore none should teach in Councell (saith Panormitan in the Councell of Basill) but Prelates who are the pillars and keyes of Heaven.* 1.20 So said Eccius.* 1.21 But the Councell of Basill thought not so,* 1.22 nor the Greeke Church,* 1.23 for whom Nilus speaketh alleadging others whom it concerneth, should voice also.

2. Matters of discipline concerneth all, Ergo, Elders representing the people should voice.

3. Suppose that the suffrage and voice of a Pastor, and of an Elder be voices different onely in diverse relati∣o••s to divers officers, to wit, the Pastor and the Ei∣der; yet in the matter of bearing weight in the con∣science from force of truth, and not from the authority of men, they are equall; and therefore ruling Elders having knowledge and light, and withall authority of office may well have voices: But it followeth not hence that these who have knowledge are formall Canon-makers, because the Decrees and constitutions of Sy∣nods lay two obligations upon the people: One for the matter, and so in respect that in the morall part there∣of they m••••t be agreeable to the word, they bind the consciences to an obedience of conscience. 2. They im∣pose an Ecclesiasticall tye from the authority of the Co••••cell and Canon-makers, and so they require sub∣jection or obedience of reverence for the authority of∣ficiall that is in the Canon-makers: The second com∣mand layeth on the first bond or tye, and the first com∣mand layeth on the other bond and tye.

Q. 8. Philip and Steven, who were Dea••ons, baptized ••nd preached, Acts 21. 8. Acts 7 1, 2, 3, &c. but your Dea••ons may not preach nor baptize, that so they may be prepared for the ministery, according to that 1 Tim. 3. 13. For th••y who have used the office of a Deacon will, pur∣ch••••e to themselves a good degree,* 1.24 and great boldnesse in the faith.

Answ. What Philip and Stephen did, in facto, in an extraordinary fact, nihil ponit in iure, it belongeth no∣thing to Law, but the 〈◊〉〈◊〉, of it selfe, is a serving of

Tables, and a taking of the burden of caring for the poore of the Pastors, that the Pastors may give them∣selves to the word and prayer, Acts 6. 2, 4. Now if Dea∣cons ex officio, turne Preachers, and give themselves to the word and prayer, then by the Apostles reason, Acts 6. 4. they cannot serve Tables, but they must have other Deacons to take the burden of the poore off them, that they may give themselves to the word.

2. Christ ordaineth,* 1.25 Mat. ••8. 18. Apostles and Pa∣stors their successors to preach the word, and not Dea∣cons.

3. There shall be moe officers in Gods house given for the edifying of the Saints,* 1.26 then Pastors and Doctors, even preaching Deacons; yea all the offices in Gods house shall be Preachers; the Prelate to Formalists is a peece of a Preacher; the Pastor and Doctor by their office must preach (the ruling Elder is nothing to them) and the Deacon is a teacher, and so all are teachers, ex officio, why then do••h Paul, 1 Cor. 12. difference be∣twixt Governours, helps and teachers, seeing all are teachers?

4. Rom. 12. He who sheweth mercy,* 1.27 and he who di∣stributeth are differenced by their specificke acts from the Pastor who exhorteth and preacheth.

5. Paul requireth,* 1.28 1 Tim. 3. that the Pastor be apt to teach; but he requireth no such thing of the Deacon, whose qualification he describeth at length.

6. The well using of the Deacons office is no more by,* 1.29 1 Tim. 3. 13. a degree to the ministery or pastorall calling, then, much boldnesse in the faith is a degree there∣unto, for he, who ex officio, doth preach and baptize, is not a degree to a Pastor, as he who discourseth is not in degree to be a man, or in preparation a man onely; but he is formally a man, now to preach and baptize, are specificke acts of a Pastor, Mat. 28. 18. and so the Deacon must be formally a Pastor, as he is formally a a man who can and doth performe acts which proceed only from the specificke forme of a man.

7. It is a mystery that a Deacon may preach and bap∣tize,* 1.30 but he may not administer the Sacrament of the Lords Supper: For 1. Philip an Evangelist as well as a Deacon might have done both. 2. Is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper holier then the Sacrament of Bap∣tisme, that the Deacon may administer the one Sacra∣ment, and not the other? But this is a Masse-mystery, there is no Transubstantiation in Baptisme, and there∣fore a woman, a laicke (as they speake) may baptize; but he must be a consecrated and orderly Priest who hath power to make and create the naturall body of Christ. So Greg.* 1.31 de Valentia,* 1.32 Suarez, Vasquez, Bucanus teacheth us.* 1.33 3. The word of God knoweth not any who have power to baptize,* 1.34 and have no power to administer the Lords Supper.

8. The Popish Libeller in the Survay saith,* 1.35 when now contributions and collections cease,* 1.36 the Deacon may preach and baptize. Then Deacons ordained, Rom. 12. 8. Acts 6. 4, 5. 1 Tim. 3. are now out of the world, and they have given to us for a well made Deacon, an ill made and a spilt Minister; but the cause remaining the office should remaine, the Churches poverty remaineth: For the Prelate hath a singular faculty of creating beggars in his Officiall-Courts.

Q. 9. How is it that you have taken away widowes, which was an office established by the Apostles? Rom. 12. 8. For some say they should be gone, because they were tem∣porary, and the heate of the Easterne Countries which cau∣sed sicknesse, required them, but they are not needfull now. So saith Cartwright. Others make them perpetuall, as Fen∣ner,* 1.37 some make them to be women, as Cartwright, some men,* 1.38 as Travors, some neither men nor women onely, as Beza and Junius.* 1.39

Answ.* 1.40 The perpetuall use of that office we thinke continueth, that is, that there be some to shew mercy on the poore, which are captives, exiled, strangers, dis∣eased, distracted, and that there be Hospitals for that effect, and Chirurgians, Physicians, aged men and wo∣men,

but that widowes were officers in the Church, as Elders and Deacons are, we thinke no; but that that service may be performed by men or women, as the Church shall thinke good. Cartwright thinketh no other then what I say. Fenner thinketh well that the sicke should alwayes be cared for, neither by men only, nor by women onely, as Beza and Junius thinke, but by both as need requireth.

Quest 10. Presbyteriall government cannot consist with a Monarchy, you ioyne with Papists in oppugning the Prin∣ces authority in causes Ecclesiasticall. Cartwright, Viretus, Calvin teach that the authority of Kings commeth imme∣diately from God the Creator, not from God in the Medi∣ator Christ. So the Survay.

Answ.* 1.41 It is the slanderous malice of Court-Syco∣phants, to say, a friend to Christ cannot be a friend to Cae∣sar; but we set downe our mind here anent thus.

1. Concl.* 1.42 Presbyteriall government, and the regall po∣wer of Monarchs doe well consist: Paul a favourer of this government, 1 Tim. 4. 14. commandeth that pray∣ers be put up to God for Kings and all who are in autho∣rity, and so doe we teach.

2. Conclusion.* 1.43 Our adversaries here corrupt the mind of Cartwright,* 1.44 Viretus, Calvin, and others, who say that the authority of Kings come immediately from God as Creator,* 1.45 and not from God in Christ as Mediator:* 1.46 For the kingly power is considered two wayes, 1. In ge∣nerall, as kingly, and in the person of heathen Princes, who know nothing of God as a Redeemer in the Me∣diator. And so the kingly power in generall as given for the good of all humane societies in generall, is from God the Creator for the good of all societies whither heathen or Christian. So Nebuchadnezzar, Darius, Nero, and Julian were essentially Kings, and yet had not their kingly power immediately from the Mediator Christ, except in this generall sense that the kingly power is a lawfull ordinance of God warranted by the word of God, and Testament of our Testator Jesus Christ, be∣cause

these are essentially Kings and lawfull Magistrates who either never heard of Christ, nor any thing of God; but onely that he is Creator of the world, or then who persecute and hate the name of Jesus Christ. It may be that the fruits of persecuting Princes, their go∣vernment redound to the ••ood and salvation of the Saints, and that by accident, as all things worke out for the good to those who love God. Now ••ormalists denying such to be lawfull Kings, as either know not Christ, or be∣leeve not in him, joyne hands with Papists, and make way for Anabaptisticall Ana••chy, that a persecuting, or an unbeleeving King is no King, not to be obeyed, but to be turned out of his Throne: And to this meaning, Calvin, Viretus, and Cartwright teach that the king∣ly power floweth immediately from God the Cre∣ator, not from God in the Mediator Christ. But 2. th•• kingly power is considered in a speciall manner, as it is in a Christian, whether professing onely the Gospell, or truly beleeving in Christ, and so in relation to Christs Church and to the soule of a beleeving Prince, the kingly power floweth from God in and through the Mediator Jesus Christ, as all common favours which in general•• flow from God the Creator, are sanctified, and blessed to the beleevers in the Mediator Christ, as meat, drinke, sleep, riches, kingly honour. And in this meaning, Sauls kingly honour in respect of Saul him∣selfe is but a common favour flowing from the Creator; howbeit to Gods Church, for whose good he did fight the battels of the Lord, it was a speciall favour flow∣ing from God in Christ, as our Divines say that creation (which in it selfe is a common favour to all) is a meane in the execution of the Decree of El••ction to the chil∣dren of God.

3. Conclusion.* 1.47 Hence our Divines say, that kingly authority is the same ordinance of God essentially con∣sidered in the heathen Princes,* 1.48 as in Christian Kings, as Cartwright and others say.* 1.49 Neither doth it follow as our unlawfull Canons teach, That the Christian Kings

now have that same power in Causes Ecclesiasticall, which the godly Kings amongst the Jewes, as David and Salomon had: ••or David and Salomon were Prophets as well as Kings, and had power to pen Canon••cke Scripture, and to prophesie, which power in Ecclesiasticke causes no King now can have. Neither doth it follow which Whytgift saith,* 1.50 that we give no more authority to the Chri∣stian Magistrate in the Church of Christ then to the great Turke. Our Divines say, and that with good warrant, that the kingly power as kingly, is one and the same in kind in heathen Nero, and in Christian Constantine, As a heathen man is as essentially a father to his owne children, and a husband to his owne wife, and a King to his owne subjects; as a Christian man is a father, hus∣band, and king to his owne children, wife, and subjects. Neither doth Christianity superadde, and give of new any kingly power to a King, because he is now become by Gods grace of a Heathen King, a Christian King, Chri∣stianity addeth indeed a new obligation to imploy his kingly power, which he had full and entire before, now in its exercise and use to more regall and kingly acts, as to take care that the Gospell be soundly preached, the Sacraments and discipline of the Church kept pure, and heretickes punished according to that, he to whom much is given, from him much shall be required: But the same King, while he was a heathen King, had the same kingly power and authority to performe these regall acts; but being yet a heathen, he wanted 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 super∣naturalis, a supernaturall or reall and physicall power to performe these acts; now this power which he wanted before he heard of the Gospell and beleeved in Christ, was not a kingly authority, for then he should not have been a compleat Heathen King before, which is against Gods word, commanding obedience to heathen Kings, Rom. 13. 1, 2. 1 Tim. 2. 1, 2. 1 Pet. 2. 17. but this power that he wanted is a Christian power to exercise regall and kingly acts: Neither is this an inconvenience, that power to exercise the acts of a calling in a Christian

manner, be Christian and supernaturall, and yet the au∣thority kingly, and not formally Christian, but such as is, and may be in a heathen King; therefore kingly power and Christian power are here carefully to be di∣stinguished, and a Christian Kings power as a Christian, is more then the Turks power in Church-matters. Hence our Adversaries here dethrone and degrade the King; for they give the King a head-ship and dominion over the Church as he is a Christian man, and take that head∣ship from him as a King; because if the Turke by sword should conquer Britaine, and become our King, by their grounds he should be Head of the Church, no lesse then our Christian Prince who now re••gneth over us, and certaine it is a poore Headship that they give to the King, even such a Head-ship as a Heathen King and the Turke, hath over subdued Christian kingdomes; and thus by their way Nero and Julian were heads of Christs Church.

2. If unbeleeving Kings cease to be Kings, then when they commit any fault that maketh them in Gods Court no members of the Church, they are to be dethroned, which is most seditious doctrine, and so Formalists herein joyne with Papists.

4. Conclusion.* 1.51 There be these distinctions here con∣sider••ble:

• 1. The Kings power ordinary and extraordinary.
• 2. His power as a King. 2. and as a singularly graced Christian.
• 3. His power hortatorie as a Christian, and coactive as a King.
• 4. His power accumulative, not privative in Church-matters.
• 5. His power in actibus imperatis, in acts comman∣ding to another, and his power in actibus elicitis, which he is to performe himselfe.

If a King were a Prophet as a David, he might doe many things in an extraordinary way in Church-matters, which he cannot now ordinarily doe.

2. As a singularly graced Christian, he may write Ser∣mons and Commentaries on holy Scripture for edifying the Church; but this should be done by him by no kingly faculty.

3. As a Christian he may exhort others to doe their duty, but as King he may command that which Paul commanded Timothy and Titus, to commit the Gospell to faithfull men who are able to teach others, to preach in sea∣son, and out of season, to lay hands suddenly on no man, and reforme Religion, purge the Church of idolatry, and superstition, as Joshuah and H••zekiah did, all which Church-men and Synods might doe also;* 1.52 but Synods doe this in an Ecclesiasticke way,* 1.53 upon the paine of Ecclesiasticke censures. The King doth it by a regall, kingly, and coactive power of the sword.

4. the Kings power is accumulative, in giving to the Church, and ayding and helping; God hath given to the King the ten Commandements, and the Gosp••ll, as a pupill is given to a Tutor: The King holds his sword above the Law of God, to ward off the stroakes of wic∣ked men who doe hurt the Law; but the Kings power is not privative, to take any priviledge from the Law and the Church: so his power is as a tutor to keep, not as a father who may both give and take away from his son the inheritance; his power is defensive, not of∣fensive.

5. He hath power in actibus imperatis, to command that all preach sound Doctrine, decree just Canons, ex∣ercise discipline aright, but in actibus elicitis, in acts per∣formed by an intrinsecall power in the agent, he hath no power: for the King as King cannot preach himselfe, nor baptize, &c. as the will may command the eye to see, the feet to walke, but the will doth not see nor walk: Here two errours are to be rebuked.

1. Whitgift saith,* 1.54 the King is not the head of the Church as it is a society of elect and believers, for so the govern∣ment is spirituall, but he is the head of the Church, as it is a visible society in externall government, comprehending

good and evill. For 1. The government visible and exter∣nall is meerly ecclesiasticall, by Christs spirituall lawes and censures, of rebuking, binding, loosing and excom∣municating; but the King is not an ecclesiasticall per∣son, and so not the head who hath any intrinsecall in∣fluence as King in these acts.

2. He is the head of the persons who make the Church, and so is a politick head, but he is not the head of the Church visible, as it is such. The head visible and mem∣ber•• are of one nature, the King as King is a politicke and civill head, the visible Church is not a politick and civill,* 1.55 but an ecclesiastick body, so Camero erreth who will have all Church-men synodically constituting and de∣creeing Canons, and in all acts of externall government subordinate to the King as King, as the instruments and servants are subordinate to the principall cause and first commander. 1. Because then the King should be the prin∣cipall ecclesiastick matter, and prime Canon maker, the King the first excommunicater when the Church excom∣municateth; but the members of a Church-Synod are immediately subordinate to Christ whose servants and instruments they are, and not the servants of the King. Nathan as a man was Davids servant, but as a Prophet he was Gods servant, and not Davids ser∣vant.

Hence a third errour of court sycophantes must be reje∣cted,* 1.56 that the King hath a negative voice in disci∣pline, and in Church-Assemblies, which is most false.

1. Because Christ hath promised to lead his Church in all truth, to be with her to the end, to be in the midst of his owne assem••led in his name, and this promise Christ ma∣keth and keepeth under Heathen Kings, who have no voice at all in Church-Assemblies, 1 Cor. 4▪ 5. Math. 18. 23. Act. 15. 28.

2. If the acts of Church-Assemblies have no ecclesiasti∣call power, without the consent of a Christian ••rince, by that same reason the acts of publick preaching, baptizing and administring the Lords Supper should lay no ec∣clesiasticall

bond upon mens consciences, except the King should consent unto these acts; but the latter is against the Word of God, Jer. 1. 10. Jer. 1. 18, 19. 2 Cor. 10. 4, 5. and most absurd. Ergo, so is the former. I prove the connexion, because that same power of Christ which is given to the Church conveened for acts of discipline is given for preaching, and the conferring of the seales of the covenant; for the Church hath the keyes to bind and loose from Christ equally independent upon any mortall man in discipline, as in doctrine, so in dis∣cipline the Kings power cannot be to impede all acts of discipline or to make them null, except he consent to them.

3. Because these words are absolutely made good,* 1.57 with∣out the interveening of any other authority. Whatsoever ye binde on earth, shall be bound in Heaven, and whatsoever ye loose on earth, shall be loosed in Heaven, els Christ would have said, whatsoever the King or civill Magistrate shall binde on earth, shall be bound in Heaven, otherwise no∣thing is ratified on earth or Heaven either, which the Church bindeth or looseth, because the King saith not Amen to it.

4. If a contumacious brother shall refuse to heare the Church,* 1.58 hee is not for that to bee excommu∣nicated and to be reputed an Heathen and a Publican, because the civill Magistrate doth not repute him such an one.

5. Of that free grace,* 1.59 wherby God heareth the prayers of two or three agreeing to pray for one thing on earth, the Lord bindeth and looseth in heaven that which his Church bindeth and looseth on Earth, Mat. 18. 19. but the Lord heareth the prayers of two or three agreeing to pray for one thing on Earth, though the civill Magistrate doe not give his consent that these prayers be heard and gran∣ted of God; because the Magistrate is no interces∣sour without whose consent God heareth not pray∣ers. The proposition is cleare from Matthew 18. ver. 18, 19.

6. If the Magistrate have such a joynt power of bin∣ding and loosing,* 1.60 and of forgiving and reteining sins with the Church, then also with the Apostles and their suc∣cessours; but Christ gave this power to his Apostles without any such condition, Matth. 28. 18, 19. John ••0. 22, 23. and they practised this power without con∣sent of the Magistrate, and preached and excommuni∣cated against his will, 1 Tim. 1. 19, 20. 1 Cor. 5. 4. yea, as the Father sent Christ, so should the Father have sent the civill Magistrate, for so are they sent who have pow∣er to forgive and retaine sinnes, John 20. 21, 22, 23.

7. That power which upon just reasons we deny to the Pope,* 1.61 that we cannot give to the King, but upon just reasons we deny to the Pope a negative voyce in Councels, to anull lawfull Councels conveened in the name of Christ, except he who is the virtuall Church say Amen thereunto, neither is the King the virtuall Church.

8. If a woe be due to a Pastor,* 1.62 if he preach not, sup∣pose the Magistrate should forbid him to preach,* 1.63 then also is a woe due to the Church,* 1.64 which useth not the keyes, though the Magistrate forbid, then hath the Magistrate no such voyce, and if the Church of Pergamos be re∣buked for not using the power of the keyes against these who held the Doctrine of Balaam and the Nicolaitanes even when the Magistrate was a killer of the witnes∣ses of Jesus, then the Magistrat•• hath no such negative voyce, for it should not be possible to censure the followers of such Doctrine, seeing, hee was against both Doctrine and Discipline, but the Lord repro∣veth P••rgamos in this case, Revelation 2. ver. 13, 14, 15.

9. There is no Word of God to prove that the Lord hath given the power of th•• keyes to the King as the King,* 1.65 and therfore we are not to believe that he hath any such power. Also if the fore-said power of the keyes be given to the Church without any such pow∣er

of the King, the Church by all the former argu∣ments may conveene to exercise that power, in prea∣ching, binding, loosing, excommunicating, suppose the ci∣vill Magistrate should discharge and inhibit these mee∣tings, for if the power of the keyes be given imme∣diately by Christ to the Church, then the power of meeting for the exercise of that power must also be given, though the Magistrate say not Amen, as is cleare, Mat. 18. 18, 19, 20, 21. 1 Cor. 5. 4▪ 5. 1 Cor. 11. 19, 20. where the Church had her owne Synods without the consent of a civill Magistrate, but we are to repute it a speciall favour of God, when the King as a nursing-••a∣ther will countenance Synods with his royall presence, God blesse our King.

5. Conclusion.* 1.66 The Kings royall power in adding his sanction to the ecclesiasticall constitutions, and in punishing such as are decreed to be hereticks by the Church is regall, and not ministeriall and servile. See for this the Con c. Chalced. A••t. 16. the Imperiall lawes, Cod. l. 1 tit. 8. leg. 2. Heretic. Vocab, & decret. p. 2. caus. 23. q. 8. c. 30. crossing Bellar. de pont l. 1. c. 7. So do their owne men goe against Bellarmine in this, as San∣derus de clavib. David. l▪ 2. c. 13. Carerius de potest. sum. pont. l. 2. c. 23 Leo epist. 38. to Martian and Pulcheria, and Leo epist. 7. to Theodosius. Becanus erreth here with Bellarmine, making the King as a servant obliged to adde his sanction civill to ecclesiasticall Canons. Becan. in o∣pusc. exam. conc. Anglic c. 7.

1. Because the use of the sword at Gods comman∣dement is a kingly act commanded by God, and is ser∣vice done to God, not to the Church.

2. Neither is the King so to execute the Churches will, as he should judge only of the fact, and of the assump∣tion, yea he is to judge of the law, and of the major proposition. I or we see not in the Word of God, where a Judge is a Judge to punish a fault, and is not to know judicially that it is a fault: a Judge as a Judge should know such a thing to be heresie, and not tak••

it upon the word of an Assembly of Church-men, Deu. 17. 18▪ 19. he is expresly to reade and know the law, and to know and remember the Decree, Prov. 31. 5. And the cause which he knoweth not he is to search out, Job 29. 16. all which is meant of a knowledge not of private discretion, which is required in all private Chri∣stians, but (as I take these places) of a knowledge ju∣diciall and authoritative which agreeth to a Judge as a Judge.

3. If a Synod erre, and decree that man to be an he∣retick who is sound in the faith, the King is not ob∣liged to erre with the Synod, and to punish the in∣nocent, he is to decree righteous judgement, and so the King is to judge of heresie, but after a regall and civill way, and with a coactive pow••r, as the Synod or Church-Assembly is to judge of heresie after an ec∣clesiastick way, and with a spirituall power. 2. The King punisheth heresie as it troubleth the Common-w••alth, and the Synod as it is scandalous and infecti∣ous in the Church.

Yea and the Christian King ruleth over men as men, and also as Christian-m••n; he ruleth over them as men, with a dominion over their bodies, lives and goods by his civill lawes, he hath also dominion as King over men, as Christians and members of Christs kingdome and Church, not over their consc••ences (for that is proper only to the father of spirits) but he hath a co∣active power over all men, even Pastors, as to cause them do their Christian duties, he hath power to com∣pell Church-men in Assemblies to determine truth, and to use the keyes right, and to preach and use the Sa∣craments according as Christ hath commanded in his Word, and to punish them when they do otherwise. What then if the King discerne that to be truth, and absolve the man, whom the Church-Assembly doth condemne as an heretick, who shall judge betwixt them?

I answer, the infallible rule of judging for both is

the Word of God, which speaketh home unpartially to both, if they will heare, but certainly the Kings civill, kingly coactive power to compell men to doe their duty remaineth the highest and most supream pow∣er on Earth, in genere potestatis politicae, in the kind of poli∣tick power, and pastors and all men may, by this power, be compelled to do right, as for the abuse of the power, it is no part of the power, and in this kind the King hath a nega∣tive politick and kingly suffrage and voyce in all Church Assemblies, no ecclesiasticall constitution hath the force of a law without the politick suffrage of the civill Judge. And againe the ecclesiastick power that Christ hath given to his Church remaineth: also the most supreme power under Christ in genere potestatis ecclesiasticae, and the King is subject to this power. The King is not excepted in this, He that despiseth you despiseth me, and in this, whatsoever ye shall binde on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and in this, whose sinnes ye remit, they are re∣mitted, and whose sinnes ye retaine they are retained, and this ecclesiasticall power being the highest on Earth, Pastors may command Kings in the Lord, Jer. 1. 10, 18, 17. to doe their duty by an ecclesiastick power. Arminians and Formalists both aske which of the two powers are highest, and nearest unto the head Christ, whither the kingly power, or the ecclesiastick power, for two paralell highest powers on earth cannot be.

I answer, by asking which of the two shoulders, in a mans body are highest, and nearest to the mans head? Certainly one of them in a well proportioned body is not higher then another, and both are alike neare the head, as none of two pole-starrs are nearer to their Zenith and Nadir, none of two wheels in a right Chariot are high∣er then another.* 1.67 The Church power (saith the Prelate Davenant) is highest in teaching and directing; the kingly power in commanding and compelling. Barclai compareth them to two shoulders under one head.* 1.68 Meisner saith, one of them is not above another.* 1.69 There is no absurdity (saith Spalato) that in two bodies formally different there

should be two heads, yea it is necessary.* 1.70 The Roman Glosse saith, Patricius is the Popes father in things temporall, and the Pope is his father in things spirituall, as Cusan saith, Papists (saith Spalat.)* 1.71 have deleted that out of the Glosse.* 1.72 So Berengarius,* 1.73 Gelasius Papa, Nicolaius the I agree to these words, Sciendum quod nec Catholicae fidei, nec Chri∣stianae contrarium est legi,* 1.74 si ad honorem regni, & sacer∣dotij,* 1.75 Rex pontifici, & pontifix obediat regi.

Spalato seemeth against Bellarmine, to make up the losses made by Papists in Kings honour, while he hol∣deth, that the King his person, and as he is a Christian man is subject to Church-power, but as King he is sub∣ject to none, but to Christ, from whom immediately he hath his kingly dignity, even as (saith he) when an Em∣perours servant, being a Physitian, the Emperour as Em∣perour is not subject to the Physitian, but only the Empe∣rour as he is a wounded man is subject to the art of his owne servant who cureth him, and that of the Emperour▪ free-will, not by coaction, so the Image-maker or he who ma∣keth pourtracts, in his art is not subject to the King, nei∣ther is the King as King, Master of the art of painting, or pourtract-making, the art onely is subject to the precepts and principles of art, but the person of the painter is sub∣ject to the kingly power;* 1.76 for the King, as Bellarmin saith, may forbid the Image-maker to draw obscene and filthy I∣mages, or to waste too much gold or silver upon his Ima∣ges, or to sell his images at too deare a price. Hence, saith he, the kingly dignity is not subject to the ecclesiasticall power, or to any other power on earth, but only to Jesus Christ.

I answer, the Prelate doth well difference in the art of paintry these two. 1. That which is artificiall and is only ruled by art, that the King cannot command, another thing which is morall, as that he sell not his Images too deare, and hurt not the common wealth by spending vainly too much gold and silver on his Ima∣ges, and in this the King may make lawes to limit the Painters morall carriage, but then he and his fel∣lowes

honour not the King, who call him judge over all persons, and of all causes, or in all causes: and that without any distinction; for when two Shoomakers contend about a point of tanning leather, the King is not Judge in that cause, because it is a point of art which belongeth to the art, not the King. Also the right translation of the Bible out of the Hebrew and the Greeke in the vulgar language is a cause meerly ecclesiasticall, be∣longing to the Church Assembly, it were hard to make the King being ignorant of these mother languages, the Judge of that version, as he is made by them Judge in all causes ecclesiasticall, howbeit, de jure, he is a politick Judge, even in this judging by a coactive and kingly power, how∣beit, de facto, and through ignorance he cannot exercise the kingly power that God hath given him in this act.

2. By this comparison, the Prelate putteth upon the King ••ut a course peece of country honour. O (faith he) as King, I make him above all, and subject to no power in Heaven or Earth, but immediately to God; forsooth so make you the Painter, the Shoomaker, the Fashioner subject to no power in Heaven and Earth, no not to the King, but only immediately to God, only their persons are subject to the King, and so is the person of the King as a Christian man, not as a King, subject to Pastors, who may exhort him and rebuke him when he judgeth un∣justly.

But 3. saith the Prelate, The wounded Emperour is sub∣ject to his servant the Physitian who cureth him, not as Emperour, but as a wounded man, and that of his owne free-will and not by coaction. What meaneth this (not by coaction) but that a King, neither as King, neither as a Christian man is subject to Church-discipline, to the ad∣monition of Pastors, by any ecclesiasticall coaction, or any law of God, but of the Kings owne free-will? Con∣sider how Court-parasites doe dishonour the Lord, for if Nathan by Gods commandement was obliged to rebuke David for his adultery and murther, and the man of God

obliged to cry against Jeroboams Altar, and the Seer ob∣liged to reprove King Asa, and Jeremiah commanded to speake against the Kings and Princes of the land, and if the Kings of Israel and Judah were plagued of God, because they would not heare and submit to the Prophets speaking to them in the name of the Lord, then the King as a Christian man is subject to the Eccle∣siasticall power, not of his owne free-will, as this flatte∣rer saith, but by such Ecclesiasticall coaction as God layeth upon all men, whose spirits are subject to Christs kingly power.

4. This comparison halteth fowlely. In the art of pain∣try, ye may abstract that which is morall from that which is artificiall; but in a King as a King, there is nothing artificiall, or which is to be abstracted from ju∣stice and piety; for all the acts of kingly authority as kingly, are morall acts of justice, and of piety in pre∣serving both the Tables of the Law (if a King command a stratagem of war, that which is meerly artificiall is not from the King as King, but from a principle of mi∣litary art in him, as an expert souldier) if then the King as King be a morall agent and a preserver of both Tables, then as King he is subject to the Ecclesiasticall power.

5. Spalato faileth farre in making the end of kingly government a naturall end,* 1.77 not life eternall, as the end of sayling is the desired harbour, and not the kingdome of Heaven, which is l••fe eternall; nay, but if we speake either of the end of the worke, or the end of the wor∣ker, the end of kingly power is a morall end; for the end of the worke called finis operis, is by Paul said to be, that we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life in all godlinesse and honesty, and this is de iure, also finis ope∣rantis, the end which the Ring is to intend, and so the dignity, office, acts and end of the King as the King is subordinated to Christs kingly power in Church-discipline, and yet he is the most supreme politicke po∣wer on earth, and in eo genere, solo Deo minor, and above the Pastors in that kind.

But doe we joyne with Papists in this?* 1.78

1. Papists say Kings hold their Crownes of the Pope the Church universall virtually: We thinke Nero had not his kingdome from Peter,* 1.79 nor Domitian and Traian their kingdome from Clemens and Anacletus, nor Ha∣drian from Enaristus and Alexander.

2. Innocentius 3^d. forbad obedience to Emperours: Bonifacius 8••.* 1.80 for hatred of King Philip of France for∣bad to pay tribute to the Emperors?* 1.81 the Devill might blush to lay that upon us.* 1.82

3. Was there ever amongst us the like of their 8▪ ge∣nerall Councell?* 1.83 A Prelate shall not light off his horse,* 1.84 nor bow to a King, nor shall a King seeke that of a Bi∣shop, under the paine of two yeares excommunica∣tion?

4. Did any of us thinke or write what Bellarmine hath spoken against the Lords anointed?* 1.85 If Princes can∣not be moved by Church-censures; and if the necessity of the Church require, the (Pope) shall free their subiects from obeying them, ipsis{que} principatus abrogabit, and shall pull their Princedome from them. I say no more of this.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Calv, in Tit. 1. ••artwright. l. 3. p. 35.
• * 1.2

  Ju••us. 〈…〉〈…〉 ••••vey c. 12.
• * 1.3

  Til•••• Par ad Scot. Dilo••l. alt. Da••••as. p. 918.
• * 1.4

  Ruling Elders proved from 1 Tim. 5. 17.
• * 1.5

  Hals humble Re∣monst. to the Par∣liament, an. 1641. p. 198, 199.
• * 1.6

  Field ••. booke of the Church, c, ••6.
• * 1.7

  This speech where the article 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is doubled, an•• the adverbe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 intervening signifie ever divers persons.
• * 1.8

  Field 5. booke of the Church, c. 26.
• * 1.9

  Cyp••. l. 4. ep. 4. l. 3. ep. ••1.
• * 1.10

  T••r••. in Apol. c. 39. Hier. in 3 ••sa. & in sit. 1.
• * 1.11

  Ambr. in •• Tim 5.
• * 1.12

  Ambr. in 1 Tim. ••.
• * 1.13

  Surv••y, c. 16. p. 17;
• * 1.14

  ••••ld Chur. l. ••. c. 26
• * 1.15

  Beza in M••t. 16. 19▪ Cartwright, l. 3. p 83.
• * 1.16

  N••ellius. thes.
• * 1.17

  Theol. p 243.
• * 1.18

  Survay, c. 17•• 〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.19

  B••llar. de con••. l ••. c 15.
• * 1.20

  Concil.
• * 1.21

  Basil.
• * 1.22

  Ecc••us de concil.
• * 1.23

  W••lus l. 2 de p••i••••.
• * 1.24

  Deacons cannot baptize and preach.
• * 1.25

  2. Arg.
• * 1.26

  3. Arg.
• * 1.27

  4. Arg.
• * 1.28

  5. Arg.
• * 1.29

  6. Arg.
• * 1.30

  7. Arg.
• * 1.31

  Valent.
• * 1.32

  Suarez.
• * 1.33

  Vasquez.
• * 1.34

  Bucanus.
• * 1.35

  8. Arg.
• * 1.36

  Survay, c. 18. p. 20••
• * 1.37

  C••••twright l. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 p. ••••0.
• * 1.38

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 defen. p. 135.
• * 1.39

  T••av. dist. ••ccl. p. 118, ••19.
• * 1.40

  ••un E••cl l 2 c. 4.
• * 1.41

  Sarvay of discipl. c. 32, 33.
• * 1.42

  1. Conclus.
• * 1.43

  2. Conclus.
• * 1.44

  Cartwright, p. 1. p. 93.
• * 1.45

  Vir••tus dial. 3.
• * 1.46

  Calv admonitions to the Pa••l. 2. of Eng. p. 61.
• * 1.47

  3. Conclus.
• * 1.48

  Cartwright, l. 3. p 163.
• * 1.49

  Ob••ruded 〈◊〉〈◊〉, c. ••. v. 2.
• * 1.50

  Whytgift against 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.51

  4. Conclus.
• * 1.52

  2 Chron. 29.
• * 1.53

  2 King. 2••.
• * 1.54

  Wh••tgift, tract 3 to the ad•••• c. 6. 5. divil against Cartwright, p. 18••
• * 1.55

  Cam••ro. 〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.56

  Magistrate hath •• no negative voyce in Synod••.
• * 1.57

  3. Arg.
• * 1.58

  4. Arg.
• * 1.59

  5. Arg.
• * 1.60

  6. Arg.
• * 1.61

  7. Arg.
• * 1.62

  8. Arg.
• * 1.63

  1 Cor. 9. 6.
• * 1.64

  Act. ••. 19▪
• * 1.65

  9. Arg.
• * 1.66

  5. Conclus.
• * 1.67

  Davenant. de iud. controver. c. 13. p. 7•• Barclaius de priest. c. 14. p. 110
• * 1.68

  Balth Meisnerus in sobr. Philo. par. 3. Sect. 2. c. 2.
• * 1.69

  Anto Spal•••••• de rep. ••c. l. 6. c. 3. ••. 17.
• * 1.70

  Glossa. in C. Had••i. an. dist. 36: 〈◊〉〈◊〉 art. Cusan. de conc. l. 3. c. 3.
• * 1.71

  Berengarius l de myst sign. t••m. ••. Bibloth patr.
• * 1.72

  Gelasius.
• * 1.73

  Nicolaus I.
• * 1.74

  M Anto. de Domin.
• * 1.75

  Arth••epist. Spala. de rep. eccl. l. 6. c. 3. n. 4, 5, 6, 7.
• * 1.76

  Bellarm. contra Barcl. c. 2.
• * 1.77

  Spal. ib. n. 9.
• * 1.78

  Clemens 5. & tem∣p••rales sua à nobis, & sub nobis tenet (Rex) Clemens l. ••. c 11.
• * 1.79

  Azorius inst. mor. p. •• l. 4. c. 10 Papa subditos à Sacra∣ments Religione erga Regem solvit.
• * 1.80

  So Sander devi••.
• * 1.81

  Monat. l. 2. c. 4.
• * 1.82

  Concil. go•• 8. c. 14. Bellar. contra Bar∣clatum. c. 19.
• * 1.83

  See more of this in Bosius d•• sig.
• * 1.84

  Eccles l. 17. c 3. and B••sius de ••u∣inis gentium, l 1. c. 18. Fazellus de reb Sion, l. 8. c ••. Sander. de visib.
• * 1.85

  Monat. l. 2 c. 4 Papirius Masson de Epist. Vrb. l. 5. in vita B••nifacij 8. B••rrom. Anal tom 12. anno. 1106. n. 14. all Trumpets of Treason that the Pope may de∣••hron•• Kings.