CHAP. XII.

MR. H. It belongs to the supreme Magistrate (the King)*as peculiar to his power and place, and not to the Church, to enjoyn the solemn and publick concurrence of the several persons of the Churches, and to appoint and nominate whom he will have to consider of those weighty and doubtsome cases which concern the publick professing and practising of the worship of God within his Dominions.

Ans. Erastians, and such as make the King the Head of the * Church, can give no more to the Prince, than Mr. H.

• 1. By his Royalty he onely can convene Synods.
• 2. He, by that same power, chooseth the members of Sy∣nods.
• 3. Of his supreme Power in controversies we shall hear.

1. The Apostles, Elders and Church must then be in an act of Rebellion in convening, Act. 1. to choose Matthias, Acts 6. to ordain Deacons, Act. 4. & 5. to preach the Gospel in the Temple, and convene a Synod, Act. 15. from divers Churches, without the knowledge or consent of the supreme power. It cannot help to say, There was no Christian Magistrate then; for Mr. H. sayes, it was peculiar to his power; and proves it after∣ward, because Arg. 4. pag 58. he cannot otherwise maintain the peace of his subjects. Arg. 5. he cannot give them protection with∣out Page  487 this, pag. 59. But the heathen Magistrate as a Magistrate is to procure peace and protection to his Subjects, Rom. 13. 1, 2, 3. 1 Tim. 2. 1, 2. So must the Apostles, who gave to Caesar the things that are Caesars, have laid the foundation of the Go∣spel upon a rebellious usurping of that which is peculiar (saith Mr. H.) to the civil power and place.

2. The Churches of Corinth, Ephesus, Rome, &c. must have convened to Divine Worship, 1 Cor. 11. 17, 18, &c. without warrant, for Paul rebukes them for going to law before hea∣then Judges, 1 Cor. 6.

Mr. H. They may, as Christians, maintain private communion one with another; and as they be Churches, use that Christian pri∣viledge to further their own good, and promote the work by coun∣sel: for what I do quâ Ethicus, quâ Oeconomicus, quâ Chri∣stianus in private, appertains not to the Magistrate, except it in∣trench upon his policy.

Ans. 1. Mr. H. makes all that Christians do as Christians and as Churches, that is, gathering of Churches, hearing, par∣taking of seals and censures, to be private actings not belong∣ing to the Magistrate. Strange it is, that the convening of the ten thousand Subjects in the same place (as our Brethren say) belongs nothing to the Magistrate; sure it sides with peace or war. And yet Mr. H. saith, The Magistrate may compel men to*attend the mind of Christ, and solemnly to humble themselves by fasting and prayer. See how these two consist.

2. Its strange to say the Magistrate hath nothing to do with * what a man doth as a moral man, as a member of a family, or as a Christian so they do these things in private which they do; which is to say the Magistrate hath nothing to do with the Villanies, Particides, Adulteries and Robberies that men commit in pri∣vate. And Mr. H. saves not the matter by saying, The Magi∣strate hath nothing to do with the man, to punish him; I judge in these capacities, except he intrench upon his policy, that is, ex∣cept he break his Laws. But sure, he can punish no man in any imaginable capacity, private or publick, except he break his Laws. Beside that, its neither Law nor Divinity, to say, that a man intrencheth upon the Magistrates policy, and violates his Laws, as Ethicus, a moral man, or a member of a family either Page  488 in private or publick; for more abominable it is to say. He vio∣lates Laws, and Whores, Murthers, Robs as a Christian: for Christianity teacheth men to deny all ungodliness, Tit. 1. 11. for he must do all these as malus civis, as a wicked member of the Common-wealth.

3. I wonder more in what capacity the Magistrate can have to do with commanding and governing men, if not as they con∣verse morally with men, and in their families, as fathers and sons, as Masters and servants, and as Christians who both in pri∣vate and publick may perform duties to one another, or oppress one another; else the Judge could not punish the rebellious son, the wicked servant, or the murthering father, and the oppressing Master. Yea, the more secret that wicked acts are, a godly Magistate doth the more resemble God, who can say, as Iob, chap. 29. 16. I was a father to the poor, and the cause that I knew not I searched out. Nor do men, except extremely flagi∣tious, commit Villanies, Robberies, Murthers, Parricides, Adul∣teries, but in private: And it appertains to the Ruler the more to search them out, the more privately that they be acted. But if Mr. H. mean, that private actings of citizens, of members of families, of Christians, that are good and indifferent, do not ap∣pertain to the Magistrate, who is an adversary to him in this? Though all good actions done in private or publick deserve praise, reward and protection from the Magistrate, except Mr. H. expound that Rom. 13. 3. Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same, so thou do good in publick onely, as hypocrites: but thou shalt have no praise of the Ruler, if thou do good within doors. Is this good moral Philosophy of Mr. H? But how godly Princes may compel to external wor∣ship, * see Margin.

Page  489 Mr. H. Commission and just permission are all one: A Ruler permits a Finder to set up a School, he needs no commission.

Ans. If fencing be useful, the Ruler must give him positive * protection, as others that do well; else if one kill him when he teaches his Scholars, the Ruler ought not to revenge that mur∣ther, though most treacherously committed, and say he promi∣sed to the Fencer onely permission; and yet its worse to say the Christian Ruler owes to Assemblies, Pastors, Schools onely permission. Paul saith, he owes praise, Rom. 13. 3. which, with good ground, famous Interpreters expound to be countenan∣ting, favour, protection, reward, stipends. And if the Chri∣stian Magistrate do but permit Assemblies to convene, as a very Episcopal man D. Bilson said permissio est à magistratu, commis∣sio à Christo: What more influence (if permission and commis∣sion be all one) hath the godly Magistrate in the publick wor∣ship * of God, and Assemblies of the Church, then heathen Magistrates, Ahasuerus, the Kings of Chaldea, who permitted the people of God to worship the true God, Esth. 4. v. 16, 17. Dan. 6. v 7, 8. or the Church of Rome have, who by publick Order establish Stews, and permit fornication? See Emmanuel Sa, who saith, Bishops and Priests are by Law permitted to have Whores.

Mr. H. 1 Arg. That a right opinion and worship of God should be openly professed within the Territ•… and Iurisdiction •f a State, appertains to them, as that which comes within the verge and object of the State and policy to attend. 1. They could not provide that the Subj•ct• live in godliness and honesty without this. 2. Nor could be Nurse-fathers to the Church and Religion, if they should suffer open blasphemy and idolatry to be maintained and pro∣fessed. 3. The Kings of Israel did punish such crimes, not as types of Christ, but by a civil power.

Ans. 1. If the Magistrate have onely a permissive power * here, as even now he said, how doth Mr. H. again exalt the Magistrate as Head of the Church, to inquire and judge of pro∣fessions, and of true and false Religions by his civil power, as after Page  490 he speaks? If he do this by an antecedent Magistratical power, as Mr. H. saith in the following words; then hath God made the Christian Magistrate as the Magistrate by the power of the Sword (for the Magistrates power is formally coactive, not sua∣sory or moral, not Ecclesiastically juridical, to excommunicate) the onely Supreme Judge and Determiner of all true and false Religions; which Bilson disclaims. Henes

1. By his Office he may deny protection and justice to all that are not of his Religion, and banish them out of his Domi∣nions. Its true, they may say he plays the Tyrant in that; but yet God hath given him the onely supreme power, both to inquire (saith Mr. H.) and judge of Professions and Religions, which is true, and ought to be maintained, which is false, and ought to be rejected. And if so, the many godly who fled from Old Eng∣land to New England, because of Prelatical Tyranny of con∣science, did believe that the late King Charles had power as a King to judge the Service book and Ceremonies imposed upon the godly in England, yea and upon Scotland also, was the one∣ly true Religion, and had power given him of God as supreme Magistrate, to command all the three Kingdoms to be of the Kings Religion, or then let them all be banished out of his Do∣minions: But is not this to make the King a Pope, and the one∣ly carver and Lord of the Faith and Religion of his Subjects? and so the King, by his Office, is the Messenger of the Lord of Hosts, and a Royal Prophetical Teacher, who watches for the souls of all his people. What Scripture puts the King in such an Office?

2. Did not the godly and sound condemn such an Headship * in the Oath of Supremacy, and in the Kings Proclamation; in which he, as King, commands all to receive such a Religion as he thinks fit, even the substantials of the Mass, and no Prayers but book-prayers (the other Prayers being fancies?) And this command is equal to a pastoral or Synodical Decree.

Page  491 1. Because it comes from the King having no act of the * Church, but onely having taken the counsel of his Clergie, and so by civil power peculiar to his power Royal and place, as Mr. H. speaks, p. 56.

2. Because its the onely form of worship he thinks fit.

3. Because he commands it to all Ecclesiastick persons, Arch-bishops, Bishops, &c. as the onely Spiritual Pastor of Pastors on earth.

Hence if Christ hath given such power, its not lawful, with∣out breach of the fifth Command, to embrace or profess any Religion in a Christian Kingdom, except it be first instamped by or with the Authority of the King the Head (as the Chaplain calls him) of the Churches by his Royal Authority. Yea, our Book of Canons say, that Christian Kings now have the same power in causes Ecclesiastical, that the godly Kings among the Iews had: And are they not then Prophets by office, and may write Canonick Scripture, as David and Solomon did? and so we must not, without Rebellion, profess the Faith or the Christian Reli∣gion, but when, and where, such as the King commands us; contrary to Mat. 10. 32. or we are to confess Christ before men, but not except the King teach and command a confession, and such a confessor?

3. Paul must have told us, Eph 4. 11, 12. of the King, as well as of the Apostle given to edifie the Body, and gather the Church, if so be that he is the onely supreme Iudge of true and false Religions: And he must be some spiritual officer, and one who chooseth a God and a Religion to his Subjects; and he must be •he holiest Subject, who can say, The Kings God is my God. When I read this, I was sad, to see Mr. Tho: HookerPage  492 speak and write like the Royalist Mr. Rich. Hooker.

4. The Magistrate supreme and inferiour, except Mr. H. be an Erastian, is a member of the Church, and under the Scepter of Christ in the preached Gospel, and to be edified by the Word, Seals, Rebukes and Censures; for otherwise. He that despiseth you despiseth me; and, if he hear not the Church, let him be as a heathen; and, Faith comes by hearing, must suffer a strange exception in the person of the King; he may despise pa∣stors and the Church without guiltiness, for he is above the pa∣stors, and carves their Religion, and prescribes, as our cited Proclamation saith, the causes why Bishops should excommuni∣cate and censure, to wit, if they refuse the Kings Religion; and Mr. H. warrants him by a power peculiar and supreme so to do.

5. We reade not that the Kings of Israel and Iudah prescibed what was true and false Religion, but were subject to the Priests and Prophets, who spake the word of the Lord: and the Pro∣phets rebuked Kings, as Ieroboam and others, for intruding themselves in that office. Moses, Samuel, David, Solomon were Prophets, 2 Chron. 36. 16. Isa. 50. 19.

6. The Magistrate is the Minister of God, and bears the Sword to take order with evil doers, and is Custos & vindex utrius{que} tabulae, and the Religion is supposed to be before the Ruler.

7. Its somewhat heathenish, like Numa, Lycurgus, who to procure obedience and authority to themselves, gave out, that they prescribed what Religion was true, and that they conver∣sed much with God.

8. All questions and controversies of Religion in the Nation must be determined, all cases of conscience resolved by this Pope, who onely can determine what is true, and what is false Religion; and the King must be the Oracle and Priest, with whom onely the Urim and the Thummim must be.

9. All fallings against Religion must be Treason against the King: whereas Kings and people are rebuked, because they hearkened not to the voice of the Prophets, not because disobe∣dient to the word of the Lord in the mouth of the King. Either this is to take both the Swords from the Pope, and to give them Page  493 to the King, or it is nothing: for without controversie the King bears the Sword to take vengeance of him that doth evil, Rom. 13. 4. 1 Pet. 2. 14. and whosoever determineth by his supreme power, what is true and false Religion to all the Subjects, must bear the other Sword.

10. M. H. makes out his Assertion thus: Kings could not provide for their Subjects, to live in godliness and honesty, except they had power to inquire and judge of true and false Religions. Now this is spoken of Nero and of heathen Kings, 1 Tim. 2. 1, 2. But out of doubt, God never made heathens, that are enemies to true Reli∣gion, supreme determiners of true and false Religion: And if this agree to Rulers as Rulers, as M. H. saith, it is peculiar to their power and place; then all Rulers, Heathen, Christian, high and low, sound in the faith, and corrupt and heretical, should be carvers of so many sundry Gods and Religions. But the next Reason is ill and worse, if because the King is a Nurse-father to the Church, he must be father, and a begetter both of Religion and of the Church, & because he protects and defends the true Church, then true Re∣ligion must be before him: As also when Mr. H. saith, that the Prince is a Nurse father to the Church, he means, the Inde∣pendent Church onely, so that he owes no protection to Pres∣byterians, nor justice to them. And if the Nurse-fathers care be, that there should be a right opinion and worship openly profes∣sed within his Territories, the Magistrate is to do this no other wayes, but by the Sword, for another power he hath not; then must he with the Sword compel all within his Dominions to be * professed members of Independent Churches, else M. H. judges there is some other sound worship and sound profession: But this compelling of men to be Church-members, Mr. H. before disclaimed.

Mr. H. doth also suspiciously give his sense of Toleration, while he limiteth the Magistrates power, to the not suffering of*open Blasphemy and Idolatry. But beside open Blasphemy, there is Blasphemy Pepery in the hesds of it, many dangerous errors about superstructures and non-fundamentals, are these errone∣ous opinions professed to be tolerated? Mr. H saith nothing against the Belgick and Socinian Toleration of all Errors, except fundamentals, which are made few by them, and hard to be Page  494 known: And what the Gospel suffers by the Toleration holden * by the Independents in England, and swarms of Sects there, is too manifest to the Christian world. See the Arminians and Socinians in the Margin.

Let the Reader judge of Mr. H. his Reason, The Kings of Israel did punish Blasphemy and Idolatry, not as Types of Christ, but by a Civil power. Mr. H. shall not in haste teach us what was typical, what moral. Mr. Lockier and others make the con∣stitution of the Jewish Church typical, and of another nature from the New Testament Church; others, not so. But I am afraid our Brethren augment the Kalendar of Typicals, until the Old Testament be well near laid aside, as many Anabaptists do. The Kings of Israel punished blasphemers, not as types of Christ, but by civil power. But Ioh• Goodwyn will reply, Was it a civil power morally that belongs to all Christian Magistrates to destroy the city, in which the Inhabitants are seduced to Ido∣latry, and that all the Inhabitants and the cattel be utterly de∣stroyed, and the spoil burnt with fire, as Deut. 13. 15, 16? to pu∣nish the cattel of Idolaters and Apostates with death, and burn all the goods with fire, surely must be temporary then. But let Mr. H. shew what is typical in a National Oath: They say, *There is no shadow of it in the New Testament. Ans. If the meaning be, there is no express command, no practise of it in the New Testament, or for it, and therefore it must be ty∣pical.

1. By this Argument negative, this is not in the New Testa∣ment, Ergo there is no warrant for it in Scripture, is fair for all who would casheer all the Books of the Old Testament as no Scripture; and so that the Magistrate should take away the life of one that commits Sodomy, Bestiality, murthers Father or Mother, must be typical, and not obliging under the New Te∣stament: for let Mr. H. shew an express command or practise for it in the New Testament. A general there is, Rom. 13. but Socinians, Anabaptists tell us, You must not take away the life of Page  495 him who is created according to the Image of God, by Logick and argumentative consequences, but by express Law.

2. Let it be shewed by what express precept or practice in the New Testament, a rich Son should take in to his house and feed and maintain his Father-in-law, and his Grand-father, and his Grand-mother that are begging.

3. Mr. H. may also press us for an express precept, or pra∣ctice of a promissory oath in a private person, as well as in a * Nation; and for a covenant of peace by oath between a Chri∣stian Nation, and a neighbour Christian Nation in the New Testament: or suppose a Christian Nation should neighbour with a nation that worships the sun, compelling all strangers that come within their bounds, by death, to deny Jesus Christ, & wor∣ship their God the Sun, there must be an express particular pre∣cept for a covenant oath, for peace to warrant such a paction, that the Heat•… Nation shall kill none of theirs for refusing Sun-Worship.

4. The particular temptations that may tempt Ionathan to be on his own Fathers side against David, and might stir Da∣vid up against Saul and all his seed, were a sufficient call to put David and Ionathan under the tye of the oath of God one to another. There were good grounds of the covenant between Laban and Iacob. And some Nations designed of God should submit, suit peace, and embrace the Jewish Religion. Was there not cause, why both they and Israel should lay upon themselves the band of a covenant oath? that both of them should be the united Confederates of God: and the like Na∣tional temptations press a Nation now, when its become the Lords covenanted Kingdom, as Isa. 19. 25. Rev. 11. 15. which within and without is enticed to receive the mark of the Beast, and his name on their foreheads, to guard themselves against such snares by a National oath, not that every one of the Nation, though ignorant, profane, and malignant, and treacherous enemies to the truth should be admitted in covenant. And Mr. H. seems to say that promissory oaths of single persons under the New Testament are not necessary; and (say I) not lawful, if not necessary. For Mr. H. saith, a man is not neces∣sarily and morally tied to swear or vow. And I believe a man Page  496 may live all his life and never take a private oath, I say, private*betwixt God and himself, to keep his Laws, and yet not be guilty of sin in so doing.

Mr. H. speaks most mistakingly of the doctrine of vowes, * as if he had not read our Divines.

For 1. Our National vow that we shall be the Lords people, cannot be called a private vow.

2. If a vow to keep Gods Commandmens tye not morally, and so be not necessary, it is not lawful; and if so, we must condemn these general vows which one makes to God in pray∣er, Psal. 32. 2. I will bless the Lord at all times, Psal. 101. 2. I will behave my self wisely in a perfect way. Who can pray in faith to God in private, but they must engage themselves to * God to run, if he draw? and what suits an enlarged heart, and strength against temptations? and who can pray for faith, and perseverance, but they vow new obedience? ••d yet Mr. H. saith, a man may all his life never vow betwixt God and himselfe to keep the Commandments of God, and not be guilty. As for vowes of particular things, vows concerning spare dye•, our Divines, a•Calvin, professors of Leyden, Tilenus, Bacanus, teach they are utilia potius quam necessaira, useful, and in regard of particu∣lar temptations, profitable rather then necessary. Now one National vow is to the whole duties of the first and second Ta∣ble, which we tye our selves to perform both in Baptisme, in the Lords Supper, in selfe-judging, in confession of sin.

And 2. To say a man all his life may never be tyed to a vow, is to say a man may never pray, never confess his sins, never speak in private his godly Gospel-resolutions, and purpose of heart to cleave to the Lord, and yet not be guilty.

3. This is to make all Gospel-vows to be unnecessary, and will worship under the New Testament. Whereas Papists tell us in the Mass they make a general vow of obedience to God. See Durantus and Gab. Biel.

Mr. H. For if the Magistrate were bound to follow the judge∣ment*of the Churches and Ministry, if they should judge a tole∣ration Page  497 of all Religions lawful, or judge the false to be true, he then were bound to nurse the false Religion, and false Churches.

Ans. 1. No shadow of consequence is here, for neither Magistrate nor people can be bound to follow the judgement of the Churches or Ministry, farther then they follow the Rule of the Word, they follow their judgement conditionally, not ab∣solutely and simply; and it is a great calumny of Mr. Burton* and our Brethren, that we lay bands on the consciences of Prince and people to follow the acts and determinations of the Church, be they true or false: and that there is no place left to appeal to the next, or a better informed Synod, and to the consciences of the collective Church of the godly judicious professors, and to protest and deny obedience to erring Assem∣blies. If it be said, but where is there a Iudge to determine whe∣ther this or another well informed Synod, or the conscience of the collective body of the godly be right? This argument falls with e∣qual weight upon all Judicatures, all Judges, Parliament, Prince and Councellors with him, & upon all Assemblies; for what they determine, be it toleration of all blasphemies, or a strictest uniformity in Worship and Religion, it hath no power to bind the conscientious and moral practices of Prince or people, more then to bind their conscience by this: for the Fraternity and whole Church is tyed to follow the dogmatick determination of officers, in preaching or in sentencing delinquents without gain-saying: what the officers decree (saith Mr. H.) it is to all as the word of God. But Mr. H. must answer us, Churches * and Ministry are bound either absolutely or conditionally to fol∣low the Judgement of the King, who judgeth popery is the only true Religion, to which he can tender protection. If the former, what Tyranny are we under, who must submit to the Religion of the Prince, or be denuded of all protection, and exposed to fire and sword? If the latter be said, to wit, that Churches and Ministry are only conditionally to follow the judg∣ment of the King, so they find it agreeable to the Word, other∣wise not: then it must be false which Mr. H. said, that the Prince is the only supreme Judge of all true and false Religions: to say they must either obey or suffer, saith, that Christ exposed all to Martyrdom.

Page  498 Mr. H. If it be in the Magistrates power lawfully to forbid and hinder, then it is not in the power of the Churches to do lawfullye for*then the same thing should be in the same regard both lawful and unlawful•… and the rules of providence shall be opposite one to ano∣ther: but the supreme Magistrate may hinder any of another Na∣tion to come into his Kingdom, or his own subjects to go out, other∣wise he should want power to oppose them who come to lay waste the State, and should not have power to require homage of his own people.

Ans. 1. The probation of the proposition is most false, for * the power of the Magistrate is not to forbid, or command what he pleaseth, but according to the rule of the Word, and the Churches power is the same; if both the powers be lawful, their objects cannot be contradictory: for God hath not given to two lawful powers any lawful liberty, that the one may com∣mand what is lawful, and the other what is unlawful: for then he should give a power to command unlawful things, and the command of a created power should make it lawful, which is blasphemous: this argument falls with weight upon the Inde∣pendent way. There is a Iezabel in the Independent Church of Thyatira, and another Iezabel in the Church of Pergamus, each Church (say our Brethren) hath an immediate Indepen∣dent * Church-power to excommunicate. Thyatira useth their power and excommunicates Iezabel which is under them. Per∣gamus absolves and defends their Iezabel. Both powers are highest and immediate, and countable to no juridical power on earth: both are lawful powers. Then must it follow, if it be in the power of the one Church, to wi•, of Pergamus, law∣fully to forbid and hinder the excommunication of their equal∣ly guilty Iezabel and the c•…ning of her blasphemous Do∣ctrine: (for Pergamus absolves their •…l, and commends, and defends her Doctrine as so•…d and •…g) then it shall not be in the power of T•… lawfully to excommunicate their Iezabel, and condemn he• plasphemous Doctrine: for it shall follow, that the same Doctrine must be in the same regard both lawful, and sound, and edifying (saith the lawful power of Pergamus) and 〈◊〉 unlawful, and unsound, and destructive to souls, saith the lawful power of Thyatira.

Page  499 2. The probation is feeble and wacery, the King hath suffi∣cient power to oppose wasters of his Kingdom, and to require ho∣mage*of his subjects. Suppose he have not an unlimited power to forbid these of other Nations and Churches, and his own, to go to a Synod, within or without his Nation, for the setling of the Churches in necessary peace and truth, if the Churches must seek liberty and counsel for their soules good, and edifi∣cation: nor hath he any lawful power from God to hinder his own subjects to send Commissioners to sound and godly Sy∣nods for counsel and synodical light, more then Ieroboam could lawfully forbid the people to go and worship at Ierusalem, upon pretence, that they might be perswaded to cleave to Rehoboam their lawful Prince, and waste his new Kingdom: nor hath the Prince an unlimited and absolute power to exact such absolute homage of his people; nor such a power over their moving from place: for so the Church Independent of Ierusalem confisting * of ten thousand, if not more, should have no intrinsecal pow∣er to meet for the publick worship of God; but the Prince must have a lawful power to hinder their meeting, or then the Church cannot have a lawful power to meet; for the convening of ten thousands, if abused, is as dangerous for wasting of a Kingdom in its own way, as the convening of a national Synod, is, or may be destructive to peace.

Mr. H. To appoint such solemn publick Assemblies is an act meerly civil; Ergo, the Prince may do it. A civil act belongs not to an Ecclesiastick power. A right opinion, rectus de Deo sen∣sus & cultus, of God, and a right worship of God is a meerly civil act.

Ans. There is nothing here sound, but evil and worse. Christ •…h given an Ecclesiastick intrinsecal power to his Church to meet, it being a part of his free Kingdom, and he himself a free King. Suppose the Princes of the earth oppose, Ps. 2. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Ps. 110. 1, 2, 3.

2. Kings are Nurse-fathers, having a civil, but cumulative Page  498〈1 page duplicate〉Page  499〈1 page duplicate〉Page  500 power to command them to meet and assemble, but no privative * power to hinder them.

3. This proves they may not meet in a single congregation without the leave of the heathen and persecuting Magistrates, and condemns all the assembles and Church-meetings of the Apostolick Church as rebellious; for they had neither allow∣ance nor command of the Magistrate, yea, they were forbid∣den: and heathen Rulers as Rulers have power to oppose wasters of their Kingdoms, and so had the heathen Emperors in the Apostles times, as well as Christian Magistrates have such a power.

4. A right sense and opinion of God is no civil act. This yet more makes the Magistrate an Ecclesiastick person.

Mr. H. To call what members of the Synod he pleaseth to con∣sult about the good of the Church belongeth to the Prince, and their homage requireth this, otherwise he could not maintain the peace of the subject in godliness, for providence doth not require the end, but allows also the means.

Ans. Because the third and fourth Arguments are one, they are here.

1. The godly and sound Prince may call godly and learned Divines where the Churches are rightly constitute; but when the Churches make no free election of these Divines, it is nei∣ther a free Synod, not are the Divines messengers of the Chur∣ches, nor sent by the Churches, as Act. 15. 1, 2, 3. nor may * the Magistrate for the maintaining of the peace of the subjects in godliness, use what means he pleaseth for that end, but only means prescribed of God, except Mr. H. can prove that Christ hath annexed to the royal Office, a gift of chusing members of Assemblies, more excellent then is in the Churches, which we read not. And if 2. this belong to the Magistrate as the Ma∣gistrate, then all Magistrates, Heathen, Arrian, Socinian, Po∣pish (for sure they are Magistrates) must have this power, and this power only, if it be given to godly and sound Magistrates, as such, Mr. H. his instance of Herod comes far short of this power. Read then the Councel of Antioch holden by the Arrians under Constantius. Then must Maximus Bishop of Ierusalem, and Iulius Bishop of Rome, who refused to come Page  501 to that Councel, be Rebells by Mr. H. his reason, and deny ho∣mage to the Emperour. For the Magdeburgenses, Sozomen, So∣crates,* tell us these godly men justly feared the Princes siding with Arrians, and the design of casting out of Athanasius, at the Assembly at Antiochia, Anno 344. and the altering of the Nicene faith, as fell out: and its known that Constantius ri∣gorously and unjustly commanded those of the Councel of Sirmium, Anno 356. to recall the two Confessions of Faith, one in Latine, another in Greek, in which though abstaining from the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, (which should not have been) they gave great glory to the Son of God; yet that they too much inclined to obey his wicked design, in that he also banished ma∣ny worthy Bishops, Liberius Bishop of Rome, Paulinus Bishop * of Triere, Dionyfius Bishop of Alba, Osius Bishop of Corduba, and others, because they refused to ratifie in the Councel at Millan, the deposition of Athanasius, and to alter the Nicene Faith. See Theodoret, Socrates, Sozo•en, Ruffin. Much more * of the flexibleness of Constantius in opposing the Councel of Ariminum, and in arming with power Ursatius and Valens to publish the summe of the Arrian Faith, and to eject sundry Bishops, who refused to subscribe thereunto: and in gathering a Councel in Nica a town in Thracia, which ratified the Ar∣rian Faith, and called it falsely the Nic••• Faith; as if the world knew not then and now, the difference between Nica in Thracia, and Nice in Bithynia. See Socrates and Sozomen.* Who shall read the Histories shall find, 1. That the Emperors were not Masters of true and false Religion, as Mr. H. saith. 2. That they had not power of chusing members of the Coun∣cel. as Mr. H. 3. That godly Bishops refusing to come to cor∣rupt Councels at the command of the Emperor, were not coun∣ted rebellious, as Mr. H. saith.

To the fifth Argument, The Churches need the protection of the Prince in Assemblies, and are to give an account to any of their*faith and doings, 1 Pet. 3. 18. and far more to the Christian Prince: but it follows not, that they have no intrin•…l power Page  502 from Christ to meet themselves, if the Prince refuse to con∣vocate them, as Asa, Hezekiah, Iosiah did, for the Magi∣strate ought to protect the Independent congregation, and every single Professor: but it follows not, therefore the sin∣gle congregation hath no power intrinsecal to meet for Word and Seals, except the Prince who is a persecutor, give him leave: nor follows it yet, therefore no single member can profess Christ before men and the Ruler (who often perse∣cutes confession of Christ) except the Ruler give him leave to profess Christ, and to meet in a Synod: For Christ hath given to his Church, and members thereof, power to wor∣ship him in private, in publick, in Church-Assemblies, and hath laid above their heads no lawful privative power of Ru∣lers to hinder his people to worship the Lord God, Exodus 3• and the Argument retorted concludes against Mr. Hooker. The Prince hath no power under pretence of keeping civil peace to Casar, to hinder actings of rendring honour to God, contrary to truth, and destructive to the Gospel.