The divine right of church-government and excommunication: or a peacable dispute for the perfection of the holy scripture in point of ceremonies and church government; in which the removal of the Service-book is justifi'd, the six books of Tho: Erastus against excommunication are briefly examin'd; with a vindication of that eminent divine Theod: Beza against the aspersions of Erastus, the arguments of Mr. William Pryn, Rich: Hooker, Dr. Morton, Dr. Jackson, Dr. John Forbes, and the doctors of Aberdeen; touching will-worship, ceremonies, imagery, idolatry, things indifferent, an ambulatory government; the due and just powers of the magistrate in matters of religion, and the arguments of Mr. Pryn, in so far as they side with Erastus, are modestly discussed. To which is added, a brief tractate of scandal ... / By Samuel Rutherfurd, Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. Published by authority.

CHAP. XIV.

Quest. 10.

Whether Erastus doth strongly prove that there is no Presbytery, nor two distinct judicatures, one of the Church, another of the State?

Erastus. I deny not, First, such a Presbytery, as the Evangelists* 1.1 mention, which is called a Presbytery, a Synedry, a Synagogue; this was the civill Magistrate who had amongst the Jews the power of the sword. 2. I deny not a Presbytery, 1 Cor. 6. when the Church wanteth a civill Magistrate. 3. I deny not a Presbytery of learned men, who being asked, may give their judgement of doubts: of which Ambrose, there was nothing of old done sine seniorum consilio, without the Counsels of the Elders. But I deny a Senate, collected out of the body of the Church, to judge who repenteth, and are to be excommunicated, and debarred from the Sacraments, and who not; or I deny any Eccle∣siasticall judicature, touching the manners and conversation of men, different from the judgement or court of the civill Magistrate, or that there be two supream Courts touching manners in one Common wealth.

Ans. One simple head in a moment, may deny more then many wise men can prove in a whole day, it proveth they are more cum∣bersome in their disputes, then strong; that there was a Iewish Presbytery, ••hat is, a civill judicature, is con••uted by Lev. 10. 10. where there is a Court of Aarons sonnes, whose it was to judge

of Church matters only, and to put difference betweene holy, and un∣holy, betweene cleane, and uncleane. 2. A Presbytery of arbitrators in matters civill, to keep Christians from going to law one with another, before heathen judges: Is not a Presbytery, 1 Cor. 6. one wise man might do that, and he is no Presbytery. 2. There is no judicatures of Officers there; they were but gifted men arbitra∣rily chosen for a certaine businesse, and were not judges, habitu. 3. A Presbytery for Doctrine only is further to seek in the word, I hope, then our Presbytery; Erastus should teach us where it is. 4. He denieth a Presbytery for manners, then all scandals must come before the civill Magistrate. Who made him a Church offi∣cer to judge of the affairs of the Church? Who is to be admitted to the seals, who not? For two supream Courts, I shall speak God-willing.

Erastus. There is no Colledge of Presbyters at Corinth, but every* 1.2 man was to judge himselfe.

Ans. There is a company gathered together in the name of our* 1.3 Lord Jesus with the spirit of Paul, and the power of our Lord Iesus, 1 Cor. 5. 4. 5. who did judge those that are within, and put out from amongst them an incestuous man, v. 12, 13. least he should leaven the whole Church, v. 6. this is a Colledge of judges. 2. There is a num∣ber of builders and labourers with God, 1 Cor. 3. 9, 10, 11, 12. Ministers of God, dispensers of the misteries of Word and Sacra∣ments of God, 1 Cor. 4. 1. such as Paul, Apollos, Cephas, and o∣thers, 1 Cor. 1. 12, 13. 1 Cor. 4. 6. A number that had power to punish, to forgive, 2 Cor. 1. 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. 3. A number of Prophets who judged of the Doctrine of the Prophets, 1 Cor. 14. 30, 31, 32. these be ve∣ry like a Colledge of Presbyters. O but Paul writeth not to those, but to those who were puffed up, and mourned not, 1 Cor. 5. 2. These were the people and Church. Ans. Yea these were the eyes, eares, and principall parts of the Church, 1 Cor. 12. 14, 15, 16, 17, 18. now he writeth to the Church, 1 Cor. 1. 1▪ 2.

Erastus. Before this time, Paul must have instituted this Presby∣tery, who seeth not that this is false? for so he would have accused the Presbytery, not the whole Church; but he accuseth not the Elders, be∣cause they admitted the man to the Lords supper, and there is no word of excommunication here. There is no mention of one judgement, of one election, of one office, but he chideth the whole Church; because

they mourned not: it was not the Elders office to remove this; they dream, who say there is a Presbytery instituted here, and there was none insti∣tuted before this Epistle was written; he biddeth them not ask suf∣frages, whether he should be excommunicated or no.

Ans. All that Erastus saith against a Presbytery, is to improve excommunication: But there may be excommunication by the people, as many hold, where there be no Elders at all. 2. Let Era∣stus point out the time, when a number of preaching Prophets were instituted at Corinth, whether in this Chapter (which to me is a dream) or before. 3. He had cause to rebuke all; All were secure, the Elders who cast him not out, the people who said not to their Elders, as the Colossians are bidden say, Col. 4. 17. to Archippus; and will Erastus say that preaching Elders, who by office, are the eyes of the Church, 1 Cor. 12. 17, 28. were not to be chiefe in mourning to God, and praying that the man might be miraculously killed? and yet he reproveth all equally. 4. He reproveth them all that the man was not cast out of the Church, and this includeth a reproofe, that he injoyed all the Church priviledges, especially the Sacraments. 5. It is false that there is no mention of judgement, v. 12. Do not ye judge those that are within? for election, there is none in the Chapter, nor any Presbytery instituted in this Chap∣ter; it was before: Erastus hath the like reason to say, that there was no instituted Church at Corinth, because in the 1. or 2. Epistle to the Corinthians: we reade not where he instituted any such Church; if we finde the thing instituted, we know it had an insti∣tution, and let Erastus shew us when Paul received the institution of the Lords supper, from the Lord: shall we deny he received a∣ny such thing contrary to 1 Cor. 11. 23. because we finde not where and how he received from the Lord? 6. There is no asking of suf∣frages mentioned Act. 1. at the choosing of Mathias, nor Act. 6. at the choosing of the Deacons that we reade of; Ergo, there were no suffrages there; it followeth not. 7. And ought not farre rather suffrages to have been asked before the people should take on their heads the mans blood, by consenting thereunto, and praying for it, as Erastus saith?

Erastus. If these words, v. 3. I verily as absent in body, but present in spirit, have decreed, &c. signifie, choose out of your company, Pres∣byters, who are to censure the manners of the people, who shall debarre

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

the unworthy from the Sacraments, I am willing to suffer any thing.

Ans. I know no man but Erastus that dreameth of any such sense, there is no institution of a Presbytery in this Chapter, no calling of Ministers; but it presupposeth a ministery before s••••led. But if th••se words. I have decreed, &c. have the Erastian sense, I have given s••••••e••c•• as a Magistrate, that the man be killed by the ministery of the Devill; and that you shall be my Heralds to pro∣claime this sentence: it is a wonder the Text give not any hint of such a sense.

Erastus. v. 12. he speaketh not of the judgement of Presbyters,* 1.4 but of all the people.

Ans. 1. This Erastus on his word asserteth, without probation:* 1.5 We deny it, it is but par••llel with Gods judging. 2. It is an act of the keys. 3. It is relative to casting out by those that are conveened in the name of the Lord Iesus, with the spirit of Paul, and the po∣wer of our Lord Iesus: Was every Girle, and beleeving servant capable of this spirit▪ and power?

Erastus. I grant before any come to age, be baptized, he is to be ex∣amined, whether he understand the Doctrine of saith, and assent to it with his heart: I grant it is profitable that young ones be examined, before they be admitted to the supper, but I deny God hath for either of those instituted a Presbytery. But there is no ground that a Presby∣tery must try wicked men, ere they be admitted to the Lords supper.

Ans. 1. We owe Erastus thanks for granting this; but what if the aged be sound grosly ignorant, and uncapable of the seals? and some wicked men will trample the seals as swine, and yet they desire the seals. Erastus said before, such should not be admitted; who* 1.6 should debarre them; either the Church of beleevers, or those that are over them in the Lord, or the Magistrate must debarre them: if the first and second be said, Erastus cometh to finde some use for a Presbytery; if the Magistrate be an heathen, he cannot examine or debarre any from the seals. Let Erastus answer, if he be a Chri∣stian, how can it be denied; but if the Magistrate by his office is to steward the bread to one of the children, not to another, but he is a steward to cut and divide the word, and seals both aright; and how could Paul make it one of the properties of the Pastor, 2. Tim. 2. to cut the word, and by the same reason to distribute the seals aright, if it depend upon another officer by his office to com∣mand

him to divide it to this man, whom he hath examined, and findeth in his mind qualified, and not to this man? We judge the Elders of the New Testament do agree in this common and perpe∣tuall morality, that both are to put difference between clean, and unclean, holy, and unholy, though many things were unclean to the Iews, that are not unclean to us, and that the Church hath yet a power to bind and loose, Mat. 16. 9.

Erastus. There was never a wiser common wealth in the world,* 1.7 then that of the Iews, Deut. 4 But in the Common vvealth of the Ievves, there vvere never tvvo distinct judicatures concerning man∣ners: Ergo, There should not be these tvvo different jurisdictions in the Christian common vvealth. But all should be given to the civill Magistrate.

Ans. Erastus is seldome happy in his Logick, his Sy••logismes are thin sowne, all Gods laws are most wise, but if this be a good Ar∣gument, was not their Church, their Religion, their Ceremonies, their judiciall Laws, all wise and righteous? Then the Christian Church should be conform yet to the Iewish, we should have those same bloody sacrifices, judiciall lawes, Ceremonies that they had. The Iudicatures and officers are positive things, flowing from the positive will of God, who doth appoint one jurisdiction for them, most wise, and another to Christians different from them, and in its kinde, most wise. 2. We give two judicatures in the Church of the Iews, concerning manners, one civil, acknowledged by Erastus; ano∣ther spirituall & Ecclesiastick, ordaining Ecclesiastick and Spirituall punishments upon the unclean, Lev. 10. 10. As to be removed out of the campe, and such like, and Deut. 17. Thou shalt come to the priests, the Levites, and the Iudge, that shall be in those daies, according to the sentence vvhich they of that place (vvhich the Lord shall chuse)* 1.8 shall shevv thee, and thou shalt observe to doe according to all that they informe thee, ver. 12. And the man that vvill do•• presumptu∣ously, and vvill not hearken 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to the Priest, (that standeth there to minister before the Lord thy God) or unto the judge, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 even that man shall die, and thou shalt put avvdy evill from Israel. There is here an evident disjunction that clear∣ly holdeth forth, that both the Priests and the civill judge judged in matters of manners, and that he that presumptuously despised the sentence of either was to die: a judicature of the Priests is e∣vidently

here, and a judicature of the civill judge, Erastus can∣not deny, and that the Priest judged in subordination to the ci∣vill judge, is refuted by the words, which saith the Priest was immediatly subordinate to God, not to the Magstistrate: He that will not heare the Priest (that standeth to minister before the Lord thy God) shall die: Ergo, He is the Minister of the Lord; and God called and separated Aaron and his sonnes, to stand before the Lord, and to minister, and he did call the Levites, the Magistrate called them not to office.

Erastus. Beza saith, that Moses, Ioshua, David, Salomon, did not* 1.9 execute the office of the Priests, and therefore the charge of the Priests, and of the civill Magistrates were different offices, and charges; but I said, before the Lord chose Aaron and his sonnes to be Priests, they were not so distinct charges, but they did agree to one and the same person; for, Moses to omit the rest, did execute the office of Aaron, Levit. 8. But after that it was not lawfull for any to doe the office both of King and Priest; and therefore Saul and Vzziah were justly corrected of God for it. But what is this? It proveth not that the Priests had publike judicatures to punish wickednes of manners.

Ans. Certainly, if Erastus deny the charge of the Priest and the* 1.10 King to be different offices, because once Moses did offer Sacri∣fice, (and so was Melchisedeck both a King and a Priest, Heb. 7.) he must say that Moses offered Sacrifices, Levit. 8. not as a Priest. (Sure I am, Moses was a Prophet, and a Prince and Ruler, but no Priest.) But Moses by Erastus his way, must as a civill Magistrate have offered Sacrifices, and not as a Priest or priviledged per∣son by a speciall and an extraordinary commandement of God; for to deny the two offices of Priest and King to be different of∣fices, because one man discharged some Acts proper to both Offices, as Moses both did beare the Sword of God, as a Prince, and did also discharge some Acts proper to the Priest, as Erastus saith he did, Leviticus 8. is a poore and naughty Argument: undeniable it is that Melchisedeck was both King and Priest, but even then to be a King and to be a Priest, were two distinct offices, in nature and essence, because Melchisedech did not take away the life of a Murtherer, as a Priest, but as King of Sa∣lem, Heb. 7. 1. Nor did Abraham pay tithes to Melchisedech as to a King, but as to a Priest. Tithes in Moses Law as tithes, were ne∣ver

due to any but to the Priests: and therefore even in Melchi∣sedeck, the Kingly and Priestly office, were formally distinct Or∣dinances of God, just as David as a King and judge took away the head of the man who brought Sauls head to him, and not as a Prophet he did this; so as a Prophet he penned the Psalmes, not as a King: If one and the same man be both a Musitian and a pain∣ter, he doth paint excellently as a painter, not at a Musitian, and he singeth excellently not as a Painter, but as a Musitian; and though one and the same man doe acts proper to both, that may prove that Musick and the art of painting are one subjectively onely, that they may both agree to one and the same man, but not that they are not two faculties and gifts of God different in spece and nature. 2. Though Erastus confesse that it was unlawfull that Vzzias and Saul should sacrifice, yet he will have the Kings office, and the Ministers office under the New Testament not so different; for* 1.11 he said expresly, Who knoweth not now when Aarons Priesthood is removed, but we are all equally Priests? Saul and Vzziah sinned when they were bold to sacrifice and burne incense, but the Magi∣strate doth not therefore sin, who exerciseth the charge of the Mini∣stery, if he might for his businesse performe both, doth Paul make ex∣ceptions of Magistrates and Potentates, when he saith, 1 Cor. 14. You may all prophecie? Hence he must grant that the civill Magi∣strate now may both preach, baptize, and administer the Supper of the Lord, and therfore not only hath the Church no Senate, nor Ec∣clesiasticall court to punish faults, and scandals with Ecclesiastick censures; but there is no Presbytery of Elders to give their judge∣ment in matters of doctrine, for the Magistrates and all Christi∣ans may as well prophecy by •• Cor. 14. as Ministers, saith he, yea the faculty of preaching is no more proper to the Ministers of the Church, then to the Magistrates of the city. Now by this nothing is proper to the Magistrate, as the Magistrate, but to the Magi∣strate as a Christian, and to all Christians. But Erastus conten∣deth that the government of the Church, and punishing of Scan∣dals, which we say belongeth to those that are over the people of God in the Lord, and to Church Rulers, doth belong to the Ma∣gistrate as the Magistrate, and virtute officii, by vertue of his of∣fice: so that if any Iew or Turke, or any ignorant or extreame∣ly scandalous should attempt to intrude himselfe upon the Seals,

the Magistrate as the Magistrate and virtute officii, is to examine and judge if he be unworthy, & to debar him, or as he findeth him wor∣thy, admit him to the Seals. Now any seeth that it is but a deceiving of the Reader, to say that one man may discharge both the place of the Magistrate, and the Minister of God, as Moses did, and Ioshua, & David: For let Erastus and his followers shew us roundly and down-right, whether or no prophecying, debarring the unworthy from the Seals, and all acts of Church government, not proper to the Magistrate as the Magistrate, and virtute officii; And if so, (as indeed Erastus teacheth) it is bu•• a poore shift to say, that one and the same man may both exercise the part of a Magistrate, and of a Minister.

Erastus. Beza for ever shall not prove that there was a Church judicature, that had power to punish scandalous men. Iehoshaphat* 1.12 2 Chron. 19. ordained judges in all the fenced cities, and admoni∣shed them of their duty. 2. And did the same at Ierusalem. 3. And ordained judges of Levites and Priests, and heads of families, for the judgement of the Lord, and for every cause; and Amaziah the High Priest was chiefe in the causes of the Lord, and Zebadiah in the Kings causes. This Synedrie at Ierusalem was the politick Magi∣strate, they judged of stroaks, servitude, deaths. But your Synedrie judgeth not between blood and blood, it judgeth not of every cause, as Deut. 17. Those that are not well versed in Scripture, are to note two things: 1. That the cause of the Lord, where mention is made of judicatures, is not onely a cause of Religion, but any cause proposed in judgement, especially the causes of the widdow, the Or∣phan, & oppressed, which the Lord saith he will avenge. 2. The Levites & Priests were no lesse civil judges then others it is known that onely the Levits were Magistrats in the cities of refuge, there was need of men exercised in the Law of God, that the judges might judge righteously.

Ans. If you take punishing for inflicting Church-censure, (as we here take it) then all the places that sayes the Priests pronounced the Leper clean or unclean, to put out of the campe, or take in, to judge of the adulterous woman, of the restitution made by those for whom they offered Sacrifices, to judge between the clean and unclean; to hold out of the Sanctuary the unclean, the uncircum∣cised in heart and flesh, Levit. 13. 3, 4, &c. and 20, 22. and 21. 26, and 30. 44. and 31. 50. Ezek. 22. 26. and 44. 8, 9, 10. Num. 3. 6, and 5. 18, 19. Deut, 17. 12. say the Priests had power to pu∣nish

for transgressing of Gods Lawes, and where the Prophets complaine of the Priests mis-government and unjustice, it is pre∣supposed they were to govern justly according to the Law, Ier. 5. 31. 2 King. 12. 4. Ier. 26. 7, 8, 11. Hag. 2. 11, 12. Ezek. 44. 8, 9, 10. 2. For the place 2 Chron. 19. it is evident that Iehoshaphat doth re∣forme both Church and State, and brought the corrupted Iudi∣catures to that which they should be by Law; and v. 5, 6, 7. He set judges in the fenced cities of Iudah: Here is the civill judicature. And v. 8. Moreover in Ierusalem did Iehoshaphat set of the Levits, and of the Priests, and of the chiefo of the fathers of Israel, for the judgement of the Lord, and for controversies, when they returned to Ierusalem. Now that this second is a Church judicature, I am con∣firmed, 1. Because Iehoshaphat appointed civill judges in all the fen∣ced cities of Iudah; Ergo, Also in Ierusalem the prime fenced city: Now this civill judicature was not tyed to a place, but was in e∣very city, even all the fenced cities; but the Synedrie of Priests, Levites and Elders was onely at Ierusalem, in the place that the Lord should chuse, Deut. 17. 8. Hence a judicature tyed to no city, but which is in every fenced city, 2 Chron. 19. 5. Deut. 17. 8. and a judicature tyed to Ierusalem, the place that the Lord did choose, Deut. 17. 8. 2 Chron. 19. 8. must be two distinct judicatures, but such were these. 2. There is a (moreover) put to the Iudicature at Ierusalem, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and also in Ierusalem did Iehoshaphat set of the Levites, &c. This could not have been said, if this had not been a judicature different from the former, for if Iehoshaphat appointed Iudges in all the fenced cities; Ergo, He appointed them first at Ierusalem, the Mother city and fountaine of justice; now then he should say the same thing needlesly, and with a moreover, if this judicature at Ierusalem were not a judicature Ecclesiasticke and different from the judicature civill, that he appointed at Ierusalem as one of the prime fenced cities, which was common with the civill judicatures in other fenced cities. 3. The persons in the ju∣dicatures are different, for v. 5. the members of the court, 2 Chro. 19. 5, 6, 7▪ are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 judges; these could not be Churchmen, for of these he speaketh v. 8. & they are expresly distinguished from the Levites, Priests and Elders, v. 8. who are all Church-men, for the fathers of the people were no other thing then our governing Elders, and these were members of the other court, v. 8. 4. The

objects of these judicatures are very different. The Spirit of God saith of the one ver. 5. That they judge for the Lord, ver. 13. for▪* 1.13 all the Kings matters, this must be all civill causes, in which the King, and inferiour judges under the King doe judge; but the ob∣ject of the other is higher. The Priests and Levites are appointed by Iehoshaphat for the judgement of the Lord, ver. 8. And in every matter of the Lord, v. 13. Now whereas Erastus putteth a note of ignorance on all that hath been versed in the Old Testament be∣fore him, whereas he confesseth he understandeth not the Originall Language, let the Reader judge what arrogance is here, where e∣ver there is mention (saith he) of judgement, there is signified not re∣ligious causes, but also other causes, especially the cause of the wi∣dow and Orphane: It bewrayeth great ignorance. For, 1. The matters of the Lord, and the matters of the King, are so evidently di∣stinguished, and opposed the one to the other, by two divers presi∣dents in the different judicatures, the one Ecclesiasticall, Ama∣ziah the chiefe Priest, in every word or matter of the Lord▪ and the other Zebadiah, the sonne of Ishmael the ruler of the house of Iudah, for all the Kings matters, that the very words of the Text, say that of Erastus which he saith of others, that he is not versed in the Scripture: for then the causes of the Lord, and the causes of the King in the Text, by Erastus should be the same causes, whereas the Spirit of God doth distinguish them most evident∣ly. 2. If the cause of the King, were all one with the judgement of the Lord, and the cause of the Lord, yea, if it were all one with all causes whatsoever either civill or Ecclesiasticall, what reason was there they should be distinguished in the Text? and that Amaziah should not be over the people in the Kings matters, though he were the chiefe Priest, and Zebadiah though a civill Iudge over all the matters of the Lord, and causes Ecclesiasticall? 3. The Kings matters are the causes of the widow, and orphan, and oppressed, as is evident, Ier. 22. 2. O King of Iudah, v. 3. ex∣ecute yee judgement and righteousnesse, and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor, and doe no wrong, doe no violence to the stranger, the fatherlesse, nor the widdow, so Esa. 1. 10. 17. Prov. 31. 4, 5. Iob 29. 12, 13, &c. Then the▪ Text must beare that every matter of the King is the Iudgement of the Lord, and the mat∣ter of the Lord; and every matter and judgement of the Lord, is

also the matter of the King, and to be judged by the King, then must the King as well as the Priest, judge between the clean and the unclean, and give sentence who shall be put out of the Campe, and not enter into the Congregation of the Lord, no lesse then the Priests. Let Erastus and all his see to this, and then must the Priests also releeve the fatherlesse and widdow, and put to death the oppressour. 2. The different presidents in the judicatures maketh them different judicatures. 3. It is denied, that all causes whatsoever came before the Ecclesiasti∣call Synedry at Jerusalem, Erastus doth say this, but not prove it; for the place 2 Chron. 19. doth clearly expound the place, Deut. 17. for the causes of the brethren that dwell in the Cities, between Blood and Blood, between Law and Commandement, Statutes and judgements are judged in the Ecclesiasticall Synedrim at Ierusalem not in a civill coactive way by the power of the sword. 1. Because all causes are by a coactive power judged, as the mat∣ters of the King, the supream sword bearer, 2 Chron. 19. 5. v. 13. Rom. 13▪ 4. to eschew oppression, and maintain justice, Ier. 22. 2, 3. But the causes here judged in this Synedrim, are judged in another reduplication, as the matters of the Lord differenced from the mat∣ters of the King, 2 Chron. 19. 13. now if the Priests and Levites judged in the same judicature, these same civill causes, and the same way by the power of the sword, as Magistrates, (as Erastus saith) why is there in the Text, 1. Two judicatures; one, v. 5. in all the fenced cities; another at Ierusalem, v. 8? 2. What meaneth this, that the Kings matters are judged in the civill judicature, not by the Priests and Levites? (as Erastus saith) for the Ruler of the house of Iudah was president in these, and the matters of the Lord were judged by the Priests and Levites? and Amariah the chiefe Priest was over them? for then Amariah was as well over the Kings matters, as the Ruler of the house of Iudah, and the Ruler of the house of Iudah over the Lords matters, as over the Kings; for if Priests and Levites judged as the Deputies subordinate to the King, and by the power of the sword, the Kings matters are the Lords matters, and the Lords matters the Kings matters, and A∣mariah judgeth not as chiefe Priests, as he doth burne incense, but as an other judge, this truly is to turne the Text upside downe. 2. The causes judged in the Synedrim at Ierusalem, are said to be

judged as controversies, when they returned to Ierusalem, 2 Chr. 19. 8. and matters too hard, between plea and plea, between blood, and blood, between stroke and stroke, Deut. 17. 8. and so doubts of Law, and cases of conscience. Now Mal. 2. 7. The Priests lips should preserve knowledge, and they should seek the Law at his mouth; for he is the messenger of the Lord of hostes, and this way only the Priests and Levites judged, not that they inflicted death on any; but they resolved in an Ecclesiasticall way, the consciences of the judges of the fenced Cities, what was a breach of the Law of God Morall or Judiciall, what not; what deserved Church censures, what not, who were clean, who unclean; and all these are called the judgement of the Lord, the matters of the Lord; because they had so near relation to the soul and conscience, as the conscience is under a divine Law. 3. Erastus saith, it is knowen that the Le∣vites only were Magistrates in the Cities of refuge, but I deny it; Erastus should have made it knowen to us from some Scripture: I finde no ground for it in Scripture.

Erastus. It is true, that Beza saith, that the Magistrate hath a* 1.14 supream power to cause every man do his duty. But how hath he that supream power, if he be also subject to the Presbyters? for your Presbyters do subject the Magistrate to them, and compell him to obey them and punish them, if they disobey.

Ans. The Magistrate even King David leaveth not off to be supream, because Nathan commandeth him in the Lord; nor the King of Niniveh and his Nobles leave not off to command as Ma∣gistrates, though Jonah by the word of the Lord bring them to lie in sackcloth, and to Fast; all the Kings are subject to the rebukes and threatnings of the Prophets, Isa. 1. 10. Jer. 22. 2, 3. Ier. 1. 18. 2 Kin. 12. 8, 9. 10, 11, 12. 1 Kin. 21. 21, 22, 23. Isa. 30. 33. Hos. 5. 1, 2. and to their commandments in the Lord: If Presbyters do com∣mand as Ministers of Christ, the highest powers on earth if they have souls, must submit their consciences to the Lords rebukings, threatnings and Commandment in their mouth: Court Sycophants say the contrary, but we care not. 2. But they punish the Christian Magistrate (saith he) if there be any Church Censure, as we sup∣pose there is, this Objection should not have been made against us; because of the Magistrates supremacy; it doth conclude with e∣quall strength, that Pastors should use it against no man: Now

there be some swine that trample the Sacraments, some not well in∣structed in the grounds of Christian Religion▪ and Erastus said, pag. 207. Such should not be admitted to the Lords Supper▪ Now the Magistrate the King is such; Let Erastians say, the Pearles of the Seals of the Covenant are to be given to no swine, except the swine be Magistrates, and that which the Church bindeth on earth is bound in heaven, except it be the Magistrate; Erastus saith, he may go to Hell by priviledge of his place; and that whose sins the Elders of the Church retaineth are retained, except it be the Kings sins, and that we are to put shame upon scandalous persons, and to refuse to eat with them, Romanes 16. 17. 2▪ Thess. 3. 14, 15. 1 Cor. 5. 11. 2 Ioh. 10. Except they be Magistrates; Sure God is no accepter of persons.

Erastus. Whereas you say, it is not lawfull for the Magistrate to* 1.15 preach and administer the Sacraments▪ (if he might because of his bu∣sinesse be able to discharge both Offices) it is not true: God hath not forbidden it; it was lawfull in the Old Testament, for one man to dis∣charge both, why is it not lawfull now also? the history of Eli and Sa∣muel is known; it is nothing that you say, that the tribunall of Moses, was distinguished from the tribunall of Aaron: for God gave to Aa∣ron no tribunall at all, different from the tribunall of Moses, he ne∣ver did forbid the Priests to sit in the Civill judicature after the cap∣tivity, the Priests judged the people Ezech. 44.

Ans. That it is lawfull for the Magistrate to preach and Admi∣nister* 1.16 the Sacraments, 1. Destroyeth the Ordinance of Pastors, and a sent and called Ministry under the New Testament, against the Scriptures, Heb▪ 5. 4▪ No man taketh on him this honour to himself▪ except he that is called of God, as was Aaron: So also Christ glori∣fied not himself, to be made an high Priest, &c. •• 2. God often ma∣keth an honour of a calling to the Ministery, that he hath separated them to it, Numb. 16▪ 9. Moses saith to Korah; hear now ••e sons of Levi, Seemeth it a small thing unto you, that the God of Israel hath separated you from the congregation of Israel to bring you neer to himself to do the service of the tabernacle of the Lord, Deut. 10. 8. At that time the Lord separated the tribe of Levi to bear the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord, to stand before the Lord to minister un∣to him, Numb. 8▪ 6. 7. 8. 9. But that same honour is put upon the Preachers of the Gospel, Rom▪ ••. 1. Paul the servant of Iesus Christ,

called to be an Apostle, separated unto the Gospell of God, Act. 13. 2. The holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them: If it be an honour, and no man, though gifted as Christ was, can take honour to himself: No Ma∣gistrate can take on him to discharge the office of a Minister.

Object. But when he is called to be a Magistrate, he is called to be a Minister, and so being called to the one, he is called by the same cal∣ling to the other.

Ans. If being called to be Magistrate, he be also called to be a Minister, then being called to be a Minister, he is called to be a Magistrate, and Hoc ipso that he is a Minister, be may usurpe the sword, and usurpe the Throne and the Bench▪ But Christ being sent to be a Prophet, and to preach the Gospel, Esa. 61. 1. Luk. 4. 20. 21. ve••. 43. refused to divide the inheritance, and to be a a Iudge, Luk. 12. 13, 14. He would not take on him to be a judge, except God had made him, and called him to be a judge; If any say the Magistrate, being the supream place, containeth eminently all inferior offices▪ as to be a Minister, a Lawyer, a Physitian, &c. but the inferior does not containe the superior, I Ans. Then the Ma∣gistrate being called to be a Magistrate and King, he is called to be a Priest to burn incense, which the Lord condemned in his word▪ in Vzzah; then when Saul is called to be a King, he is called to be an Astronomer, Lawyer, Physitian, Sayler, Tayler: Now God giveth a spirit to be a King, but no gifts to those offices; Ergo, No calling thereunto, for no gifts argue no calling of God. 2. If a man called to be a judge, be also by that same calling, by which he is made a judge, made a Minister, then it is all one to be called to be a judge, and to be a Minister; and so a Magistrate as a Magistrate doth preach and administrate the Sacraments, then 1. All Magi∣strates should preach and administrate the Sacraments, and Nero, and heathen Magistrates are gifts, actu primo, given by Christ as∣cending on high, for the edifying the body of the Church, Ephe. 4. 11, 12.

Obj. It is not sinne to him to preach and administrate the Sacra∣ments; but then he cannot have time for both.

Ans. If God lawfully call the Magistrate to preach the Gospel, woe be to him, if he preach not, he should lay aside all other im∣ployments and preach, God never gave a talent and calling to any

to preach, but he ought to lay aside other things, and imploy that talent to the honour of God, otherwise he sinneth in digging his Lords talent in the earth, whereas he is obliged to make five ta∣lent ten. 2. If he preach as a Pastor not as a Magistrate, then he hath another calling of God to be a Pastor, and another to be a Magistrate, and ••••rtaine it is, as a Magistrate he doth not preach; because there be farre other qualifications required in a Magistrate, as Deut. 1. 12. that he be wise, and understanding, and knowen, and a man of truth, hating coveteousnesse, Exo. 18. 21. But there is farre other qualities required in a Bishop, 1 Tim. 3. 1, 2, 3. Ergo, it is one thing to be called to be a Minister, and another to be called to be a Magistrate. 3. In all the word, Christ never commanded the Magistrate to preach and baptise▪ this negative Argument Era∣stus useth often against us, to prove that none ought to be excluded from the Sacraments, because Priests, Prophets, Christ, Apostles never excluded any: But Christ commanded the Ministers to preach and baptise, and gave them the Holy Ghost for that effect, and sent them as the father sent him, as having received all power from the father, Math. 28. 18, 19, 20. Mark. 16. 15, 16. Ioh. 20. 20, 21, 22. and least we should think this charge was given to Apostles as Apo∣stles, he teacheth that it is given to all faithfull Pastors to the end of the world, Math. 28. v. 20. Lo I am with you, even unto the end of the world, Amen. Not to say, that if it be peculiar to Apostles to preach and baptise, neither Pastors, farre lesse Magistrates can do it, or then Pastors and Magistrates are Apostles sent to preach to all the world, and can work miracles, which is absurd. 4. Christ ascen∣ding to heaven, left Apostles, Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers, for the perfecting of the Saints, and work of the Ministery; not Kings and Magistrates. 5. How shall they preach, except they be sent? Magistrates as Magistrates bear the sword, and have car∣nall weapons, and are not sent; the weapons of Ministers are not carnall, 2 Cor. 10. 4, 5. For Erastus his Argument, God has not forbidden Magistrates to preach; Ergo, it is lawfull for them to preach, it followeth not▪ for such positive ordinances as preaching Ministers, must be appointed by a positive command, for where hath God forbidden women to baptise? Ergo, they may baptise; is not the Lords commanding the Apostles to go teach and baptise all Na∣tions, and his not giving any such commandement to others, as

good as a forbidding of them? But I hope this is examined already suffi••ientl••. 2. For Samuel his being both Iudge and Prophet, I grant it; but as an extraordinary dispensation of God, which Christ would not take on him to do, Luk. 12. nor is it left to us as a rule. 3. That Aarons sons had no tribunall of their owne different from the tri∣bunall of Moses, is proved to be false from 2 Chr. 19, 8. 4. That the Priests were Magistrates having the power of the sword, cannot be proved by any word of God, the pl••••e Ez••. 44. is every way for us, all the power given in that Cha▪ is Ecclesiasticall, none Civill, as to k••ep the charge of the Lords holy things, to exclude the uncircumcised in heart and flesh, out of the sanctuary, to come near to the table of the Lord and Minister, v. 16, to enter into the gates of the inner courts, clothed in linnen, &c. and many the like, did no more agree to a Magistrate then to burn incense, which to do, Erastus granteth was unlawfull in King Vzziah; yet he would prove that it is law∣full under the New Testament to exercise both, so the Magistrate were able to do both; because Samuel exercised both. But might not King Vzziah exercise both without impeachment of his busi∣nesse? and where was he forbidden? but in this God made choise of the tribe of Levi, and of no others, which also he has done un∣der the New Testament▪ as is proved.

Erastus. Nor is that true, that whose part it is to preach and dis∣pense* 1.17 the Sacraments, it is his part to judge of those that prophaneth the word, and seals, so as he has power to punish any that desires the Sacraments, with the want of the Sacraments; and though it were true, it should prove that Pastors, not a Presbytery of Pastors and Ru∣ling Elders have any power to debarre from the seals.

Ans. 1. Well, then Erastus granteth that the Ministers are to preach the Word and dispense the Sacraments: But not to judge of those that prophane the holy things of God, nor to debarre from the Sacraments any who desire them; if Erastus did mean a bodily debarring by the power of the sword, if any openly pro∣phane shall violently intrude himself, we should yeeld that to the Magistrate as the keeper of both Tables. But Erastus is of that minde, that as the Magistrate may preach and dispense the Sacra∣ments, he may by that power also Ecclesiastically cognosce, and judge of the scandals, for which the openly prophane are to be debar∣red, and accordingly debarre. Now Erastus saith he may preach

as a Christian, because that all Christians now under the New Testament may preach and prophecy, all are Priests and Prophets, so saith he, page 175. So the Magistrate by this as a Christian, and* 1.18 so all Christians women and children, may try and examine all that are openly prophane, and unworthy of the Seals: this can be nothing but popular Anarchy; yet that the Magistrate, as a Magistrate, and not as a Christian, is to examine and try who are unworthy communicants, I conceive is the minde of Erastus, as I have proved before: Which though it be a plaine contradiction, yet it is the pillar of all the Erastian doctrine, that the Magi∣strate as the Magistrate hath the supream power of all Church governement. Therefore (saith he, page 171.) they doe wickedly who* 1.19 take from the Magistrate that part of the visible jurisdiction in governement of the Church which God hath given to him, and sub∣ject the Magistrate to some other jurisdiction,—Magistrates are Gods.

Ans. If to preach, dispense the Sacraments, and to judge who are unworthy of the Seals, and debarre them, be taken from the Magi∣strate as he is a Christian, this power of visible jurisdiction over the Church is no more taken by us from the Magistrate, then it is taken from all Christians as Christians, and in regard of any such power Magistrates are no more Gods and Nursefathers in the Church, then all Christians are Gods and Nursefathers of the Church: for by the reason of Erastus, p. 175. that all Christians now are Priests and Prophets, and so may examine who are worthy of the seals, who not, then the Civill Magistrate can be, by us, spoyled of nothing that God has given him, as a Magistrate, except Erastus say that he doth all these as a Magistrate & virtute officij; which when he or any of his Disciples shall assert, beside that it is contradictorious to his way, we are ready to demonstrate that it is blasphemous & con∣trary to the word of God. But that Erastus does take from the El∣ders of the Church, and give to the Magistrate a power to judge in an Ecclesiasticall way, who are to be debarred from the seals, I argue on the contrary thus; those who are to cut the word, and distribute it aright, are also to distribute the seals a right, to the worthy, not to dogs and swine, not to heathens and publicans, for it is evident that the right stewarding and distributing of ordinances doth essen∣tially include the stewarding of them, with judgement and discer∣ning,

to those that are worthy, not to those that are unworthy. But Elders, not Civill Magistrates are to do the former, Ergo the latter also. 2. Those to whom Christ committed the power of the keys to open and shut, to bind and loose, to those he hath given the use and exercise of the keys. But Christ gave the power of the keys to the Apostle Peter, as representing the Rulers of the Church, Mat. 16. 19. & to the Church, Mat. 18. 18. and not to the Magistrate as to the Magistrate; Ergo, The proposi••ion I prove from the Texts, Mat. 18. 18. What ye sh••ll bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven, &c. and Cha. 16. 19. the same is repeated: now actuall binding is the use and exercise of the keys given to Peter and the Church. But it is presumed the power is given, when Christ saith, v. 19. I will give unto thee, the keys of the Kingdome of Heaven. 2. We read not that God giveth a power, a gift, a talent, or an office, but he judgeth it a sinne in those to whom he giveth it, not to put forth in acts and in exercise that gift, talent, and office, either by themselves, or his deputies; which latter I speak for the King, who in his own person, and in the person of inferiour judges sent by him, do put forth in acts of justice, the Royall power that God has given him. The assumption is Scripture.

Erastus has no answer to this, but the keys were given to Peter as representing all the faithfull, not the Elders, and that all private Chri∣stians do bind and loose.

Ans. Besides, this is answered fully above, and is a meer anarchi∣call Democracy; it, 2. concludeth well that Christ gave not to the Magistrate as the Magistrate, the keys, but to the Magistrate as he is a Christian, making that same Christian confession of faith with Peter, Mat. 16. and as he is an offended brother, who may bind and loose in earth and heaven, so Erastus Thes. 54. p. 42. and so by this the Magistrate hath no more power to debarre from the seals, then all other Christians have. 3. If Christ give the key of knowledge to the Elders, then he cannot give the power of study∣ing Sermons, and preaching the word to another; so if Christ give the power of breaking the bread of life to the children of the house, then he cannot give the power of judging, who are the children of the house, who not, to another.

Ob. But the Magistrate is only to examine the fact, & to punish adul∣tery, incest and the like, that deserve to be punished by the sword, but not

whether it be a scandall that deserve exclusion from the Sacrament, or not; Ministers are to take the probation of the scandalous fact by witnes from the Magistrate, & so to exclude from the Lords supper, and to deal with the mans conscience to bring him to repentance, so do some argue.

Ans. If the Church be to try the penitency, or impenitency of the fact, and not to cognosce and try whether he hath done the fact, upon the same ground the Magistrate is to try and punish the di∣sturbance of the peace of the Common-wealth, that adhereth to the fact, and not to try the fact. 2. It is not possible that the Church can know whether the man be penitent, or no, except by witnesses they know the fact, for they shall run a preposterous way, to work the man to a godly sorrow, for that sinne which possibly he never committed; now that of which the Church is to convince the man, and from which they are to gain his soul, that they are to find out. 2. This is against the way of Erastus, who will have the Magistrate to exclude from the Sacraments, and none other. 3. The word knowes no such thing, as that Ministers should be led in the acts of their Ministeriall duties, to whom they should dispense the myste∣ries of the Gospel, and to whom they should deny them; by the Magistrate? by a good warrant the Magistrate is to lay a tye on the consciences of Elders, what they should dispence, as to whom they should dispense; sure if the Magistrate as the Magistrate must pre∣scribe to Ministers, to what sort of persons they must dispence word and Sacraments, he must upon the same ground as a Magistrate pre∣scribe what Doctrine they should preach to this man, not to this, whether Law or Gospel; and so the Magistrate as the Magistrate must be a Pastor to cut the word aright, 2 Tim. 2. 15. Eze. 3. 18, 19, 20. Eze. 13. 19. to command to preach life to this man, death to this man. 4. If the Church must cast him out, and judge him who has done this wickednesse, 1 Cor. 5. 2, 12. and 4. 5, 6. 7. then must they judge of his scandall; that according to the quality of the scandall, they may proportion the measure of the punishment; Er∣go, a pari they must judge whom they debarre from the seals. 5. The debarring any from the seals, must be proportioned to the end of all spirituall censures, that the man be gained, and his sinne loosed in heaven, Mat. 18. 15. 18. that his soul may be saved in the day of the Lord, 1 Cor. 5. 4. That he may be ashamed, and so humbled, 2 Thes. 3. 14, 15. 2 Cor. 2. 6, 7. that he may learn not to blaspheme, 1 Tim.

1. 20. But the Magistrates excluding of any from the Sacraments is no mean congruous to such an end, for he can command nothing, but the disobedience of which he can and ought to punish with the sword; now a carnall weapon cannot be congruous and proportion∣able to a spirituall end. 6. If the Magistrate as a Magistrate must so farre have the keys of Discipline, then as a Magistrate he must catechise, examine, and try the knowledge of the Communicants, and so watch for their souls, as those that must give an accompt to God. 7. The Magistrate must have a Negative voyce in all the acts of the Church, and the man must be bound in heaven, but not ex∣cept the Magistrate will, and loosed in heaven, but not except the Magistrate will, for all must depend upon the consent of him to whom Iesus Christ has committed the supream▪ and highest and on∣ly power of governing the Church; now this is the Magistrate as the Magistrate to Erastus. 8. The Magistrate as the Magistrate must forgive sinners and relaxe them from excommunication, 2 Cor. 2. 7. and restore those that are overtaken in offences, with the spirit of meeknesse, Gal. 6. 1. and rebuke publikely those that sin publikely, 1 Tim. 5. 20. and so be a spirituall man, and a Pastor. Neither doth it follow that the Pastors as Pastors only, should de∣barre from the Communion, though virtute potestatis ordinis as Pa∣stors, they are to keep themselves pure, and not to give pearls to swine, nor to communicate with other mens sins; yet because the Sacraments are Church ordinances, they are to be dispensed by the Church, that is, by the Elders with consent of the people: it is one thing to dispense ordinances to those that receive them, and another thing to dispense them ce••••o ordine after a Church way, the former is from power of order, the latter from power of jurisdiction, and from the Church only.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Erastusl. 4. c. 1. c. 2. p. 258. 259. What Pres∣byteries Erastus yeildeth.
• * 1.2

  Pag. 259.
• * 1.3

  A Presby∣tery at Co∣rinth.
• * 1.4

  Pag. 261.
• * 1.5

  Erastus granteth an examinati∣on of such as are to be admitted to the Sacra∣ments, but denieth all exclusion. Pag. 261.
• * 1.6

  Pag. 207.
• * 1.7

  Page 262. lib. 4.
• * 1.8

  The pla∣ces Deut. 17. and 2 Chron. ••9 do prove two diffe∣rent judi∣catures.
• * 1.9

  Page 262.
• * 1.10

  How the Kingly and priest∣ly office are diffe∣rent.
• * 1.11

  Lib. 3. c. 1. page 175. Erastus de∣nieth the Ministery to be a pe∣culiar ordi∣nance to some one∣ly, but common to all under the New Testament.
• * 1.12

  Page 263. 264. Two di∣stinct Iudi∣catures, 2 Chron. 19.
• * 1.13

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.14

  Pag. 265.
• * 1.15

  Pag. 265.
• * 1.16

  Magistrates are not to dispense the word and Sacraments as Erastus saith.
• * 1.17

  The Ma∣gistrate is not to judge who are to be admitted to the Sa∣craments, who not.
• * 1.18

  L. 3. c. 1. ex equo n••s omnes esse sacerdotes.
• * 1.19

  Erastus ib. 171.