It is true, these are good words, but it is as true, they do not touch the cause in hand, much lesse confute it, if they be rightly consi∣dered.
The Kings of the nations are so stiled by way of distinction, be∣cause of the speciall rule they have, distinct from the rule which is erected in the Church: And the fair and familiar meaning is, This King is Ruler over those people that are within the com∣passe of his nation or territory: another over his people, and so every one over his own particular subjects, and hath no Kingly rule at all in anothers kingdom: so here the Elders of the Church∣es are and may be so called, because they feed and rule within their particular Congregations, but exercise no rule in anothers Church, no more then the King of Edom doth in the Kingdom of Chaldea: and therefore the members of one Church, as they did not choose, so they should not submit to the rule of the Elders of another Congregation, no more then a subject in Chaldea, as he did not choose, so should not submit to the King of Edom; by this expression our cause is confirmed, not confuted.
M. R. addes,
If all the Kings of the nations did meet, in one Court, and in that Court did govern the nations with common royall authority and counsell in those things, which concern all the kingdoms in common, then all the nations were bound to obey them in that Court. And when they do consent to the power of that common Court, tacitely they consent, that every one of those Kings shall be a chosen King of such and such a kingdom.