The Difference Between the Power of Magistrates and Church Pastors, Letter 1

The Difference Between the Power of Magistrates and Church Pastors · Letter 1

p. 1My Learned, Sincere and Worthy Friend,

WHEN I had hastily set down my judgement of the Cause which I found handled in your Papa Ultrajectinus and other Writings which you sent me, I cast by that Script (which I intended at the writing of it, for your view) that I might surely keep it from the notice of others, in this Age wherein the prevalency of Interest, Faction, Passion and Injudiciousness, doth make it so great a difficulty, to say any thing for the cure of any mens errors, enormities or impieties, which shall not be charged with the same crime (or greater) which it would cure, and be taken for a disturber of the Church and Peace, which it would save or heal. But now seeing that you renew your endeavours in the same Cause, and finding your Jugulum Causae directed to so many hands, by seventy particular Epistles, and that you have honoured me with a place among those great and worthy persons, I take my self obliged to render you some account of my judgement of your Writings, and especially of the whole Cause, by bringing into the open light, those hundred Propositions which I had purposed to conceal: And withal to tell you,

1. That (though you have much overvalued me in your recitation of their report, who would have joyned me with so Great, so Wise and Good a man as A Bishop Usher, and that in so great a work; and experience may tell you, that other men have other thoughts of me, as one unmeet to preach the Gospel in the Land of my Nativity, much more p. 2unmeet to be a decider of the Churches Controversies) yet you have truly described my judgement of your self and your undertaking. I confess I hope not that ever you should make the Roman Usurpation, more palpable, than the falshood of their Doctrine of Transubstantiation; where they maintain (not only the Corporal Presence, which is not it that I now mean, but) that Bread is not Bread, and Wine is not Wine, when all men see, taste, smell and feel them: And if the Princes, Doctors, and great men of the world, can thus obstinately deny (or take on them to deny) the judgement which is made of sensible objects, by all mens senses, you may gather what fruit you may expect of your labours, or of any Cause how plain soever, where prejudice and seeming interest are against you? Can all the Writings or Reasonings in the world, bring any thing to a more clear and sure decision, than that of all the senses of all men in the world, about the proper objects of sense? If flesh so far conquer flesh it self, and the interest of sensuality can cause such men, and such multitudes to renounce the apprehension of all their senses, what have we to do more for the cure of mankind?

You have made it plain enough, that it is really a part of the Secular Government of Kings and States, which is now commonly called Ecclesiastical among the Papists, and as such is challenged and usurped by the Pope, and that Princes that subject their Kingdoms to his Usurpation, do take in a joint Ruler with them, and divide their Kingdoms or Power between themselves and him. But so they have done, and so they will do, till the Time of the Churches fuller Reformation, and of the Coalition of the Christian world is come.

I know you may think that as Interest blindeth them, so this great detection of the Invasion of their Interest is the way to bring them to the truth. For who will have a Co-partner with him in his Kingdom, that may choose? Who had not rather Rule alone, than divide his Kingdom with the Pope? Undoubtedly they give away more of their own Interest hereby, than you have opened? When they deliver part of their power to one, who by an approved p. 3General Council of their own, which is the Religion of their Party, Later. sub Innoc. 3. Can. 2. 3. may depose Temporal Read the Declaration against the Oath of Allegiance by H. I. for the Popes deposing Kings, pa. 16, 17, 27 43. Read Hottomans Franco-Gal. cap. 7. and his Brutum …lmen, pag. 87, 97, 98. Read Withriagton and Barclay against Bellarmia in Goldastus Tom. 3. de Mon. And Bellarmia against Barclay c. 9. Vid. Sua ez. …. advers. sect. A…glic. li 6. cap. 4. sect. 14. & cap. 6. sect. 22. 24. Azor. …rs. Mor. par. 1. l. 8 c. 13. Dom. Bannes in Thom. 22. q. 12. art. 2. August. Triump. de potest. Eccl. q 46. art. 2. There is no doubt (saith he) but the Pope may depose all Kings when there is reasonable cause for it.] See the Jesui…s Morals, and Mystery of Jesuitism, and Myster. Patrum Jesuitarum.Lords, (though no Protestants themselves) that will not exterminate those that deny Transubstantiation out of their Dominions, and may absolve their subjects from their fidelity, and may give their Countryes unto others. When their most Learned, Renowned, applauded Doctors teach, that the Pope may excommunicate Kings, and that an excommunicated King is no King, and he that killeth him, killeth not a King. When the Roman Council under Greg. 7. decreeth, that the Pope may depose Emperours: And the same Greg. 7. li. 4. Ep. 7. conspireth in the like Doctrine. The Oration of Card. Peron is well known: If so great a Kingdom as France, that glorieth of its Church-liberties, can bear so much, what will not those bear, that are less able to deliver themselves? The words of this Great and pretendedly Moderate Cardinal in a Moderate Kingdom, in a publick Writing against a Protestant Learned King (King James) pag. 453. (as cited by A. Bishop Usher of Babylon, pag. 163. is fit to be written on the Doors of all Princes, and of the Pope himself, in Capital Letters; viz. [By this Article (that Kings may not be deposed by the Pope) We are cast headlong into a manifest Heresie, as binding us to confess, that for many Ages past the Catholick Church hath been banished out of the whole world: For if the Champions of the Doctrine contrary to this Article do hold an impious and detestable opinion contrary to Gods Word, then ☜doubtless the Pope for so many hundred years expired, hath not ☜been the Head of the Church, but a HERETICK and the ☜ANTICHRIST.]

What would you have more to satisfie Kings, than their p. 4own profession that, Either the Pope may depose Kings, or … he is not the Head of the Church, but an Heretick and Antich…i…t, and hath been so for many hundred years. Can you sh…w their Interest plainlier than all this?

And lest any say, that this is but the Doctrine of the Jesuits, remember that Perron was another kind of man, and the famous Perverter of King Henry the fourth. And I will cite here the words of one more of a multitude, even one that wrote so long ago, as to be numbred with the Fathers in Biblioth. Patr. To. 4 p. 913. and a Roman Cardinal Bertrard Card. & Epis. Eduens. de Orig. & usu Jurisd. Qu. 4. [Respondeo & dico quod Potestas Spiritualis debet dominari omni humanae Creaturae per rationes Hostiensis—Item quia Jesus Christus silius Dei dum fuit in hoc mundo, & etiam ab aetern… naturalis dominus fuit, & de jure naturali in Imperatores & quoseunque alios depositionis sententias ferre potuisset, & damnationis, & quaseunque alias: Utpote in personas quas creaverat, & donis naturalibus & gratuito donaverat, & etiam conservabat. Et eadem ratione etiam ejus Vicarius potest. Nam non videtur discretus Dominus ☞fuisse (ut cum reverentia ejus loquar) nisi unicum post ☞se talem Vicarium reliquisset, qui haec omnia posset. Fuit ☞autem iste Vicarius ejus Petrus apud Mattheum: Et idem dicendum est de successoribus Petri, cum eadem absurditas sequeretur, si post mortem Petri humanam naturam a se creatam sine regimine unius personae reliquisset.]

I will English it lest the unlearned believe not what Fathers, what a Biblioth. Patrum, what Cardinals, and what Doctrines the Roman Clergy obtrude upon the Christian world.

[I answer and say, that the spiritual Power ought to have domination over every humane creature, by Hostiensis reasons—Also because Jesus Christ the Son of God while he was in this world, and also from Eternity, was the Natural Lord: and by Natural Right, could pass the sentence of Deposition and of Damnation, and any other, upon Emperours and upon any others; as being persons that he had created and endowed with Natural Gifts, and freely, and also preserved: And by the same reason his Vicar can do it: For the Lord seemeth p. 5not to have been discreet (that I may speak with reverence ☜to him) unless he had left behind him one such Vicar, who ☜could do all these things. And in Matthew this his Vicar ☜was Peter: And the same must be said of the successors of Peter, seeing the same absurdity would follow, if after the death of Peter he had left humane nature created by himself, without the Regiment of One person.]

Do you think this is not plain dealing enough, if men are willing to understand?

I know that there were Emperours and Princes that strugled hard, before they suffered themselves to be thus subjected; And these Emperours had Lawyers, Statesmen and Divines that took their parts; as all the Treatises in Goldastus his three Volumes de Monarch. and his Imp. Constit. See Bellarm. de Pontif. Ro. li. 5. c. 1. & 6. & 7. & 8. he saith, It is the common judgement of all Catholick Divines, that the Pope ratione spiritualis hath at least indirectly a certain Power, and that the highest in Temporals. Which c. 6. he saith, is just such over Princes, as the soul hath over the body; or sensitive appetite: and that thus he may change Kingdoms, and take them from one, and give to another, as the chief Spiritual Prince, if it be but necessary to the safety of souls. Yea, he saith, that It is not lawful for Christians to tolerate an Infidel or Heretical King, if he endeavour to draw his Subjects to his Heresie or unbelief. But to judge whether a King do draw to Heresie or not, belongeth to the Pope, to whom the care of Religion is committed. Therefore it belong…th to the Pope to judge a King to be deposed, &c.shew. But still those that sided with the Pope spake contrary, as the argumentations of those Books besides the Authors whom they oppose, do shew. And, alas, Occham, and Marsilius Patavinus, and Widdrington and Barclay came all too late. For all that Secular Power which was cloaked with the name of Ecclesiastical and Spiritual, was before so deeply rooted in the Papacy, that they durst plead for no more, than that Princes are not subject to the Pope in Temporals: But as you truly note, abundance of Temporals, and of the Magistrates proper work about things Ecclesiastical, was still vailed under the name of Spiritual: And at last, even the Temporal Power again claimed more subtilly, and indirectly, as in ordine ad spiritualia.

But you'l say, that All men are naturally so regardful of their own Interest, and especially Princes, that it is not possible they should be so servile, tame and self-abasing, as to give p. 6away so great a part of their Kingdoms to a Forreigner, yea, to one that claimeth all, (by himself, or by his most famous Writers) and by his Councils claimeth a power to depose them; They that with their own Nobles and other Subjects, are so jealous of their Prerogatives, would never so far depose themselves, if they did but know what they do: And therefore when Popish Princes understand the matter, they will shake off the yoke, and re…ssume their right.

Answ. It's true, that Protestant Princes and States have done so; And the true meaning of our Oath of Supremacy is the same with your main design: And though some have stumbled at those words, that the King is Supream Governour in all Causes Ecclesiastical, the meaning is only (as hath been oft publickly declared) that he is the Supream Civil or Coactive Governour by the Sword, in all Causes Ecclesiastical, so far as they fall under that Coactive or Coercive Government. And hereby the King doth but reassume the Royal Power over the Clergy and the affairs of Religion, which the Pope had usurped under the name of Ecclesiastical. For its well known what was called Ecclesiastical Power in England in the times of Popery: so that this much of the Vail is removed long ago among all Protestants. And if you peruse but Bishop Bilsons excellent Tract of Christian Subjection, and Bishop Andrews his Tortura Torti (to pass by all others) you will see that this Case is better opened, than I for my part am able to open it. And it is seldom heard of (for all the industry and subtilty of Rome) that any Prince or State doth Voluntarily turn Papist, that is once delivered from the Yoke, and that ever again parteth with his power when he hath recovered it.

But yet that even this Argument from Notorious Interest, doth not recover the Liberty of Countreys subject to the Pope, you will the less wonder, if you consider these three things.

1. That the Papal Interest hath got such rooting in their Subjects minds, that it is not in their power to reassume their right. The Clergy are so numerous, subtile, ubiquitary and potent, and the people so commonly deceived, and so tenacious of ancient Customs, that to make this p. 7Change, might cast all into a flame: And they think it better to lose part, than all. And no doubt but the examples of Henry the third, and Henry the fourth of France, maked some think, that if they displease the Pope and his Consederates, they have not sufficient security for their lives.

2. And Princes stand usually on such terms of danger or jealousie from one another, that they are fain to keep such a Peace at home, lest they expose themselves to a greater mischief from abroad. And they are broken by the Papal subtilty, especially in Germany and Italy, into such Fractions, and petty Principalities, that few of them are strong enough to defend themselves against the Confederates of the Pope (when potent Emperours heretofore could not do it.) And many of them, especially the House of Austria, do take this Copartnership of the Pope, to be a great part of their strength: And as anciently many Emperours were forced to choose their Caesars and Copartners, when the defence of the Empire was too hard for themselves alone; so divers Princes are glad to make use of the Papal interest and power for their own security; though upon terms that else would never be submitted to.

And in some Countreys the Rebellious disposition of the Subjects driveth them to accept of this dear remedy; and they choose rather to strengthen themselves by a Copartner, than to stoop to the wills of their inferiours.

For here you must take notice, that the pretence of a Jus divinum and of Spirituality, and the Interest of Christ, and of the safety of their souls, doth make this kind of servitude much less dishonourable, than it is to be overtopt by a neighbour Prince, or to be curbed by their subjects. For what dishonour is it for a man to be subject to his Maker and Redeemer? Nay, what greater honour can there be? And the Roman Clergy have used themselves to Canonize those Princes that have been most zealous for their Grandure, and to raise the fame and praises of such, as have raised that which they call the Church, that the very ambition of the Clergies Praises, doth do much to tempt some to a tame acceptance of a Copartner, who pretendeth to be the Vicar of Christ: When this servitude goeth for p. 8sanctity, and carrieth not with it the reproach of other sorts of servitude.

3. And it greatly furthereth their success, that the Popes Agents are commonly bred up in Learning, and so are made able to over-wit the Laity; And that it is their great design, to gratifie the Lusts of Princes, by indulging their voluptuous sensual lives, that so they may spend their dayes in such things, as will never advance their understandings to an ability to discern the cheats of their Copartners: And they detestably cherish the Ignorance of the Common Laity, that they may be the fitter to be led and mastered by them; even as men keep women from Learning and great attainments, lest they should be the more uncapable of subjection. And thus as Satan leadeth men to Hell, so the Papal Usurper bringeth the Laity into their power, by their own consent, by such pleasing baits, as make their servitude easie to them. And it is not your telling them of their interest, that will prevail against all these temptations. They that will lose Heaven, and their salvation by such cheats, may lose half of their earthly Dominions by them, as long as the other half sufficeth to satisfie their concupiscence, and to maintain their honour and pleasure in the world.

The Roman Usurpation consisteth of two parts. 1. The Usurpation of such a Pastoral Power as they have no right to. 2. The Usurpation of a great part of the Magistrates power, sometime directly, and sometimes indirectly in ordine ad spiritualia; and constantly by the cheat of the false name of Church power, put upon the Magistrates part of Church Government, as if it were the Clergies part.

I. The Usurpation of a Pastoral power which belongeth not to them, is the chief part of their Iniquity. And it consisteth in these, among other particulars.

1. In the impious, and arrogant claim of an Universal Pastorship over all the world. The Roman Prelate must be the Teacher of all the world, the High Priest of all the world, and the Spiritual Ruler of all the world; which because he cannot do by himself, he must do by others, as far as he can to uphold his usurpation. He must be the Lawgiver p. 9and the Judge of all the world, even at the Antipodes, and where he hath no acquaintance nor access.

2. By this he undertaketh to be a Bishop in other mens Diocesses, and to rule in all matters, where he hath no more power, than any Pastor hath in another Pastoral Charge.

3. And by this he undertaketh to be the Spiritual Father and Governour of all the Kings and Rulers of the Christian world, and so to have the power of excommunicating them when he thinketh there is cause, and to brand them as uncapable of Christian communion with their own Subjects; or with any other Christians.

4. By this he usurpeth authority of imposing what Pastors he please (even such as will carry on his interest) upon all the Churches in the world, and depriving both Princes and people of their just liberty of choice.

5. By this also he usurpeth the power of deposing what Bishops or Pastors he please, and depriving the people of their necessary helps, and faithfullest Teachers. Yea, of putting whole Nations under Interdicts of serving and honouring God in Church-assemblies; commanding all Pastors to shut up the Church doors, and forbidding them to perfom their office, and to preach Christs Gospel, or administer his holy Sacraments.

6. By this he sendeth forth his Missionaries▪ and setteth up Societies of Jesuits and Fryers to do his work, and commandeth all Princes and people to receive and countenance them.

7. By this he layeth claim to a right of maintenance for Himself and his Missionaries in all parts of the world, in the name of Christ, who hath said, that the labourer is worthy of his hire.

8. By this he granteth Dispensations, Pardons, Indulgences, commandeth praying to Saints and Angels, and praying for the Dead, as being in Purgatory, and by this he setteth up his whole new frame of self-devised Worship and Religion. Now I call not all this an Usurpation of Magistracy, so far as he useth no Corporal force, and threatneth no penalty but excommunication and damnation. p. 10For every true Pastor with his own flock hath the Power of Guiding them by delivering Christs Doctrine and Precepts, and commanding obedience as his Servant or Embassadour in his Name, and of denouncing his judgements, and of judging obligingly who are fit to be taken in to the Church by Baptism, and who to be cast out as Impenitent by excommunication in his own particular Charge or Society. And if the Pope usurp a power of doing all this and more, as an Universal Pastor only, this is an Usurpation of a Church Power, and not of a Magistracy. And indeed if you will acquit him from the guilt of the Mysterie of Iniquity any further than he invadeth Magistracy it self, you will do him a great deal of wrong: For he is the Vicarius Christi, and the Vice-Christ more notably by his Spiritual Usurpation of a power proper to Christ himself, or at least of a power that Christ never gave him.

II. His setting up a KINGDOM, and invading the MAGISTRACY is done I. Directly, II. Indirectly and Consequentially.

I. Directly;

1. By holding a Secular Jurisdiction, as the King of Rome, where he exerciseth the Supream Civil Power, acknowledging no Superiour Civil Governour; either as to the Legislation or Execution, in all the parts of his own Dominions.

2. By his laying claim to many Kingdoms as his own (among which England is one, as pretended to be delivered to him by King John) and supposing that the Kings do hold them as under him, and by his Grant.

3. By laying claim to the Temporal or Corporal Government of all the world (say some) or of all the Christian world (say others): Of which you may see a multitude of Volumes written in the defence of his pretensions: In particular all those aforesaid were of this subject, which all Goldastus his Collected Treatises, for the Right of Princes do confute. I gave you Cardinal Bertrands words before.

And though some of their Clergy who live under Princes that are not willing to resign their Crowns, do disclaim p. 11the Popes direct Title to the Universal Civil Soveraignty, yet he himself disclaimeth it not, nor condemneth the Books as such, that have been written to defend it.

In the Jesuits Morals the last Chapter hath this Title [That the Jesuits teach, that the Church cannot command spiritual and internal actions; That its Laws and guidance are humane, and that it is it self only a Political Body] Where the Jansenist chargeth them with destroying the Church from its foundation, and making it altogether external, humane and Politick; and that which needeth only Politick Vertues for its Government, and the exercise of its principal offices, and that they make its Laws but humane and politick, which oblige only to things external: and chargeth them as Cyprian did the Novatians, Quod Ecclesiam humanam faciunt] So that if he accuse them justly, here is no room for any subterfuge: It is not the Spiritual and Temporal power that he makes them claim, but the Temporal or External only: But what! doth the Jansenist himself therefore disclaim all Temporal Power in the Church, or is he just to Kings? Judge but by pag. 388. where he boasteth of Laymans Confession of the Truth, that [Ecclesiastick power is instituted immediately from God, and the Civil power comes immediately from men: And that Civil power regards properly and directly wealth and peace temporal only:] And he adds [For the Civil power regards the outward order and Civil tranquility alone; and prescribes none but outward and humane means to attain this end.] Which is all false, and most injurious to Kings; whom this moderate Jansenist would hereby set as far below every Priest; in real dignity and amiableness to the Subjects as a Humane Creature is below a Divine, and the interest of the body is below that of the soul. Whereas indeed God is the immediate Original of Civil and Church power, though in both the Persons are designed by the means of men. And both have God himself for their ultimate end, and the Common Good of the Society for their Common End; which ever consisteth most in spiritual felicity, referring to Eternal. Though the Magistrates weapon be the Sword, and the Pastors only the Word, by which all this is brought to pass.

p. 12Indeed it is not possible that the Papacy in its present State can be defended by any man how moderate soever, without Injury to Princes and States, whose Power the Pope hath so notoriously invaded and usurped: For how can they defend him, that usurpeth the Power of Kings, or usurpeth a false Power over Kings, and not be injurious to them that the Usurper injureth?

But it is most wonderful to me, that when W. Barclay defendeth the right of Monarchs in such a Kingdom as France that hath power and will to hold fast its own, he should complain as if he undertook a Cause which most were against him in, and in which he expected to be wondered at for his singularity.

4. By their Inquisition, and by their Decreeing Corporal Penalties in their Councils, and Decreeing the deposition of Princes, and the giving away their Dominions to others, as in the two fore-cited Councils, Roman. su…. Greg. 7. & Lateran. sub Innoc. 3. In a word, by all that they do in their Usurped Legislation, Judgement and Execution, by the Sword, or a forcing Power as in themselves.

II. But the more successful Usurpation of the Power and Rights of Princes is Indirectly, and as Bellarmin defendeth it, in ordine ad spiritualia; By using their Ecclesiastical Usurped power upon mens Consciences, in such a way as shall overtop the Magistrates power of the Sword: when they decree that all are Hereticks that believe their senses, and deny Transubstantiation, and that all such Hereticks shall be banished or burnt; the Clergy is not to do this themselves, but to deliver them over to the Secular Power: The Pope and Clergy do but charge it on their Consciences in the name of Christ. And if Princes obey them not, or Temporal Lords will not burn or banish all such Hereticks for believing sense, the Pope is not to touch their bodies, but to excommunicate them. And if they will not yet obey the Pope, when they are excommunicate, the Pope, Good man, will not draw a Sword against them, but only use the Spiritual Sword, by giving their Dominions to others, which is but by word of mouth; he doth but declare such a Temporal Lord to be dispossest of his Title, and require p. 13another to take his Lands, and let his great Divines publish that an Excommunicate King is no King, and that to kill him, is not to kill a King: And if Princes will defend themselves by Arms, the Pope will not send his Clergy in Arms against them, but only by the Spiritual Sword, or Word, command other Princes, States and people to arm themselves against their Emperours, Kings and Governours, and to defend those to whom he hath given their Dominions. How oft these Games have been seriously acted, the German Histories lamentably tell us: and Guicciardine… Italian, and the English, French and others are not wholly silent.

So if the Clergy be exempt from paying Taxes, from Secular Judgements, if their Lands and Estates be not under the Power of Kings, if they set up Courts of Judicature with Offices like a Civil Court, if they assume to themselves the sole judgement of Hereticks, and Schismaticks, and Apostates, and also of Testaments of the dead, and of Causes of Adultery and Fornication, of lawful or unlawful degrees of Marriage, and of Divorce, if the Pope lay Taxes on the Clergy that are Subjects in all Princes Dominions, if he dispose of Buildings, Tythes, Glebes, Monasteries, Lands, Almshouses, Colledges, and abundance such like; all this is not by the Sword, but by perswading Kings and States that they are bound in Conscience to promote all this, and obey the Pope as their Ghostly Father herein: And that if they be stricken with the Thunderbolt of Excommunication, they are in a state of damnation, and if they so dye, are undone for ever: And by perswading other Princes and people, that the Arms taken up against such Princes at the Popes Command (according to the foresaid Councils) are meritorious, and shall procure their salvation.

And if Princes and people will believe all this, and will be deceived, and will voluntarily subject themselves to such an Usurper, who can help it? Though it excuse not the Pope, yet they have little reason to complain, that they lose that power which they voluntarily give away, and that the Pope shall exercise that power which they p. 14give him. And so much to your Cause against the Papacy.

II. But in your Epistle to Mr. Areskin and several others, you lay much of the like charge upon the Reformed Churches, and you take our great Reforming Divines, to have kept up the Mysterie of Iniquity in their Discipline. Concerning which give me leave to deal freely with you, and to tell you, that I am perswaded that your meaning is sincere and good, and that it is an usurpation or devised imitation of Secular Government by the Clergy which you condemn; and that too great a part of the Protestant Clergy have given you some occasion for these complaints: But that really you deal not accurately in the Controversie, and Accurateness is the thing you want. You do not here exactly describe the true difference between the several powers where you seem to describe them; you leave out much that should be said. It is a more distinct way of handling this point, that must decide the Controversie. To which end I have laid you down an hundred Propositions, on occasion of your former Writings sent me.

And as you say in Epist. ad D. Russellum, p. 248. that in this you would believe one Physicion, one Coxe, Goddard; Lower, Ridgley, &c. (Though I have reason to think that the first and last of these are more of my mind about Church Government than of yours) before a thousand Augustines, Hieroms, Gregories, yea, Jewells, Davenant, Ushers, Dallees; so my opinion is, that usually all men are wisest in their own Profession. And though I am naturally somewhat unapt to take more than needs I must upon trust from any (since I have had great experience of humane ignorance and vanity) yet I had rather take a Physicions judgement in Physick, and a Lawyers in points of Law, and a Souldiers in Military matters, and a Divines in Theology, than any of their judgements about the matters of an aliene Profession. Not but that now and then a man may arise, that shall know more on the by, than others that make it the study of their lives: But that is not usual. And that one man would have been yet wiser, in those things if he had been of that Profession. p. 15For surely caeteris paribus, he that bestoweth twenty years, or thirty, or forty, or threescore in the Study of Divinity alone, with its subservient helps, is liker to understand it, than he that alloweth it, but now and then a spare hour, in the midst of other diverting Studies. For my part, if I follow not one thing only when I am upon it, but divide my thoughts among things heterogeneal, I cannot pierce deep into any great difficulties, nor make any thing of distracted Studies; neque quicquam recte fit, quod fit praeoccupato animo. God doth not use to give wisdom now by the way of Miracles; but they that seek most, are likest to find. And therefore pardon me for telling you, that though I am deservedly a great honourer of the Physicions you name, yet I set more by the Judgement of one Usher, one Davenant, one Jewell, one Dallaeus, one Blondel, one Camero, one Le Blank, one Petrus Molinaeus in matters of Theology, than of abundance of Lawyers and Physicions. And of one Lawyer and Physicion in matters of their Profession, than of many Divines. Being still of Pembles mind, that one clear eye can see further than a Council of purblind ones.

And as to the matter of Partiality of which you suspect Divines, it is not without cause as to all that party who seek for Riches, Ease and Honours, or Domination and Preferments and Preheminency in the world: But such as that St. Martin whom you mention out of Severus, who so vehemently opposed the Ithacian Violence, **You are mistaken when you twi… call Maximus Imperator Ethnicus, who but for his …patio…, ha… been a Christia… Saint.and Maximus his using the Sword against the Priscillianists are as impartial as you. Certainly if Christianity be what we all profess to take it for, it will make that man best who is most a Christian: And he that is best will be most impartially and self denyingly faithful to Christ, and will prefer Christs honour incomparably before his own. And he is like to be most a Christian, who doth sincerely give up himself to the closest study of it all his dayes. Deny this, and your suspicions will fall upon Christianity it self.

But yet I will allow you to be moderately suspicious p. 16where you see that there is any great bait of carnal interest to tempt men: A Popedome, a Cardinalship, (I must name no more) may make the Roman Heathen say, I will turn Christian, if you will make me Bishop of Rome, &c. But will you suspect that a good man, yea, and all such good men, should be Partial where they put themselves on the greatest self-denyal? Where they have no profit, no preterment, no man-pleasing, no worldly honour to invite them? Yea, where it is like to diminish their gain, to hinder them from preferment, to make them hated by most on whom their discipline is exercised? If a few out of a pang of Factious or Phanatick zeal, may cast themselves on such a self-denying life, it is not like that this will be the ordinary Case, of Learned, sober, godly men. If it be, with whom shall the ignorant trust the conduct of their souls, that will not make merchandize of them? Would you be partial and false to the Truth of Christ your self, if you were the Pastor of a Church? Is the Office so malignant to infect all that undertake it? If it be, how can our Religion be good? If not, why should you think that others will not be as just and impartial as you would be? Do you consider what excellent persons in all respects for Wisdom, and Piety, and Integrity, were Melanchthon, Bucholtzer, Sohnius, Kimedontius, Olevian, Ursinus, Zanchius, Paraeus, and those English men you named, and many hundreds more; who more unlikely through Ignorance or partiality to betray the truth?

But they say, that Interest will not lye. Do you not know that an able Preacher, may better by many degrees consult his own Ease, his Profit, and his worldly honours by Preaching only, than by this troublesome ungrateful work of Discipline? I am confident that you and I do take one another for true plain dealing honest men, and therefore can believe each other. And if you will believe me, I did, in my Pastoral Charge (in those times when I was thought tolerable in the Sacred Office) for about ten years (of the twenty that I had leave to preach) exercise some Discipline upon some particular offendors, according to the common judgement of Protestant Divines; And it p. 17was so much to my labour, to my expence of time, to the grievous displeasure of those that fell under it, and required so much self-denyal, that when I consulted with flesh and blood, if I might but have forborn it, and only preached, and given the Sacraments to all that came, I should have thought my self so greatly disburdened, as would have made my life to be sensually pleasant: so that, though I had not any maintenance of my own, I think I could gladly have given up all that I received for my Ministry, and made what other shift I could for food and rayment, so I might but have been freed from the trouble of this particular Discipline: I speak only what it was to flesh and blood, and not what it was to faith, which saith God cannot be served too dearly. Till I speak this to one that hath tryed the thing I talk of, I shall take it for granted, that my words are not half understood.

If you say, Why then did you not forbear a work so ungrateful? I now only answer, Why doth not the Judge and Sheriff forbear hanging Murderers and Thieves: The rest of my Answer you shall have anon.

Though my following Propositions seem full enough in opening the difference between the two Powers; yet I will here also briefly tell you, 1. Somewhat of the nature of Church Power: 2. Somewhat of the certain Truth that Jesus Christ did institute it: 3. Somewhat of the Necessity of it sub ratione m…dii ad finem.

I. For the first, take these few things together, and you may clearly see what power we claim.

1. Our Office for the Original of it, is as immediately from Christ as that of Magistrates, and is not made by Kings or any Monarchs. Therefore we hold it as immediately from Christ.

2. For the Matter of it, it is only to expound and apply the Word of God, both commonly in Sermons, and particularly to each mans several▪Case, as Physicions look to the Cure of individuals: And also to exercise the Keys of the Church or Kingdom of Christ; that is, 1. To be the ordinary Judges who is to be taken in by Baptism; 2. And also who is to be publickly admonished as scandalous, p. 18in our particular Charge: 3. And also who is to be absolved as penitent: 4. And who is to be declared unmeet for Church-communion, as obstinately impenitent, and to be forbidden Communion with the Church, and the Church with him, and consequently denyed the priviledges of the Church, and signs of Communion in the Lords Supper, which it belongeth to the Pastor to deliver only to the capable, and by the peoples familiarity and brotherly Society, which they are obliged to deny them. And this Sentence of the Pastor, if it should proceed on mistake, doth not make the mans Case the worse before God; but yet (till the Church have …ought its due remedy against mistaking Pastors) it remaineth so far valid, as that none against it may obtrude himself on the Communion of that Church. For, I pray you tell me, if Plato, or Zen… mistake in their judgement of a Disciple whom they refuse, or any Free Schoolmaster in judging of the incapacity of a Scholar, shall others so misjudged intrude into their Schools, and make themselves their Scholars against their wills? Or shall he whom by mis-information you refuse or reject from your family or service, become your houshold servant in despight of you?

3. And as to the Instruments and manner of exercising our Office, we professedly disclaim all pretensions to any power of the Sword, or of corporal penalty, that is coactive or coercive. You confess this once your self. We claim no power but by the Word, either generally preached, or particularly applyed to the case of those that are of our charge. No other power of Excommunication do we claim: If men will despise our Ministerial instructions, reproofs and censures, we have done with them. Shall they force themselves into our familiarity or communion in spight of us? Your Epist. 54. ad Mettagerium openeth the matter so fairly, that we little differ from it. If you say that Presbyterians and Episcopal set up Courts, Judicatories, with Officers like Civil Courts: I answer, 1. The more pomp and likeness to the Magistrates coercive way, the worse I like it. 2. But how shall men be heard, if they be not cited? How shall such things be Justly and Regularly, p. 19transacted, if there be not a known Time and Place, and if Accusers and Witnesses be not summoned? Are not such regular proceedings necessary even in Cases of meer arbitration? If this be all, here is no more Sword, no more force, than in a Pulpit. And how doth Excommunication (that is, declaring an Impenitent person unfit for Church Communion by Christs Laws, and binding him over to the great day) I say how doth this touch mens bodies or estates, or work any otherwise than a Pulpit-Sermon on the consciencious Volunteers? 3. And if horning, or Writs de Excommunicato Capiendo, or imprisonment, or burning men as Hereticks follow this, all this is the Magistrates own doing? If it be well, praise him for it. If it be ill, blame him for it. If Rulers will make such Laws, and if they will so far be Executioners of the Clergies Decrees, who can hinder them? If it be against their right, it is their own act, who give so much of their right away. If you say, that Clergy men are too blame that urge them to it; you shall not easily think worse of their so doing, than I do: It is greatly against our wills that the Sword so closely followeth Excommunication. I think it is the effect of Carnal Clergy mens base conceit of their own Sacred Office, as if it were a Leaden unpowerful Sword which Christ hath put into their hands, and Excommunication were invalid, when the Sword forceth not the impenitent to dissemble Repentance and Submission. When great worldly baits have enticed worldly men into the Sacred Office, as to a worldly preferment and Trade, they will judge accordingly and manage it like themselves (which is and hath been the Churches Pest) We would beg on our knees of Kings and Magistrates, if it would prevail, to leave Church Censures to our Lords intended use; and valeant quantum valere possunt; and to keep their Sword out of Church-mens hands, and to punish men in their own Courts for every crime that deserveth it; but not quatenus excommunicate, or meerly because the Clergy hath judged them unmeet for Church Communion. He that taketh Excommunication alone for no punishment, is not fit to be in the Communion of the Church, and p. 20therefore should not be driven for fear of a Prison to that which he hath no right to. So that you must not charge the acts of Princes, nor of ambitious Cardinals, &c. neither on Calvin, Beza, or any such as them.

And as to Lay-Elders, or Lay-Chancellors, I am no more for them than you are; that is, as the Magistrates Officers, or as the Churches Sub-Officers circa sacra & non in sacris: But sure those of them who are introduced on a mistaken conceit of Divine right, and do no more than the Pastors do, are no Usurpers of Coercive power.

You see by the late Acts of King and Parliament in Scotland, that all External Church power is declared to be in the King: And what would you have more? No doubt the meaning is not, All power about external things: For the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lords Supper, and the persons baptized, &c. are external objects: Nor can it be all power that is exercised by the external parts of the body. For the Tongue of the Preacher, and the Hand of the Baptizer, as well as the Ear of the Hearer is an external part. But in these two senses it is true, and commonly consented to, by all that I remember of my acquaintance that are Christians. 1. That all the power of the Sword, or of forcing by Mulcts or bodily punishments, as distinct from the power of the Word, that worketh directly upon the soul alone (by the senses) is in the King, and not in any of the Clergy, though it be about the matters of Religion. 2. And that all power in Church matters and Religion. Extrinsecal to the Pastoral Office as instituted by Christ, is of right the Kings, and his inferiour Magistrates. And what would you or any man have more?

4. And as to the exercise of our Office, we all confess (except the Papists) that we are responsible to the King and Magistrates, for our faults, yea for our injurious maladministration. And that though the King be not the Chief Pastor, nor hath the power of the Keys which Christ gave to his Ministers, yet he is the Ruler of all Churches and Pastors by the Sword, as well as of all Physicions. And is not all this enough to satisfie you, that we claim no part of the Magistrates Office?

p. 21As you say, our power is but Perswasive. It is …. By the Word; It is but on the Conscience; It is under the Magistrates coercive Government: And so it is like a Physicions or a Tutors in a Colledge. But that I pray you leave not out 1. That it is not under the Magistrates, as to the derivation of the office or power, that is, It is no office which the Magistrate made or may unmake: 2. That it is as immediately of Divine Institution as the Magistrates. And therefore in your similitude you must suppose your Physicion and Tutor to have a Commission from God. 3. That God hath described our office, and limited the Magistrates office, so that he hath no power from God to hinder the Ministry. 4. But if he do it injuriously we must not resist, but patiently suffer for obeying God. So much of the nature of the office.

II. Now that it is certain that God hath committed to Pastors, such a Government of his Church by the Word, as to stated commissioned Officers, because I have past by the proofs in my following Propositions, I will add some here. Supposing what Dr. Hammond hath said of the Power of the Keyes, and that no man with common sense can take the Power of the Keyes, for any thing less than a power of Church Government, or Authoritative Guidance, and so a Power of receiving in and putting out as there is cause; It is plain in that Christ first reciteth his own Commission and Power, Matth. 28. 18, 19, 20. and thence dateth the Commission of his Apostles, as it was to endure to the end of the age or world.

See Isa 22. 22. & Rev. 3. 7. & 1. 18. compared with Matth. 16. 19. & John 20. 23. The word Presbyter and Bishop can signifie no less: as Acts 4. 8, &c. compared with Acts 14. 23. & 15. 2, 4, 6, 22, 23. & 16. 4. & 20. 17, 28. Titus 1. 5. James 5. 14. 1 Pet. 5. 1. Rev. 4. 4, &c.

And nothing less can be meant by 1 Tim. 5. 17. The Elders that Rule well are worthy of double honour, &c. Heb. 13. 17. 24. Obey them that have the Rule over you, for they watch, &c. 1 Thess. 5. 12, 13. Know them that labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you, 1 Tim. 3. 1, 4, 5. If a man desire the office of a Bishop, he desireth p. 22a good work—One that Ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection.—For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the Church of God. So Tit. 1. 7, &c. 1 Pet. 5. 1, 2, 3, 4. Many other I pass by.

And for the act of excommunication, or excluding unmeet persons from Christian Church Communion, it would be tedious to stand to vindicate all those plain Texts from any mens exceptions, 1 Cor. 5. per totum. Titus 3. 10. 2 John 10, 11. 2 Thess. 3. 6, 14. Rev. 2. 14, 15, 20.

But while I am writing this, I remember that I have long ago written a small Book called Universal Concord, in which I have described all the Pastoral Office and Work: If you can prove it less than I have there named in any one point, you will so far ease us, and take nothing from us at all that gratifieth our flesh: If you can deny none of that, we are agreed. And in the Preface to the same Book I have given you twelve Reasons of the great use of Church Discipline; which shall save me the labour of the third point which I intended next to speak to; save only that I will briefly ask you,

III. Would you have any difference made between the Christian Church and the Pagan and Infidel world? If not—If you would, it must be such a difference as Christ hath appointed us to make? And doth our Baptismal Covenant contain no promise and profession of godliness and obedience, as well as of Belief; and so of Repentance and a better life?

2. Who would you have to be Judge in this matter? Shall every one be Judge himself? Then all Pagans, Murderers, Blasphemers may come in and turn Religion and the Church into a scorn. If any must judge, you would not sure set the Magistrates or people such a task (on pain of damnation) to leave their Calling, to try and judge of the qualifications of expectants or Church-members.

3. Whom do you think Christ committed this business to? Who were the Judges of the Capacity of persons to be baptized, or the desert of persons to be rejected? Diotrophes could not have rejected Christians injuriously, if he had p. 23not then had some Governing power.

4. Hath not all Christs Church exercised such a Discipline as I have described since the Apostles days till now? (saving the corruption of it by ill additions, or carnal neglects) And hath all this Church been from the beginning under a false Government in the main? Or is not Reformation a righter way than extirpation, of Discipline as well as of Doctrine and Worship?

5. Is it not the wickedness of Christians that is the chief hardening of Turks and other Infidels against Christianity? And would they not encrease this pollution that would have the most vicious to be equally received with the best?

6. Is not Faith for Holiness, and did not Christ come to purifie a peculiar people, and restore us to the Image of God? And if for want of Discipline Saints and Swine be equally Church-members, and partakers of holy things, is that agreeable to this design of our Redeemer?

7. If Oeconomical Government and School Government and Colledge Government be no wrong to Kings, neither is the Church Government which Christ hath instituted.

I do not say all this to intimate that you say the contrary. But because your Charge on Luther, Calvin and other Protestants sheweth that you do sure mistake them: And to tell you that I joyn with you in disowning the KINGDOM and Magistracy of the Mock-Church of Rome; and of all that will imitate them; But that I take the Enmity to and grosse neglect of true Church-Discipline, to be one of Satans principal services that is done him upon earth, against true Godliness.