Commentary on Revelation, Lecture 3 · Part 1

Commentary on Revelation · Lecture 3 · Part 1

p. 821. Concerning Church-government and Discipline, in generall.

THe matter of Discipline, is much insisted upon in these Epistles; and often the great weight of the commendations or reproofs that are given in them, is laid on this, as they were faithfull or defective in the administration thereof: which doth certainly show, not only the lawfulnesse of a Church government and Discipline; but also the usefulnesse and necessity thereof to the Church of Christ when faithfully exercised, as being a speciall mean and ordinance appointed by Jesus Christ for the edification thereof, and a thing that is not indifferent to her O…ficers to exerce or forbear at their pleasure, but lyeth on them, to be discharged, as they would have Christs commendation on the one side, and as they would eschew His sharp reproof on the other, and as they would prevent the offence and destruction, and promove the edification of the People over whom they watch, as they that must give account. It is therefore no wonder that the devil hath in all ages either sought to oppose, or corrupt so excellent a mean of the Churches edification: he began even under heathen Emperours to traduce this Government, as inconsistent with civil Authority; and did provoke persecutors by nothing more than this, that Christ was accounted a King by Christians, and that accordingly they did keep distinct Courts under Him, which the Politicians of the world did account inconsistent with Governments, as may appear from the History of Primitive times, and the Apologies of Christians, particularly of Origen against Celsus, wherein he doth particularly and fully insist upon this. When the Lord had vindicated His Ordinance of Government (with all His other Ordinances,) the devil set himself to corrupt the same, and to pervert it in its nature, and divert it in its exercise from the appointed end of edifying the Church, to be an occasion of offence to her, and tyranny over her, by the many debates concerning precedency, which he stirred up after the Churches freedom from heathenish persecution, till at last he brought Antichrist to tyrannize over the face of the visible Church, that thereby he might either make the Government hurtfull or odious unto the members thereof and others. Even as in reference to the Doctrine of Christ, he did endeavour the corrupting thereof by errour, when he could not altogether suppresse the same. Again, when the Lord brought the light of the Gospel to publick, at the time of Reformation, and Antichrists tyranny is by many casten off, he seeketh by all means to effectuate one of these two, to wit, that either the Church should have no distinct Government at all, or that, at least, it should be of another form, and of another nature than is appointed in the Word. Hence it is, that there have ever been such debates in the Church concerning the Government and Discipline thereof, and even whether there be such a thing or not: And although the opposers thereof, do not professedly oppose the truth of the Gospel, nor intend confusion in the Church; yet hath it with it no little advantage to the Kingdom of Satan and prejudice to Christs.

For, 1. By this means Satan obscures the beauty and excellency of the Church of Christ, and draweth men to undervalue the same; as being at best but a refined peece of civil policy, as but subservient to politick ends, and the upholding of temporall greatnesse of men in place. Hence it is, that we will finde the most worldly-wise and politick men (that are least zealous ordinarily in things of God) to be the greatest favourers and abettors of this: and it is no wonder, seing Christs way of Government, even as His Doctrine, is foolishnesse to the wisdom of men: It's observeable also, that where this opinion hath place, p. 83there is little account of any other ordinance; the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is prostituted promiscuously to all; the Ministery, is either accounted a thing indifferent, or Ministers made the servants of men, and arbitrarily to be put out or in, as they are pleasing or displeasing to them; and it is specially intended to curb free faithful speaking, and to be a snare to make them flatter Magistrates and Powers. All which shew the undervaluing principle that this opinion doth proceed from.

2. This opinion hath ordinarily with it more licentiousnesse, and that both in Doctrine and Practice: for, necessarily, one of these two do follow: either many errours and scandals in practice are accounted light and not censurable at all; or, if that in way of reason be granted, yet in practice it is never performed. And can it ever be made out in any practice past, or possibly to come, that offences in People or Ministers have been so exactly taken notice of, and restrained, or removed, where Church-government hath been denyed, as where it hath been in exercise?

3. Although such Magistrates might be found, as would take notice of every thing exactly; yet their medling with it furthers not spirituall edification, so as the way of Church-government doth: for at best, it would make men but civill, and make Religion look like the way of ancient Philosophers, who pressed the rectifying of nature; whereas a Church reproof, or censure, hath both more edification to others, and more convincing shame to the parties themselves, in respect of the sin thereof, as flowing more immediatly from Jesus Christ, and more directly representing to them His Authority, and their reckoning to Him, who more singularily binds in heaven, what by His Officers is bound on earth. And we conceive, that even the prophanest, in experience will finde this true, that a verball Church-censure (which considered of it self, is but light) will yet have more impression (as to the ends aforesaid) than sentences of a civill Magistrate, that in themselves may be heavier; and this will be, even when the parties in their outward carriage will seem to reverence the Magistrate, and to contemn the Church.

4. Although it should be yet said, that Magistrates could make things more effectuall, as in censuring of corrupt Ministers, and such like, which indeed is a benefit in it self to the Church; yet, considering this manner of performing it, especially being compared with the performing thereof by the Churches own Authority, it proveth more disparaging unto the Church of Christ: because if Ministers and Church-members, should be apt to fall in scandalous offences, and yet the Church have no Authority, but what is extrinsick for the remeding thereof, then is she apt to be looked upon as a sufferer of profanity, and as a nest to unclean persons of her self, if by the Magistrate, course were not taken with her: and although by his means such should be purged out; yet in the opinions of natural men this imputation sticks to the Church, as if such things and persons were well consistent with her profession, and liked of by her special Officers and Members. Now censuring of these by her own Authority, doth fully and only vindicate her and them from these aspersions, which are frequent upon the out-breakings of such scandals in the mouths of many profane men. And this revenging of disobedience, and vindicating of the Church of Christ, is none of the least ends of this Church-authority, which by no other power can be attained. And no question, the devil loves to have scandals breaking out in the Church, especially in her Officers, which do once put a blot upon her. And if it be to be taken notice of at all, he had rather that some other did it than the Church her self: because so the commendation becometh theirs, and the blot sticks to her: and thus (as it were) he proclames to all, what sort of persons would these Church-officers, and Church-members be, for all their profession, if they were not even as other men by some other hand restrained? And thus the wisdom and holinesse of our Lord Jesus, is reflected on, as if He had approven corrupt mens designs, who love to have a blot on the Church; but not to have her vindicated from it: because by this, the Church is capable to give offences; but, in a incapacity, to remove them, or to vindicate her self from them: which standeth not with that zeal, which our Lord hath to His own glory in the Church. And certainly, it's not the punishing of faults simply, that vindicateth the Churches holinesse; but it is the censuring of them in such a way as evidenceth the Churches abhorrencie thereof, that doth it: otherwise, Christians and heathens living under one Commonwealth, might be supposed to have the same indignation at scandalous ills. And so the denying of the Churches Authority, if it doth not permit faults to be unpunished (at least all) yet it secludeth p. 84such a way of censuring them, as may vindicate the Church and Christ Jesus the King thereof in an singular manner: and (if we may so say) puts her; yea, the Lord Himself in their reverence, whether she shall be free of corrupt Teachers and Members or not? or whether she shall lye under that blot or not?

5. By the denying of this Ordinance, the other Ordinances which are acknowledged, are made weak and obstructed in their exercise. Concerning the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, it is clear: for, by this the rail whereby it is in a singular manner separated, is broken down; many offices of the Church, as these of Elders and Deacons, are made void; and that of Preaching, made contemptible or maimed. For, publick authoritative rebuking of all, and sometimes of some in particular, is a special part thereof. Now, where Church-government is denyed, either the Minister must do it abitrarily by himself, and so he is more liable to a snare, and the party reproved to be stumbled, as having only to do with the Minister, who may partially proceed therein; or, it must be forborn, and so his Ministrie be made obnoxious to despising, which by his rebuking, with all Authority, is to be prevented, and every way plainnesse and freedom, even in Preaching, especially towards these in place, is so far as can be, restrained.

6. By this, the devil aimeth still either to make Religion to suffer as a thing that men may carve on according to their interests, as in other matters of policie (therefore he mixeth all together) or, he doth continually lay grounds of jealousie and difference between Magistrates and Ministers; thereby to make, that Ministers and these who will be faithful, should either sinfully connive at what may prejudge the Kingdom of Christ, or by their testifying against the same, make themselves more odious to the Rulers: for, lay this once for a ground, that there is no Church-government but what the Magistrate hath, then either the Minister must say, that none ought to be admitted to Civil-government, but such as both for skill and conscience are fit to mannage the matters of Religion (which Civil States will not alwayes be content with, neither often is it possible) or, they must account any man, who may be fit to mannage Civil things, fit also to mannage the Affairs of Christs House, which in conscience cannot alwayes be done, whereby necessarily, they must be brought in tops with Magistrates, except we say that either unskilfull Magistrates use not to be in place, or that such may yet be tender and dexterous in the mannaging of every Church matter that comes before them. And on the by, we may say, that seing qualifications, fitting one for any place and Government, are simply called for in these who should supplie the same (though sometime de facto they be not so qualified) and seing special qualifications, are required for governing of the Church of Christ, which are not required in these that govern a Civil State, and will not be accounted simplie necessary to them: It must therefore follow, that by the Lords Ordinance, these two Governments are not conjoyned in one person, seing he hath not alwayes conjoyned the qualifications that are requisite for both. We shall insist no more in this: the reading of these Epistles will sufficiently shew how concerning this truth is: and although this controversie be abundantly cleared by the writings of many worthy men, that there needeth no more be said therein; yet, having such occasion from these Epistles, we shall, once for all, touch some things concerning Church-government, as it is holden forth therein: whereby we will find it clear. 1. That there is such a thing as Church-government, distinct and independent from the Civill. 2. Wherein it consisteth. And, 3. Who are the Subjects thereof. And, 4. We shall lay down some conclusions or observations concerning the same, as they may be gathered from the Text.

1. The Church of Christ is furnished with a Government and Authority within her self, for the ordering of her own affairs, trying and censuring of her own Members, and that immediatly from Jesus Christ, distinct and independent from any Civil Government on earth. That there is such a thing as Government and Authority in her, is clear by these, 1. The practice of the Angel of Ephesus in the trying and censuring of false Apostles, which cannot be done without Authority and Government. 2. This practice of theirs, is commended by our Lord Jesus: it can therefore be no usurpation in them. 3. In the Church of Pergamos, we will find the Angel reproved, that they had them that held the Doctrine of the Nicolaitans, &c. which doth suppose Authority in them, even to have censured and cut off these from their society: for, if they had not had Authority to do it, it was not their duty to have done it; and if i… had not been their duty to do it, our Lord Jesus had p. 85not reproved them for committing it, 4. The Church of Thyatira, is reproved also for suffering the woman Iezebel to teach and seduce His Servants: which doth imply an Authority and Government, fitting them to whom he writeth, to have marred and hindered her Preaching, and somewhat to have been in their power to have done, which was not done by them: otherwise our Lord Jesus would not have to reproved them. The making out of these three will confirm this. 1. That the thing commended in Ephesus, and desiderated in the other two Churches, doth imply Authority and Power. 2. That this is in the Church as distinct and independent from any Civil Government. 3. That this is a thing perpetually belonging unto the visible Church, and was not temporary, as peculiar to that time.

That there is an Authority implyed here, the considering of these three will make out. 1. If we consider what is commended in Ephesus and desiderated in the other two: the very expressions and acts do bear forth an Authority. As, 1. That is commended in Ephesus, That they cannot bear them which are evil, but have tried false Apostles, and have found them liars. All which hold forth a judicial way of proceeding and trying, which implieth a citing of such a party and witnesses, for the discovering of such and such things, according to the rule given to Timothie, 1 Tim. 5.19. Against an Elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses: for, there can be no trial without witnesses, there can be no witnesses without Power to call them, and exact an oath of them, that being the end of all strife, which cannot be done without Authority. The word added, and hast found them liars, doth confirm, that it is a judicial finding after trial, whereby they decide.

1. In the general, that such and such things are evidences of false Apostles: and then in particular, that such and such things are found to be in them: and therefore that they are false Apostles, which presupponeth this trial before they judicially pronounce; than which, nothing doth look more Judicature-like. Which will be the more clear, if we consider, 1. That this trial and finding, proceedeth from their zeal, and not bearing with evil men; and therefore cannot be a trial for private information. 2. It's a trial, tending to the edification of the Church, and the preventing of that snare amongst the people, which no personal or private thing could effectuate. 3. It's a trial and finding, opposite to what is reproved in Pergamos and Thyatira, and so such a processe and sentence as rid that Church of them, which no private or personal act could do. 4. It's a poceeding and tryall, which relates to these directions, which Paul giveth to Timothy and Titus, as the coincidency of the matter, scope and other circumstances do demonstrate such, as, 1. Receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses: which is the ground of that which followeth, vers. 20. Them that sin, rebuke before all. Now if that rebuke be an authoritative act (as cannot be denied, which yet is but the execution of the sentence that followeth the former triall) then the triall it self must be judiciall and authoritative also; and therefore so must this triall be here understood. To say that this is a Ministeriall act, and that that triall preceding, is only the Ministers private act, for his own clearing, cannot be admitted: for, that tryall belongeth to many, as after will appear. 2. To whomsoever it be supposed to belong, it inferreth an authority to try, and so to conveen and examine: otherwise that triall might be made ineffectuall; and so the party wanting authority, not to be chargeable with short-coming therein. Or 3. This trial must be commended to Church-officers without Authority to effectuate it, and so it will not be a mean suitable to the end. 4. Ministerial trial and reproof, will not be enough to gain the end, and to make a corrupt Member to be no Member of such a Church, which is the thing desiderated in Pergamos and Thyatira. And considering the commendation of these Angels and Churches, it is not like that they were defective in their personal aversnesse from and rebuking of these Errors, and yet they are reproved as being defective: which must infer that they came short in respect of that judicial trial and censure, which is here commended in Ephesus, as the considering of them will clear.

2. Pergamos reproof (vers. 14. and 15.) is, Thou hast there them that hold the Doctrine of Balaam, and them that hold the Doctrine of the Nicolaitans: the fault is, not that they approved that Doctrine or connived at it; for, they denied not the Faith; and A…tipas is commended as a faithful Martyre amongst them: nor is it their fault, that such lived in the Town; or, as other Heathens might, did somtimes enter the Congregations: p. 86nor is His quarrel only against these Nicolaitans themselves, but against the Angel of the Church, because they had them in their society as Members with them, and had not cut them off: and seing this cutting off, is such a thing as made them cease to be Members of that body, and relateth to that which Paul wisheth to the troublers of the Church, Gal. 5. and commends to Titus, Chap. 3. Him that is an Heretick, reject, &c. it must imply an Authority and Power, without which this cannot be done, this un-Membering or un-Churching of a Person being a censure of highest concernment, and that same which we call excommunication; It followeth then, that this Church had that Power, and ought to have executed it against these corrupt Members, seing her failing therein doth make her reprovable.

If it be said here that this doth imply no Authority and Power, but what is common to all Societies by the Law of Nations and Nature, such as companies of Chirurgians, Wrights, and such like, have in excluding men from their own Society: which yet is no distinct Authority, but subordinate to, and derived from the Magistrate?

We answer, 1. That even these Societies in these things act by Authority, however it be derived: and so the Argument holds, that the exclusion of Members from Church-communion, doth imply an Authority: and what is said of the necessity of such a thing by the Law of Nature and Nations, doth confirm the same: for, if every Society be furnished for the maintaining of it self by the Law of Nature, so must also the Church be; except we say that it is more defective than other Societies. Beside, even such Societies could not do such a thing, were not priviledges granted them by Authority for that end. 2. We answer, That although the argument hold in the general, that there is an Authority necessary; yet will it not prove it to be dependent in the Church, as in these Societies it is. For, 1. The derivation of Authority from the Magistrate to these Societies, is clear: for, such and such Societies have that Power, because it is granted to them by the superiour Magistrate; and others want it, because it is not granted them: but I suppose none will plead for a derived Power to the Church from the Magistrate in this place: yea, the greatest opposers of Church-government, do acknowledge that it is not derived from him as L…d. Mol. pag. 654. There is no reason therefore that Church-government should be subordinate to Magistracie as other Societies are, which she exerces (as they speak) by a proper right and divine without delegation, Iure proprio & divino, non delegato. 2. The Magistrate may enter by his Authority such and such persons to the rights and priviledges of such Societies and exclude others from them (though possibly it may be done unjustly) yet, was it ever heard of, that a Magistrate might priviledge any with the priviledges of Church-membership, or by his Authority un-Church any? The paralel therefore cannot be universall in these. 3. All other Societies as such, are parts of a Commonwealth, and together make up the body: and therefore in reason ought to be subordinate to the common Government; but the Church, as a Church, is no essentiall or integrall part of a Commonwealth: there is therefore not the like reason for their subordination.

If any should yet except and say, that an Authority may be immediately from God, and not derived; and yet be by Him appointed to be subordinate to the civill Magistrate, as is instanced in that Power, that a Husband hath over the Wife; or a Parent over his Children.

We Answer, 1. That it may be questioned, if a Parent, as a Parent, be subordinated to the Magistrate, although, as a man and member of the Commonwealth, he be: for, he may command his Children without any Authority from him: yea contrary to the commands of Magistrates (and in some cases warrantably, suppose in their Marrying, adhering to the truth of God, &c.) neither can the Magistrate increase or diminish their power, although they may strengthen them, or marr them actually in the exercise thereof; yea, suppose a Parent to incline to match Son or Daughter in a way that is not sinfull or inconvenient; and for this end, to command them to give obedience: and again, suppose the Magistrate to command them otherwayes to match: The Magistrat's command here, will not loose the Childe from the Parents Authority: because, although both Parent and Child be the Magistrat's subjects; yet their obedience is called for in reference to these things that belong to a Magistrate only. Hence that case of a Magistrat's requiring one thing, and a Parents commanding of another to the same Child, is by Divines solved by this distinction, That in things belonging to the Magistrat's command, the Child ought to be p. 87obedient to him in what concerns the duty of a subject; but in things that concern the duty of a Son properly, he is to be obedient to the Father, whatever the Magistrate command: which sheweth, that simply the commands of a Father, as a Father, are not subordinate to the Magistrate: and so that in reference to some persons, there may be two supream Powers, upon divers considerations, who may command without subordination one to another; and yet their Authority be no way inconsistent together.

2. We Answer, That although the Authority of Fathers and Husbands were subject to the civil Magistrate as such; yet can it not weaken this consequence, [If the Authority of the Church be not derived from the Magistrate, Then can it not be subordinate to him:] for, the Authority of Parent, Husband, &c. is personall and naturall, that is, founded in nature: and the…efore is derived by nature to Parents, Husbands, &c. And such, do not make a body of themselves, but are members of another greater body; whereas a Church, is a Society and Incorporation, compleat in it self: and as such, is not founded on nature; but by Gods positive grant and foundation is such: and therefore Authority must be immediatly derived to the Church by the same mean, (to wit, of a positive grant) by which its being as a Church is derived. And can it be instanced that there is any such, to wit, a compleat Incorporation, having immediate power from Christ for the governing of it self and shutting out of corrupt members without any derived power from the civil magistrate, who yet, are subordinated to his power in the exercise of theirs. We grant indeed, that the Church, considered as subjects and members of the commonwealth, are subject to him; but it will no way follow, that the Authority or Government wherewith she is furnished, as a Church, is to be subjected to him. Neither can this be thought strange; that a Church …udicatory, considered as such, should be accounted independent, as to the civil Magistrate, seing we must either say, that a Minister, in his Ministeriall and Pastorall duty, acteth by an Authority immediately from Christ, without any dependency on the civil Magistrate (which yet readily cannot be admitted in any other case, to wit, that a person should command without dependence on the Magistrate) Or, we must say, that the Minister preacheth and acteth in his Ministery, in the Magistrate's name mediately, and by his Authority, or by none at all: which I suppose, none will affirm. And what greater inconsistency is it with civil Power, to have distinct Authoritative Courts, than to have Rulers distinctly and Authoritatively commanding persons, especially themselves?

3. If we consider the Epistle to Thyatira, where much is commended; yet there is a notwithstanding, and reproof cast in upon this account, because thou sufferest that woman Iezebel, that calleth her self a Prophetesse, to teach and seduce my servants. This suffering, can be no defect in respect of civil Authority: for, that was not in their power, or is it any defect of any personall or private dutie: because none such can imped other persons teaching, if willfully they will set themselves to it; nor can they be thought defective in th…t, that are so commended for Faith, Charity, Works, &c. and that even in respect of their thriving and growing in their private conditions: it must therefore be a suffering of her in so far as by Church Authority she was not censured and restrained, that thereby the seducing of Christs servants, might be prevented, whose edification is the end of this as of all other Ordinances: and so consequently, the Church of Christ is furnished with power and authority in reference to her own affairs and members.

2. This will also be clear by considering these who are primarily in this respect commended and reproved in these Epistles: it is not the body of private Christians; but the Churchofficers, as peculiarly distinguished from them: so that these threatnings and reproofs, do otherwise belong to them, than to the Church, as we will find in the progresse. And there can be no other reason given of this, but because these faults were the faults of these that had Authority to right them, and did it not: which will be more clear afterward, when we consider the subject of this power.

3. These acts, are either acts of private Christians, or personall acts of Ministers and Church-officers (both which, are already overturned by the forementioned reasons) Or, it must be by some extraordinary act, as Peter's smiting of Ananias and Sapphira; or, it must be the exercise of some ordinary Power and Authority: there is no other thing conceivable; But none of the first three can be said. Not one of the first two, for the reasons given; not the third, Because, 1. There is no warrand to look upon these Officers as furnished with that gift; nor was it ordinary to the Church, and her ordinary Officers, p. 88such as these were. 2. That would not attain the scope proposed here, which is, in part, the recovering of the offending party: therefore saith the Lord of Iezebel, vers. 21.22. I gave her space to repens; and doth threaten her but conditionally: which sheweth, that He meaned no such extraordinary off-cutting of them. It remaineth then, that it must be the exercising of an ordinary Authority and Government: and therefore such must be in the Church.

The second thing to make out the Argument, is, that this Authority and Power in the Church, is distinct and independent from any civil Government; which from the Text, may thus appear, 1. The subject is distinct, to wit, Church-officers. 2. The object is distinct, to wit, the Church and the members thereof alone, and as such: it is not the inhabitants of Pergamos and Thyatira; but the Church-members that are under the same. 3. The matter falling under that cognition, is distinct, to wit, that which is hurtfull to souls, as the seducing of Christs servants, and scandals, considered as such. 4. The censures inflicted, are different, to wit, no civil mulct upon estates, nor punishment upon bodies, nor cancelling of the freedom of their Burgeships in Towns or such like; but seclusion from Church-priviledges and membership. 5. The end is distinct, to wit, the reclaiming of the party offending, and the bringing of them to Repentance, and the preventing of soul-hurt to others, and the vindication of Christs name. 6. The manner is different, there is no externall Pomp nor Power or force in the mannaging thereof, such as is in civil Governments: for, that is not here conceiveable, considering the afflicted and persecuted condition of these Churches, but the sword of the mouth, and triall, and censures. And 7. They differ in their rise, civil Power being derived from Superiors to Inferiors; but this hath no rise or derivation from any civil Power, although for the time these Cities and Nations wanted it not; but did arise from that intrinsick oeconomie and power, which accompanies the very being of a Church, and which by Christs appointment doth reside in such a number of persons, considered as a Church, which did not reside in other inhabitants of the same Towns, nor did in these before this their Church-state. 8. The account, upon which, this Government doth consider persons and actions, is distinct from the civil: men are not considered as men, nor as in-dwellers in such and such Places one…y; but as Christs servants: and actions, are not considered, either as profitable or hurtfull to men simply; but as profitable or hurtfull to their spirituall estate. And therefore, it is seducing of Christs Servants, and as such, the deeds of the Nicolaitans and Iezebel, are to be taken notice of by it.

2. We say, as it is a distinct Government from the civil; so it is independent as to it: and if the former be true, that there is an Authority and Government included here and in the former respects exercised as distinct from the civil power then in being, it will also necessarily follow, that this Authority was independently exercised in reference to that civil power?

For, 1. There is no derivation of this Church-power, from that civil power, as is said. Therefore it cannot be dependent on it, seing it neither did, nor could derive it. And although some except (as was hinted) that there may be a power in Fathers, Husbands, and other such natu…rall relations, over Children, Wives, &c. which yet is dependent on the Magistrate; yet suppose that by the law of nature, Parents did combine in one Society and Government among themselves, as a Church doth, and in that case had a distinct Government, could that Authority and Government be accounted dependent, Seing no Superior Authority could marr them in the exercise of their power without injustice, more than a Magistrate can marr a Father in the exercise of His Authority towards his Children when he doth it justly? So this Church-power, not being a personall priviledge, but belonging to her as a body and Society of many members combining together, having that by the law of nature, as is granted (and we adde, if Jesus Christ allowed them) she cannot therefore be marred … any Authority in the exercising of that Government, what ever injust violence may do.

2. It appeareth to be independent in this, that there is a Church-government among Christians, even when Magistrates were setting themselves to undo the same: If then Government be necessary to the Church, and yet it be so ordered in the Lords providence that civil Government may be for hundreds of years enemies to the Church, as was in these Primitive times. Then it will follow, that the Church-government and Authority is not placed in the Magistrate, or civil Governours: because, in that case either she should have p. 89no Government at all (which by these Epistles will be found false) or she must have a Government and Authority destructive to her, which is contrary to the end thereof; or, in the last place, her Authority must be independent, save of Jesus Christ alone: and if it were not so, considering now that these to whom Christ writeth, were not civil Magistrates, there had been no such accesse to expostulate with them for their ommission, if they might not have acted independently on them.

3. It may appear thus, that if the civil Magistrate cannot repeal by his Authority any of their sentences, then is their Authority independent as to him. Now, suppose a Church justly to degrade, or depose a false Teacher, or to cut off a rotten member, could any Magistrate by his Authority continue that man to be a Minister, or that member to be a Church-member, (what ever violence might do) Suppose some Emperour (as in some cases Iulian did) had taken the recognition of Ephesus sentence against these false Apostles, and had declared it null? would not still their sentence have stood in force notwithstanding? Or suppose Pergamos, or Thyatira, had cut off Iezebel or the Nicolaitans from their Society, could any civil Mag…strate, Heathen or Christian, have enacted them to be continued Church-members? And this doth not only flow from the injustice of the matter: for, suppose a Proconsul had justly degraded some Judges of Ephesus; and the Town of Ephesus, had justly casten out some members from their Society; yet, by the Emperours interposing his Authority, as the supream Magistrate, both might have been fully restored (though injustly) so as they might have been really again Magistrates and Burgesses of such a City: which cannot be said in this case. No Emperours Authority could have constitute such (though injustly) to have been Officers, or members, at all of these Churches. The difference then, (I say) cannot consist in the injustice of the matter alone; (for both are injust) but it must consist in this, that civil sentences are subordinate to the supream Magistrate, but Church-sentences are not: although by violence they might have countenanced such and such persons, and have made the effects of the sentence in many things void; yet could their Authority have never reached to the formal removing of them, as in civil cases was h…nted.

Thirdly, To make out the Argument, we say, that this distinct independent Power here mentioned, is a thing that agreeth to the Church in all Ages and conditions, and is not peculiar to any one time: as suppose, because the Church wanted Christian Magistrates at this time, it had been lawful to exercise Authority independent from them: which in other cases, where the Magistrate is Christian, is not to be granted. Therefore we say, 1. That which is attributed to these Churches here, agrees to them as Churches: and therefore to all Churches at all times: for, the duties are common, and the hazards are common, to Churches at all times. Therefore this remedy of Church-discipline, must be perpetuall also, it being the cure that is appointed for such a disease. And, that often repeated word, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches, doth speak in all ages to the end of the World, alswell as then. 2. If all other directions, exhortations, &c. in these Epistles, be perpetuall and binding to the Church, to the end of the World, then this must be so also: and there can be no reason given why this is to be accounted temporary, more than the other: especially, considering that Christs sending of this Revelation, is for the good of His Servants unto the end of the World: and that especially, is aimed at in these Epistles, as the forcited close doth confirm. It must then be injurious to Christs mind, to sc…ape out so much as concerneth Government, as not belonging to His Church for so many ages. 3. If the grounds, requiring the exercise of this power in the Churches, during this time, be perpetuall, agreeing to all ages, Then it is not to be astricted to the time of the Churches being under heathen Magistrates alone; But the ground are perpetuall: for, that is not because the Magistrate is a heathen; but that the person offending may be brought to repentance; and the seducing of others may be prevented: Now these ends are perpetuall, which the Church is to study in all times: and seing Church Authority and Government, is here holden forth, as a mean appointed by Jesus Christ for attaining of these ends, It must therefore be of perpetuall use to the Church also.

Although these Truths be clear from the Word; yet there are some things, which are partly exceptions, partly objections, insisted on by Adversaries, which we shall speak a little to, as the nature of our intended purpose will permit.

A forcited Author? pag. 545. doth confidently undervalue all Arguments to this purpose; p. 90and denieth all distinctnesse of Government in the Church by any Power distinct from that of the Magistrates; and to maintain it, doth, 1. assert, That all sort of Power whatsoever, is supreamly in the Magistrate, whether Heathen or Christian, by that place, Rom. 13.2. he heaps up with many bigg words several absurdities that accompany (as he alledgeth) that opinion of a distinct Church-government, which he calleth invidiously the building of an Empire within an Empire. Yet, 3. He granteth, that where the Civil Magistrate taketh not on him the care of the Church, and maintaineth it not: in that case, by the Law of Nature and Nations, the Church cometh to have an Authority, or somewhat equivalent in the place of that, whereby she is qualified for the ordering of what concerneth her Members, during that case of such a Magistracie allanerly; and denyeth any other Authority to have been in the Church, during the time that these Epistles were written, but what was by voluntary confederacie, and association of Members amongst themselves: and therefore saith, That they had and exercised no lesse Authority, during that time, in Civil things: for which end, he maketh use of that place, 1 Corinth. 6.1, 2. &c.

In reference to all which, we say, 1. That Authority cannot be denied here (however it be derived) seing it is a Power to Excommunicate and Exauthorate Officers and Members which they assume, as he speaks, pag. 654. Yea, a Power equivalent to that of the Magistrates, because it's a Power adequate for the time to this end of governing the Church, pag. 545. And therefore, we say, if this confederating, or up-making of this Government, be a thing jure called for, and necessary to be done, for this end; it is the thing which we assert also; and, in respect of the particular circumstances, that is, what places or persons are to associate together, is to be regulated by Christian prudence; but if it meaned of a voluntary association and confederacie, such as trades and crafts use in their Societies, as that alone which is the ground of this Power, This we altogether deny: Because, 1. If that confederating be called for, by the Law of Nature, Then it is not voluntary and free. And this Authority, is not grounded meerly upon voluntary confederating: because as it is not arbitrary to a converted Christian to be Baptized or not; so, being Baptized, it is not arbitrary to him whether to joyn with the Church or not. And being joyned, submitting to its Government, is a necessary duty to him. And it becometh not Authority to him: because he submits to it; but he is to submit to it, because it is Authority: and therefore supposing that these false Apostles, or Iezebel, or the Nicolaitans, had never consented to subject themselves to the Discipline of these Churches (as, by their taking such names of Apostles and Prophets to themselves, it's like they did never) yet notwithstanding had these Churches Authority over them, and it was their duty to submit unto them. 2. It's granted that the Authority that the Church hath in such a case, is equivalent to what the Magistrate hath and might exercise: and if it be not equivalent to this, then the Church of Christ under such Magistrates would not be so perfect as to their Church-state and wel-being, as otherwayes: which cannot be said without wronging the wisdom of God, as if he had left His Church destitute of inward Power when she had least outward Protection; but if it be such a Power, it cannot be arbitrary and meerly grounded upon the confederacy; but must be authoritative upon an other account, and may authoritatively enjoyn one to confederate: And so confederating, is not the ground that constituteth the power; but a mean, making way for the exercise thereof. 3. If it were asked, What evidence or proof could be given of such voluntary confederating in the Churches for that time? It would be hard to show, that universally in all the Churches, there was such formall compacting actually agreed upon; and yet, that there was Government and Authority in them all, is evident. 4. Suppose confederacies to have been; yet could they never have constituted an Authority and Government distinct, and independent from the civil supream Power, especially while the supream Power opposed the same; as supposing (to keep the similitudes proponed) that many Chirurgians and Tradsemen of any kind, did live under a Magistrate and Laws, which would admit no such, by their Authority to live and confederate under them, will any say that in that case, by voluntary confederating, they could assume an Authority to themselves; and censure any Person (especially against their will) without wronging and encroaching upon that Authority, under which they live? Yet it cannot be denyed to a Church, and that without any prejudice to the Magistrate: because it in nothing lessens his Authority or withdraweth any thing from his cognition, p. 91which formerly used to belong unto him: but as the arising of a new Church within a Nation, hath with it new cases, actions, and considerations of persons, and deeds; so it is reason that it should have with it a new Authority to govern the same. 5. If the Church had another kind of interest, in reference to spiritual offences, than in reference to civil debates, then this confederacie cannot be the ground of such an Authority: this will not be denied according to the former principles, which do paralel both these in the primitive Church, and make this the proof of the former; But it's clear, that the Church-authority did far otherwayes reach Church-members in spiritual offences, than in civil things: which may thus be made out, 1. They might Excommunicate and un-Church for spiritual offences and for disobedience in these, if a brother did not hear the Church, and ofttimes they did so; But it cannot be said, that if a brother had been disobedient to an arbitrary decree in civil things, that upon that account, they would have proceeded against him to Excommunication, and constrained him to have submitted: sure we are, it was never put in practice, at least till Antichrist arose. 2. In that Chapter, 1 Cor. 6.7, and 8. the Apostle reasoneth for submission to this; and exhorteth Christians, so wronged, to suffer the wrong rather than to pursue it before Infidels: which doth suppose, that the Church was not furnished with Authority to redresse civil wrongs, as she was to redresse scandals. And therefore, Matth. 18. our Lord giveth order to proceed, in case of nonsatisfaction, to the highest degree. And on the by, we may say, it is an odd thing to expound that place of Matthew, by this place of Paul. As if the Lord did only there warrand a man to pursue injuries before heathen Judges, when he would not submit to the advice of Church…members, seing expresly Paul enjoyneth them rather to suffer wrong, than to make the Gospel contemptible before Infidels by the contentions of Christians; which yet that exposition of Matth. 18. will approve of: which sheweth, that it must be understood to speak of Church-offences: in respect of which, suffering and bearing with them, is condemnable, as we see in these Epistles. 3. If what the Church did in civil things be common to any person or persons in any rank or condition whatsoever, and to Christians in any time and case, that is, that they may and should submit their differences to some; and these to whom they are submitted, may decide: And upon the other side, if what the Church exerced in reference to Ecclesiastick offences and censures, be not common, but so that no submission to others but such as are in power could warrand one to draw forth such censures as are here mentioned, (yea according to the principles which we oppose, it were not lawfull for Christians to do so now in civil things; for, they say it's not lawfull to do now in Church-things, as these did at that time) Then the Churches Authority was not equal in civil things, as in spirituall things: And so consequently, no confederacy can warrantably ground this Church Authority; But the former, we conceive, is clear: Therefore, &c. 4. It may be clear by this, that the Church did never exact civil mulcts or inflict bodily punishments: which sheweth abundantly, that she did not exerce Authority in civil things equally as in spirituall: and yet had her Authority been only grounded on the voluntary confederacy, she might have inflicted the one, as well as the other. 5. Suppose a Churchmember had wronged an Heathen by his miscarriage; No question, Church-discipline would have reached him: which is not the intent of that, 1 Cor. 6. Therefore that cannot be the ground of their Power alone. 6. That direction, Matth. 18. Tell the Church, was given, before this was written: seing then, this is the foundation of civil association, as is pretended, That of Matth. 18. must be of another kind. 7. This opinion will infer the setting up of a civil Power in civil things, where the Magistrate is not Christian; yet, that was never asserted by any. 8. The Adversaries themselves grant, that in such cases, the Church may do much more in Church-matters, than in civil: because that the Magistrate doth allow his power to rectifie civil things; and yet, this doth make both equally lawfull. 9 Suppose the Magistrate had repealed a sentence, past in civil things; no question, it had bound them, though it had been unjust; Yet supposing he had repealed one of their Church censures, and declared excommunication void, It had not done so, nor had been acknowledged: yea, had he inhibited them to decide a particular in civil things, they would not have proceeded; but when he did inhibit censures, notwithstanding, they did proceed, and actually did suffer Martyrdom upon that account: which, in a civil action, I suppose they would not have done. 10. That, 1 Cor. 6. admitted any to be Judge that men submitted unto, or had wisdom; But Church-things were governed only by these who by office were Rulers. All p. 92which do shew the vanity of that assertion, that they equally meddled with both kinds; and yet, this one thing, is the ground of all that is said to evert this Authority. Add that, 1 Cor. 6. the parties offending are reproved for going to him; here, the Church-officers, for not censuring these that offended: which supposeth a power to be in them. And it cannot be thought, that the Angels had been so censurable, had they not decided civil businesses, as for this.

Beside (pag. 548.) He denies that there was a necessity of obedience in civil things: which yet clearly, is here asserted in these Church censures. Whereas it is said, as a further evidence, that the Churches Authority during this time was only built upon this voluntary confederacy, that after supream Magistrates became Christian, they did intermeddle with all Church power without any contradiction (pag. 544.) It is either a meer mistake or an untruth: a mistake in this, that it accounteth their meddling in a civil way with many things, which the Church still meddled-with as formerly, and adding of their civil sanction thereto, for strengthening, not for diminishing the Churches power; to be an assuming of Church Power and Authority, which are things most distinct; even as a Christian Magistrate, doth command the Son of a Christian Parent to do the same things, which his Parent doth command him in reference to the Christian Religion, which a heathen Magistrate did not; yet is the Parent's power and authority over his Son no lesse than when the Magistrate was heathen, because the Magistrates command is not privative; but cumulative to the Parents Authority: even so is it here. And there can be no greater reason to say that Church Power and Authority over Christians, did cease in spirituall things after Constantine became a Christian, than to say that the Power and Authority of a Christian Parent and a Christian Master did expire at that time. And seing it is granted, that Church power, and Parentall power, are both immediately from God, without any mediate derivation by the Magistrate, It is reason that they should be of equal duration and continuance also. And in matter of fact it is clear, that the Church continued to exercise the same power, which formerly she did; and also that the Magistrate concurred in his station for the strengthening thereof: and there is not the least shadow for any delegation after that, more than formerly; But, that now by the approbation of civil Authority, the Church had accesse to do that, for which before that time she was persecuted, even as there was full liberty given to Preach the Gospel, which formerly was inhibited: yet, none will say, that that power of the key of Doctrine, was derived from the Magistrate. For, what is alledged of the Emperours calling of Councels, That will prove him to have put them to the exercise of their power; but not that it was derived from him, more than when before that time Provincial Councels were called by some eminent Bishops, it will prove that their Call did authorize them, But rather both these Calls do suppose Authority to be before in these that are called. And therefore there is no question, that if Constantine had called others than Church-officers, to judge and censure in reference to these differences Ecclesiastically, he could not have derived Authority to them, so as to have made them equally Rulers, and with the same Authority as if they had been Church-members and Officers: which yet might have been done, if their Authority had resided in him alone. Beside, he commanded the preaching of the Gospel also, as is said.

Whence we may see that Christian Magistrates, did not meddle with that Power and Authority, which formerly resided in the Church: neither ever was it heard of, that a Magistrate did excommunicate, authorize or ordain a Minister, and such like, wherein Churchpower is exercised. And though it be said that he doth these things mediately, by putting the Church to it, and by calling Church-officers to consult in Ecclesiastick things, which he doth confirm by his Authority, even as he doth govern other Societies, as Physicians, Lawyers, &c. by Authorizing some of their own number to mannage what concerneth such Callings and Functions (in which respect, say some, the Function is different from the Magistrate,) Yet he is not the Lawyer, nor the Physician, more than he is the Minister; but the Authority is on him alone. To this we say, 1. That the paralel, is most unequal: because although a Magistrate be not by his station a Physician, or Lawyer; yet supposing him to have skill, he might lawfully do any act incumbent to these Stations: which doth indeed show, that the same Authority, whereby they act, doth reside in him: but suppose he had the Theorie of Ecclesiastick things, and skill in them; yet he might not step… to himself, to act the acts of a Ministeriall Function; nor as a Magistrate, to sentence with Church sentences, p. 93Administer Sacraments, as he might do in the sentences of inferior Magistrates and Courts: which doth shew, that that Authority doth not reside in him. 2. We grant that he may be said to govern mediately, as he may be said to Teach and Preach mediately (for, he ought to provide for that) But that will not infer that the Authority of Preaching is derived from him: yet, no way doth the weight of this controversie so much ly on matters of fact, what Churches or Magistrates did since the Apostles dayes, as by what right and warrand they did what they did.

This last assertion therefore although made out, could prove nothing without the former; nor will the instancing of exorbitancies in Church-governours, infer any nullity of that Power, more than the enumerating of miscarriages of men in civil place, will enervate that ordinance of God: yea, we are sure much ill hath come by Magistrates intrusion in this Church Power, and many have miscarried in it; much lesse will heaps of slanders against most faithful men do it, whom God eminently countenanced, and who singularly by suffering were honoured to testifie for Him, such as Mr. Welsh, Mr. Melvil, Mr. Davidson and others, who, we are perswaded, in the great Day, will be as bold in reference to their being approven in their stations, as any of their opposers or traducers on this account. This way of writing, will not be found to proceed from zeal for the Lord, which hath so little respect to such who eminently adhered to him; and let these traducers of His Ordinances and Servants, prepare for giving account for both to Him, to which we leave them.

For the absurdities wherewith he doth load this truth, they being for substance the same which often have been fully wiped away, we shall only say these two, 1. That either they are no absurdities; Or, 2. Not such as the grounds acknowledged by him will infer. For, 1. It is no absurdity simply, that a man in diverse considerations should be subject to diverse co-ordinate powers, as a son is to the Magistrate as a Member of the Commonwealth, to his parent as a child and member of the family: and in some things (as formerly hinted at) he is so obliged to be subject to the parent, that no command of a Superiour can loose him from it; and in other things, so subordinated to the Magistrate, that therein the parents authority hath no place. And the same may be seen in wives, who, in some things, are subject to their husbands commands, and no Authority can warrant them to do otherwise. 2. We say, that this same absurdity might have been instanced in these Churches, that the Lord writes to, su…pose (as he doth in the other case) that the Magistrate had appointed some, whom the Church had called to her Synods (as for example, to that mentioned, Acts 15.) to some other civil imployment, as they were subjects; would not the same absurdity of the interfereing of the two Authorities have followed? he must either then say that such a case was not conceivable in these times, or he must say the absurdity must be evited, or it will be fastened upon the way approven by the holy Ghost, as the Churches governing of her self distinctly is granted to be, at least during such a case: and when he loses and vindicates his own concession, it will be easie to answer his objection. 3. It cannot be denied but that a Minister may independently command a Magistrate in the Name of Christ according to the Word, and that not only by reason of the matter, as an other private subject may do; but by vertue of his Office and Authority: in which respect he is not only a reporter, to tell what is Truth, but a Messenger and Herauld authorized to charge all hearers to the obedience thereof, as Iohn the Baptist did Herod, who in some respect might be subject to Herod, as in other respects Herod was to him: and if this be no absurdity in reference to particular Governours, why should it be thought absurd in reference to the Powers by which these govern? Supream Church-Power then, and Supream Civil-power in distinct persons, cannot be absurd. And we suppose there can be no Authoritative Officer, that upon any civil account can so independently command the Civil Magistrate: Church-power therefore is not to be regulated in every thing; as the Civil is. It's strange to say that it's lawfull to a Magistrate to receive Ministeriall injunctions, or not as he pleaseth, or at least no more than a sick person is subject to the Physician. can it be said that a sent Minister can have no more Authority in prescribing duty in the name of Christ, than a Physician in giving directions for health? Or, will it be thought equally sinfull or lawfull, to disobey the directions of the one as of the other, even laying aside the matter? or, shall every one, skilfull in Divinity, be counted of equall Authority with a Minister, as the counsel of one that is skilfull in Medicine, is to be counted of the p. 94same weight, as if he were a graduat Physician, if his reasons be as weighty? or, is there any exception of some, more than others from Ministeriall power, because of any outward place or grandou…? These things can hardly be conceived without wronging the Ordinances of Christ. 4. It's thought absurd to say that a Magistrate is not blindly to act according to Church conclusions and determinations but deliberately to try his own act, and yet not to be the proper Judge thereof. It cannot be denied, that a Minister is to try and judge of what commands the Magistrate shall lay on him in reference to his duty: if therefore the Magistrate's subsequent judgement, did demonstrate him to be supream in Ecclesiastick things, the same will prove the Magistrate's judgement in the case foresaid to be subordinate to the Ministers: that therefore is no absurdity. 5. An Ambassadour from one King to another, or to some inferiour Magistrate, is in his personall carriage subject to the Authority within whose bounds he is; but as an Ambassadour in the following of his Commission and instructions, and as such, he is only countable to these that sent him: and never was it heard that one subjected his Ambassadour to the Authority of those to whom he was sent, even amongst men, But that was reserved at least, for some others appointed for that end by him: neither doth a Magistrate account an Ambassadours independency on him to be inconsistent with his Authority. Now Ministers being Ambassadours sent by Christ to Magistrates as to others, we must either say these to whom they are sent, must judge when they faithfully exerce their Commission or not, in their Masters name: which is absurd amongst men, and could not but look partiall like; or we must say, they are not countable or censurable on earth; or, that Christ hath intrusted His Ambassadours and Church officers with this power of censuring men, who shall walk unworthy of their Trust.

If it be said that an Ambassadour is no Magistrate, and hath but an instructed power?

Answ. Yet is it a power, and in that respect such as Church-officers have: and suppose there were a plurality of Ambassadours for a King or State within the Dominions of another, instructed to act joyntly for his affairs, and to censure any of their own number, or retinue, that should walk unworthy of their place; would any Magistrate think that these wronged his power; if they shat some from their fellowship without his warrand? or could he claim to recognosce their deed; although in a criminall case, he only might have accesse to punish even their members in that place?

For that qualification of his concession, which is to allow this confederate Authority only to the Church that lived under such a Magistrate, as doth not undertake the care thereof; we suppose it will not be easie to free it of absurdities, if this distinct Government be not acknowledged to be perpetuall.

For, 1. Do not the same Scriptures (that place all Authority in the Christian Magistrate; and require absolute obedience from his Subjects to him) in the same manner belong to any Magistrate, as a Magistrate, and his Subjects under him, and particularly that place, Rom. 13. And suppose the Magistrate should not assume that power, and put it in exercise; yet if Ecclesiastick power be in that same gift committed to the Magistrate with the civil power, no private persons could upon any pretext meddle therewith.. For suppose the Magistrate should abstain to punish some kind of Murthers, Witchcrafts, &c. no private persons could confederate themselves to assume a power of punishing these: becaus… civil power to punish these things, is not committed to them; but to the Magistrate. If then the Church might censure scandals, without incroaching upon these Scriptures at that time, Why may it not do so even when the Magistrate is Christian? This Church power then cannot be understood to be comprehended under the Magistrates Commission, seing Paul is exercising it, even while he is extending to the utmost the Magistrates Commission in all things, and quarelling Christians for encroaching upon any thing due to him; and no question he knew best the extent of these directions.

2. There is no Magistrate, who will professedly disclaim the charge and Government of any people; although in practice many of them prove negligent of the Church of Christ. Now it may be asked, if this necessity of confederating for exercising of Church-authority doth…ly upon the Church only when the Magistrate is professedly Heathen, or if also when Erroneous or Atheisticall and Prophane, or in practice negligent and carelesse (like Gallio) in what concerneth the Church? It cannot be astricted to the first: because the Church is no more obliged to an Erroneous Magistrate, then to a prophane and carelesse Magistrate (though he be not professedly an Heretick or Erroneous) if that Authority p. 95be not improven for them: and so according to these principles, the Church is to confederate and exercise Authority within her self, even then: which will come to this, that the Church is called to assume this Authority, except in such cases as the Magistrate doth take it on him and exercise it for her good, (for if he exercise it to her hurt, it is better to want it) and so it will turn near to this, that the Church is to assume this power, save where the Magistrate is Godly, and according to conscience doth exercise his power for her good. And then it may be asked, (supposing that the Magistrate professe willingnesse to govern the Church,) how shall it be judged whether such and such a Magistrate be to be admitted to Govern? or, whether they be to assume Government to themselve? It will come to this, that it must rest in the judgement of discretion of these private Christians, whether they will admit the Magistrate to Govern, or not? And according to the principles of that Author, if they judge him according to their light, to be one that taketh no care of the Church, they should assume that power to themselves: for elsewhere he affirmeth the judgement of discretion to be the great decider; and that a man had better do according to the light of an erring Conscience, than against it.

Yea, 3. According to his grounds, they may not only assume power in Ecclesiastick things; but equally in civil things also. And will he say, that the Church of France may take power in civil things, as they do in Ecclesiastick, and not wrong the Magistrate? Or, can it be said that this is a priviledge to the Magistrate, which makes him so to depend both in things Ecclesiastick and Civil upon a Peoples estimation of him?

4. By these grounds, either a Church should never assume power under any Magistrate however carelesse and profane, and so as is granted, wrong her self, contrary to the law of nature; or by assuming power, they declare that they account the Magistrate a Heathen, Erroneous or Atheisticall, &c. and is not that a greater irritation, and probable occasion of division betwixt the Magistrate and Church, than to continue this power distinct under all Magistrates equally? And truly it looketh not like Gods Ordinance, that putteth His Church oftentimes in this strait, that it must either suffer prejudice, or disclame and provoke the Magistrate so as to account him an Atheist unworthy of Government; but to have forfeited so much of his Power, &c. And suppose a profane …on succeed in the Magistracie to a gracious father, or profane men be chosen to succeed others who bare rule before them even in Church-affairs, (which case is often incident) what strait would it be to the Church either to continue to be governed by the Magistrate as formerly? or, with so much disadvantage upon personall considerations, to assume a power which formerly they did not?

5. Either the Church assumeth that power contrary to the Magistrate's command; and so there is clear ground of a Persecution and War; or, it is with his good will, or, at least, permission; and that must presuppose this, that he doth account himself Heathen, Erroneous or profane, which cannot easily be expected, especially from a man not so denied and mortified, as such a Magistrate is supposed to be: for, delegated it cannot be, seing in that case this assuming of Authority is not called for.

6. It may be asked, what degree of erroneousnesse, profanity, or carelesnesse in a Magistrate, may warrand a Church to assume this power: seing even amongst heathens there are degrees? and if so, then how shall that be judged? Suppose a Christian Magistrate should neglect Church affairs, otherwise than as they fall within the compasse of civil Government: in which respect Heathens did own them? or suppose he should own some sentences, punish some scandals, which, it seemeth Aurelian did in expelling Samosaten…s, and Severus, in commanding to give again to the Church a place where they used to meet, that some Rogues had violently put them from, saying, that it was fitter that God should be worshipped there, than that it should be imployed for such an use. Now, what is called for in such a case, might be a debate; whether might not such Heathens be accounted to take care of the Church, and so it became not these Primitive Christians to have retained power during their reigns? or, what may be thought of Christian Magistrates that do no more, and, it may be, lesse than these? whether are these to be retained or not?

7. It may be asked in such cases, whether is explicit confederating for that end necessary or not? and suppose some would not submit willingly, How could they be compelled? Or, if so, were they lyable to no censure, because of their obstinacy? It were good that these things were cleared, if it be supposed that this be a practicable thing▪ and often to be practised.

p. 96It is further said, That the Churches greatest hazard, is from the great power of Church-men, and not of the civil Magistrate, as experience sheweth: therefore it's dangerous to give them power. Answ. So the greatest danger of Errour, is from Church Teachers: shall they therefore have no Teachers? So the greatest hazard of tyrannie to a State in civil things, is from a civil Government: is it not therefore to be allowed? Yea, this is the reason of it, that corrupt Church-officers wrong the Church most, and that both in Government and Doctrine: because in both they come nearest Her heart: and therefore when they miscarry, it cannot be but worse than when an Authority more extrinsick doth miscarry; and by their Power, they had ever greatest accesse to do her good or evill: and this rather confirmeth what was said, That properly the Power doth belong to her, and had need to be well mannaged, because corruptio optimi est pessima. But was it ever heard of, that Church Authority, well mannaged, did hurt to the Church or State either, under what ever Magistrate? It followeth only that the abuse of Church Power is ill, But no more.

2. We come now in the second place to consider wherein this Authority is exercised: which we shall speak to only in so far as these Epistles give ground, and we will find it to be in these four.

1. There is a Triall, thou hast tried them that call themselves Apostles, &c. which triall inferreth Authority to cite and warn parties, to call and examine witnesses, 1 Tim. 5.19. to take Oaths; which is requisite to triall and witnessing, as that alone which putteth an end to strife amongst men, Heb. 6. Therefore, Mat. 18. the Lord giveth the same rule concerning procedor by witnessing in the Church, which Moses gave in reference to all Courts, That out of the mouth of two or three witnesses, &c. shall every matter be established. This showeth also, that they may receive the complaints of offended Brethren, (as is in Mat. 18.) keep meetings for that end, lead inquiry upon the crying fame of offenc… (as is like they did in this case of Ephesus) and, in a word, do every thing that is needfull for compleating triall: for where the end is approven, the means that are necessary to the attaining thereof, must be approven also.

2. There is a Power here to judge and determine, thou hast found them liars: which doth respect these two, 1. The nature of offences: they must judge what is truth and what error; otherwayes they can not tell who is a false Apostle and who a liar: and they must judge what is scandalous in practice, and so what is lawful or not; otherwayes they can make no progresse in trial or censure: for, they must find such a thing to be an error or scandal, and so not to be suffered in the Church. 2. It hath reference to persons: there is a Power in judging such and such persons to be guilty, whereby they pronounce not only such Doctrine to be erroneous, but such a Minister or person to be guilty thereof, as is clear from the Text, and so must judge what is proven or not, and every thing tending to that, as citing witnesses and parties, hearing exceptions and answers, &c.

3. There is a Power of censuring a person found guilty. These words, thou canst not bear them, &c. thou hast them, and sufferest them, do import that, as is cleared: this having of them, implying a fault, which was, that by their Authority such were not cut off from the Church: which is the highest degree of ordinary censures; for if it be a priviledge and benefit to be admitted to the visible Church, and the Ordinances of Jesus Christ therein, it cannot but be a high degree of censure to be cut off from both: and yet this is implied here to be in the Power of these Churches, and they cannot be conceived to have cutted off such from their society so as not to have had them or suffered them to remain therein, but by this which we call Excommunication. From which necessarily this followeth, that not only the Church hath a Power of censuring; but particularly of censuring thus, by cutting off one from Church-membership, and from the priviledges of the external Ordinances thereof: this is called by our Lord Jesus, Matth. 18, an accounting of one a heathen and a publicane, 1 Corinth. 5.13. a putting away of the wicked person from among them; a cutting off of troublers, Gal. 5.12. and (Titus 3.10.) a rejecting of them. There is nothing almost more frequently and clearly held forth in Scripture than this, both in Doctrine and practice. The Lord hath furnished His Church with this Power to censure, that He may preserve a Majestie in His Ordinances, which appear to the most part but foolishnesse and weaknesse; and that He may have weapons of His own kind, to batter down the proud imaginations of Church-Members, and revenge all disobedience, as the p. 97Apostle speaketh, 2 Corinth. 10.6. for which cause, he calleth it a rod, 1 Corinth. 4.21. and a punishment, 2 Corinth. 2.6.

4. There is here a Power of ordering and making Laws of what concerneth the affairs of the Church, as may be gathered, 1. From this, that they try Officers: whereby it is apparent, that the Church had her Laws in reference to the admission of Ministers, before they could be accounted such; and that these who were found by their trial, to be liars, should not be accounted Apostles, or Church-officers: otherwise Authority, in the former respects, would be maimed and defective. 2. It may be gathered from this, that they might conclude what was offensive, and what not, who was to be tried, and upon what grounds, when the trial was to proceed; who and what was to be suffered in the Church, and what not; who might Preach, and what might be Preached; and in every thing that concerneth Doctrine, Worship, and Order, according to the rule of the Word, and the great end of the Ordinances, to wit, the edification of the People: beside which, there is no Church Authority any where, it being a Power indeed, but a Power given for edification, and not to destruction, 2 Cor. 10.8. and 13.10. This Power being exercised, maketh decrees: therefore such acts are called, (Act. 16.4.) The decrees that were ordained of the Apostles and Elders; and by Paul, a setting of things in order, 1 Cor. 11.34. And (1 Cor. 16.) such were contributions for the poor, orderlinesse for preventing of confusions in Preaching and Hearing; calling of the people to Fasts, as Act. 12.5. and 13.3. and Chap. 14.23, &c. trying, proving, admitting, or censuring of Officers, and such like, as in the Epistles of Paul to Timothy and Titus, are clear.

The third thing we are to enquire for in these words, is, who are the proper and first subject of this Authority and Power? And we Answer, 1. negatively.

1. The civil Magistrate, is not the subject of this Power: for they to whom Christ writteth these Epistles, are the subject of this Power; But the civil Magistrate is not the party to whom Christ writeth these Epistles, as is clear, and it can be alleadged by none: Therefore it is clear, that the civil Magistrate is not the subject of this Church Power. Yet, no question, our Lord Jesus knew best to whom it belonged: neither is it like, when he accounts them to have Authority, that he doth account them to have it from voluntary confederating for the time: for, he accounts their neglect of the practice of it, to be a sin, against the breach of their duty; even as He quarrelleth with the Angel of Sardis for being defective in the Doctrinall part of his Ministery; and He commendeth the Angel of Ephesus for his labour in Doctrine, zeal, and Discipline, as duties equally belonging to the Ministery upon one and the same account. And it must either be said that a Magistrate, in his Election to be a Magistrate over a Church, is necessarily to be qualified in reference to these affairs; or, that the Government thereof, doth not belong unto him; Or, that one may be called of God warrantably to a Government over a Society, and that in respect of things and persons of no les…e concernment than the civil State; and yet it not be necessary that he should be qualified in reference thereunto: which is absurd.

2. We say, that it is not the body and community of the Church and People to whom this Power is committed: which appeareth thus, 1. By the same Argument, these are the subject of this Power to whom Christ principally directeth His Epistles, whom He commendeth for the exercising of this Power, and reproveth for the ommitting thereof; But these are Church-officers, contradistinguished from the rest of the Church, as appeareth not only by the common Inscription, unto the Angel of the Church, &c. whereby they are distinctly considered; but also Chap. 2. Vers. 5. where the Church is distinguished from the Angel in the threatning, I will remove thy Candlestick, &c. which saith, that what He had spoken in the former commendation of that triall, did peculiarly belong to the Angel, whom He considereth as distinct from the Church, spoken of under the terme of Candlestick. Also in the Epistle to Thyatira, the Officers are especially reproved, as appeareth from vers. 24. But unto you I say, &c. that is, the Church-officers to whom He had been formerly speaking; and to the rest in Thyatira, that is, the members, as distinct from them. It is hinted also, in the Epistle to Pergamos, as the exposition thereof cleareth; and no where in any of these Epistles is that distinction so clear, as in these, where He speaketh of the exercise of this Power: thereby the more clearly to shew where it resideth. And though it be said in the close, Let him that hath ears, hear what the spirit saith unto the Churches: yet, that is not to extend every thing equally to all the members: p. 98for, then the M…nistery of the Doctrine, would be common to all also. It is therefore to be understood w…th respect to their places and stations, as was said in our entry to speak upon the second Chapter. 2. The Church here, is divid…d in Angels and Candlesticks, that is, O…icers and Members Now, we must either give the Power to the whole, that are comprehended under the titles of Angels, that is, Officers; and Candlesticks, that is, Churches and Members; or, we must give it to the Officers alone, as distinct from the Churches: for there is no warrand to give it to the Angels, and to some of the Churchmembers, and not to all: for, that were again to sub-divide the Church, as if all its members were not (as to government) of one rank, contrary to the way keeped here. And indeed we know no other reason more palpable, why the Officers and Members of the Church, are so distinctly set forth; but that their distinctnesse in this respect might be held forth: But the first cannot be said, that all come in equally in Government, who are members: because that would take in Women and Children: Therefore it must belong to the Officers, as distinct from the other three; seing much of this Church-power, is conversant about things of that nature, as trying of false Apostles, corrupt Doctrine, &c. which do require both fitnesse of qualificaton, and continuance in respect of time, and painfulnesse, beyond that which alwayes Church-members use, or, are called to have in respect of the one, or can bestow in respect of the other. And seing these are certain Truths, that these who are ordinarily called of God to the exercise of any Authority, are to be fitted for it, and patiently to follow the tryall (for here these who are to censure, are also to try,) It will follow therefore that this power in such things cannot be thought to be committed unto the body of the People: especially, if we consider these two. 1. That in the choice, even of a Deacon, there is such exactnesse required in the trial of his qualifications, and authority to his admission to that Office: yet the power of Governing, doth not belong to this Officer, as such; but he is inferiour to that. Now if it be supposed that the people generally have interest in Government and Ruling: Then it will follow, 1. That there are moe qualifications required in a Deacon, which as such, is but a service, than there is required in these that Govern in the highest things. And, 2. That to be a member of the visible Church, hath more Authority in it, than to be a Deacon, at least than a Deacon can have as such: because the one Governeth by Authority in the highest things, and the other as such but serveth: And by the Institution and rules for the Election of Deacons, it would seem that there is by that Office an accession of somewhat to them, like Authority, more than they had before, or other members have: and seing this accession hath no Authority with it, It will seem strange to say, that a Church-member, that is overseen by an ordinary Deacon, hath Authority in him, which the Deacon, as such, hath not.

In the second place we may add this consideration, That it is simply impossible for all Church-members (even the generality of them) to understand many questions that may be agitated; yea, we may say further, they are not called to understand them; and again, others cannot possibly give their attendance for the triall of intricat things, which may draw a great length. For it is asserted by learned Thomas Hooker of New England, part. 3. chap. 3. pag. 36. and 37. That the preparation, is to be made by the Elders, because the body of the People, if numerous, they will be unable with any comely conveniency to consider and weigh all the circumstances with all the emergent difficulties, which will certainly and necessarily occur in such agitations, nor can in reason bestow their time and pains upon them, as the intricatie and perplexity of the work will sometime require. Thus farr he, which doth certainly render it at least exceeding suspicious, that they should be instated with Authority to judge and determine, who cannot possibly wait on the triall; especially, considering that in all Judges and Governments, mentioned in the Scripture; and particularly in these Epistles, these two are joyned together, to wit, triall and censure.

3. We say, that it is not one person or Church-officer above other Church-officers, to whom this Power and Authority is committed. Because, 1. It is to the Officers who are contradistinguished from the People, and are not comprehended under the title Candlestick or Church; But that must be understood of all Ministers, and not of one only. 2. By this one Angel collectively taken, many Rulers governing one Body in an associated manner, are to be understood as was cleared, chap. 1. vers. 20.

p. 99And therefore, 4. The associated number of ruling Church-officers, is the proper subject of this Church-power: because it is to them that Christ directeth these Epistles under this name Angel, as was shown, Chap. 1. vers. 20. It's these He commendeth and reproveth; it's those to whom the oversight of the People belongeth in reference to these snares, Acts 20.28. &c. It's these to whom the power of triall and admission of Churchofficers pertaineth, 1 Tim, 4.14. which is the work here commended in Ephesus. And if this be true, that by Angel here is to be understood a plurality of united Church-rulers, as was said, Then this assertion laid down will also follow: for, no other rests to lay claim to this Authority.

To close then, in the fourth place, we may shortly lay down these conclusions further from these Epistles,

1. That this Discipline and Authority is to be exercised on all sorts of persons, members of the Church, whether they be pretended Teachers, as Apostles and Prophetesses, whether M…n or Women; in a word, all who are capable to give offence and to be edified by Church censures, which young Children, mad men, and such like, are not in the reach of.

2. It concerneth all sorts of cases, whether of Errour or practice; and is to be exercised in reference to the first, as well as to the last, as is clear from these Epistles.

3. These highest censures, are to proceed against Errours and Scandals of a high nature, as these mentioned in the Text are; or such as are agreged with hightening circumstances, as disobedience and contempt in not hearing the Church, &c. Mat. 18. and which after triall, are clearly made out: that thereby the sentence in its equity, may be convincing for the gaining of its end, both on the offending party and others.

4. It followeth here, that when offences are so circumstantiated in Church-members, censures are to proceed against them, and they are not to be suffered to enjoy Church-priviledges, as if they were not under these offences, except they repent of them; yea, that un-Churching and Excommunication in such cases, is an Ordinance of Jesus Christ.

5. Church-officers may be often defective in reference to Discipline as well as to Doctrine, which is also a guiltinesse before the Lord, as appeareth here.

6. Although a Church be defective in the purging out of corrupt members; yet that doth not pollute the ordinances to others, or necessitate them to separate from them. These Churches continue to be Churches, and the Ordinances to be Ordinances of Christ, although such were continued in communion with them; and notwithstanding thereof, these who were free of those corruptions, are approven and commended by Jesus Christ. And if it were not so, that a persons endeavouring in his station to amend such a fault, and to have such scandals censured, did not exempt him from guiltinesse, so as to continue in Churchcommunion, although the plurality of Officers should be short of their dutie: in that respect then there might be still separation after separation in infinitum: which absurdity the learned H…oker, and Norton of New England, do presse for the obtaining of submission to their Church censures and keeping of communion with their Churches; even upon supposition, that the plurality of a Congregation, should refuse to shut out some deserving the same. Otherwise (say they) when these did separate, upon such a new emergent occasion, there behoved to be a new separation, and so forth; because no Church or men can be expected to be so straight, as either not to keep in some injustly, or not to suspect that some such are keeped in: which also would be a snare to their consciences who judged so, and be a cause of separation, although it were not so indeed. And were this applyed to the defects of Presbyteriall Churches, there would be no pressing necessity of separating from them, or from communion, in any ordinance, with them.

7. We may see from these Epistles, that although exact holinesse be, de jure, required of all Church-members; yet, de facto, often, They are not all exactly such, and that therefore the holinesse which is spoken of, as essential to visible-Churches, or to Membership in them, is not rigidly to be extended to a reality therein. If this Church of Laodicea (wherein nothing is commended, but much found-fault with) be considered, it will be found that this holinesse will not abide a rigid trial; yet it cannot be denied, but they have what is essential to a visible Church, and Membership therein; even as her Ministers, were Ministers, although not answerable to their stations, as was said: and if what these worthy men, Mr. Cotton, Norton, and Hooker, do assent unto in their writings, were accordingly adhered to in all practices, we conceive there needed not be any great controversie concerning p. 100this point. The second of these forcited Authors, part. 1. pag. 20. layeth down the pinch of the difference in these words (as he calls it.) Whether such as walk in a way of profannesse, or remain pertinaciously obstinate in some wickednesse, though otherways professing and practising the things of the Gospel, have any allowance from Christ, or may be accounted fit matter according to the tearms of the Gospel, to constitute a Church? Which Authors, also do acknowledge, that casting out of a Church, is but to proceed upon clear scandals of a grosse nature, convincingly made out, and no otherwayes, part. 3. pag. 39. And if there be defect in the executing thereof, separation upon that account, is disclaimed, as is formerly hinted, if the Church in Doctrine and administration of Ordinances be pure, that is, without error. The judicious Cobbet of new England, hath an excellent saying (as he hath many to the Anabaptists) against whom he writeth (p. 2. cap. 1. sect. 11.) Better (saith he) they who have not so peculiar a title thereto, be folded up in the Church, than that one of such lambs be left out in the wild wildernesse. And again, cap. 3. sect. 3. is full, to shew that there was no strictnesse observed in the admission of Professors to Baptism; but rather an enquiry of their purpose for the time to come, in bidding them bring forth fruits, and believe in Him that was to come, as from Iohn's example, Mat. 3. and Pauls, Act. 16. where there is no mention of trying the faith of the housholds of Lydia and the Iaylor; who yet were instantly baptized; as also were these Pharisees so checked by Iohn, Matth. 3. and much more hath he well to this purpose. I have but hinted at these things, to shew that although there be many questions of Church-discipline; yet they are not all of one nature and hazard, with all adversaries. And the last doth rather concern the constituting of Churches, and admission of Members, supposed yet to be without, than the governing of Churches, and inchurched-members: in reference to which there is great difference.

8. We may see, that the sustaining of, and submitting unto this Church-power, is a necessary and concerning duty: and if, what is said of Church-power and Government be truth, then this submission must follow: otherwise there could be no Government nor exercise of Power, if those who are called by their stations to be governed, were not submissive thereto: and if it were the Church-officers duty to try and censure, even by cutting off such and such scandalous persons, Then it behoved to be their duty to submit, and the Churches to acknowledge these sentences, as Christs Word is, Matth. 18. Let him be to thee as a heathen, &c. And Heb. 13.17. it is thus expressed, obey them that rule over you, and submit to them: which certainly, looks as well to the Authority of Discipline, that requireth submission, as to the obedience that ought to be given to the Word in Doctrine: for this cause, Officers are designed by the title Rulers: which is often given to civil Governours, and the fainting of such soul-overseers, is marked as a thing most unprofitable to the people themselves: and therefore is the more to be shunned.

Amongst other batteries against this Ordinance of Discipline, this is not the least that is raised against it, that it hath no compulsive force, if men willingly do not yeeld, which indeed tends to place all Authority in strength and force: for, by that same Argument, a strong son rebelling against his father, or a people or armie against their Magistrate or General, should be exempted from their subjection to them; and the Parent, Magistrate or General, be denuded of their Authority over them: because they have not force to compel obedience. Authority lyes in Gods appointing of such to rule, and such others to obey; although some sinfully should invert that order, as such disputes teach men to do. And the Question here cometh, if in reason a Church-member may disclame Church-authority and censures simply, or de jure, though by Power or violence they may do so de facto: yea, this doth indeed prove Church-government to be distinct from the civil: because it is not armed with worldly Power and strength, as other Governments of the world are; and in that respect, is not of this world, as the Lord Christ said of His Kingdom, Joh. 18. yet was He still a King, and it cannot be but a high guilt to mar this, either by overturning of it altogether, or by encroaching on it, and thereby to mar its freedom or enervat its Power, or by refusing to submit unto, acknowledge, or authorize the sentences thereof, as mens places call them to do.

We may therefore propose a word or two to all, but especially to Magistrates in ref… ference to this. 1. Let Magistrates in the fear of God consider what they do, lest they involve themselves in this guilt; it hath ever been hard to kick against the pricks: and p. 101although some would make encroachment on this Government to be a sweet thing; (which men easily admit in their own persons without any restraint,) yet the end thereof is bitternesse. And it would be considered, if such counsels tend to commend Religion and further it, or not? which at the best are but to mould and restrain it, so as it may be subservient to their own greatnesse and ends, as in Henry the 8. of England did appear. 2. They would consider if conscience put them to it, or if the most zealous presse it, or if some other thing drive it on, and to what sort of persons that design is most savourie? If it be not ordinarly the most profane, or otherways erroneous? and shall Magistrates be subservient to such? 3. They would consider the absurdities and consequents alledged, if they be hinderances or ills to Religion and Godlinesse, or but to their own power and greatnesse, and that in pretext only? is it because they will more zealously or profitably do it themselves, or because they had rather it were not done at all, nor done by them, and such like? If it be the strengthening of their own Power, more than of Christs that moves them: for it hath often been a miserable mistake of the Powers of the earth, to seek the strengthening of their Government by their enervating of Christs, which hath proven to be the overturning of their own. If Magistrates cannot in conscience clear themselves in these things, it cannot but be found to be an encroachment on Christs Ordinances, which are usefull and necessary in His Kingdom. 4. Consider the consequents, when things are marred and lye undone, or when misguided by undiscreet hands, who love nothing more than to make Ordinances despicable: for, if indeed a distinct Government be inconsistent with the civil, then a distinct incorporation as a Church is, must be inconsistent, even in its being, with a civil State and Commonwealth. And if Church-government be needlesse, because all things may be done by civil Rulers that are incumbent to it, a Ministrie also will be needlesse, because civil men that have knowledge may supplie that: and seldome is any found that rejects the one, but he is (at least) exceedingly lax in the other.

5. Suppose it be obtained, that this Government be born down, what doth the Magistrates gain thereby? It is but, either that such things, that Church-discipline takes notice of, should altogether be slighted, that so there may be confusion in the Church: which is but a poor advantage: or, it is that the burden may be doubled on him who had it heavy enough before, and so he be made more immediatly liable for all the defects that shall be in those things. And at the most, supposing that they should be diligent in the outward duties for the restraining of the outward man; yet doth never that come up to the use of edifying, as it doth by Christs Ordinance of Discipline: for men, are but punished as men, and not as Christians; and faults are but censured, as in other States, and not as in Christs Church.

6. Let them consider, that the establishing of this Power, as distinct from theirs, doth not exclude them upon the matter from having accesse to any thing which may edifie the Church: for they are admitted to oversee the spreading of pure Doctrine and the restraining of false Doctrine, error and vice, and to every other thing conducing to the end of edification in the way suitable to their places: only it bounds them here, that pure Doctrine be Preached by Christs orderly called Ministers, and not by themselves or others, upon their meer command, and so that order be preserved, and Discipline and censures be exerced and made effectual in the Church in the same method. And this is not to restrain them in Government and incapacitate them for edifying the Church in their places, more than by refusing them power to Preach authoritatively, and to administer the Sacraments as Christs Ambassadors; or, more than a Father is incapacitated to exerce his fatherly power on an unruly child, because a Magistrate or Church-Judicatory doth concur with him.

7. They are no way weakened in civil things: for, what ever the Magistrate formerly possessed before the constituting of the Church, or what ever Magistrates in other States, where no Churches are, do possesse, that is still allowed to him, where this distinct Government is erected: therefore it cannot be said, that it doth encroach on him: for, what cases do flow from a State, as a State, are still left untouched by this Authority: only what cases flow from it as a Church, or from the Members thereof, considered as Christians, these only are meddled with by it, to wit, trial of Gifts, admission of Ministers, censuring of Church-officers and Members, and that with Church censures, others than have been, or are used in any meer State or Commonwealth, and such like, &c. And seing none of these belonged to the Magistrate formerly, and do but flow from this consideration of p. 102their being a Church: It follows that the keeping of Power distinct in these, can no way be said to encroach on the Magistrates Power, seing he possesseth still, what ever any Magistrate possessed: yea, seing by the Church there is a new relation arising from what formerly was, it seems convenient and necessary, that there should be a new distinct way of ordering and governing the same: else supposing that a Magistrate had under him both Christians and Heathens in the same incorporation, he were either not to censure Christians otherwayes for their faults than heathens: which is absurd, seing the fault of a Christian hath a distinct notion from the same fault in a Heathen, to wit, it is an offence and scandal which ariseth from this, that the person committing it, is a Church-member; and so by their miscarriages, they reflect more on their head, and the profession of the Gospel, than the faults of others: or, he must punish the same faults that are done by persons under the same civil Law with several and distinct punishments, which is no lesse inconsistent with the nature of a civil State considered in its self, which admits not of distinct censures of the same faults and persons, more than of a distinct Power. And so if the consideration of a new Church-relation will admit of distinct Laws and censures, without wronging of the nature of a State, and that equity which ought to be kept in reference to Subjects, neither ought this of a distinct Power to make these Laws, and execute these censures, be thought inconsistent with Magistracie, seing it flows from the same new relation; and this equity among Subjects, is no lesse essential to a well ordered Commonwealth, than universal Supremacie and Power to the Magistrate. And the conveening of Church-officers for the exercising of Discipline, and that without dependence on the Magistrate, can be no more inconsistent with subjection to him in civil things, than the conveening of Church-members for hearing of the Word and receiving of the Sacraments, even though it should be expresly contrary to His command.

8. It would be considered, that the right exercise of Church-power, doth not only not weaken; but on the contrary, doth exceedingly strengthen civil Authority and obedience thereunto in the Church. For, where this is, a Magistrate hath all Authority that civil Laws give him, and all the power that the Word upon consciences doth imprint; and he hath beside these, Church-power and censures concurring for his strengthening: because disobedience to him, is accounted a scandale by the Church; and therefore is amongst other scandals to be taken notice of, and censured by this Power; even as they take notice of disobedient Children, Servants, and Wives; which doth exceedingly strengthen the Authority of these relations in the Church, beyond that which can be elsewhere. And thus the Churches Power doth confirm the Power of the State, when they censure disobedience to them, and when they censure the same faults in the same persons, which the State doth, though under a different notion: and by so doing, they pronounce the Power and proceeding of the civil State to be just, when the things punished by it, are thus represented to them, and not only as faults against humane Laws and inconsistent with Civil-states, but also as sins against Christ and unbecoming His Church: which certainly cannot but add a great impression of reverence unto the civil Power. Thus these two distinct Governments, do no way interfere, but support each other. And so as it's no obstruction, but a great furtherance unto Church-power in the exercise thereof (although it be still distinct and independent as such) to have Civil-power after its own manner concurring with it; so is it a strengthening to Civil-power, to have the accession of Church-power in its kind, to concur with it. And if indeed we suppose Magistrates to punish all things that are scandalous in the Church, there can be no prejudice to the Power by this, which doth censure the same things on another account. And if we suppose them not to do so, Then there is necessity for this Church-power, that such things may be taken notice of, as hath been said.

9. The exercise of this distinct Church-power, is a great advantage to the Church; and so cannot but be well consistent with Magistracy: for these two ordinances, cannot but be consistent. 1. It maketh sin hatefull. 2. It strengtheneth the Authority of all other Ordinances. 3. There can be no such way for trying qualified men fit to mannage Church-censures and Church-affairs, as such who are purposely chosen. 4. It hath what the Magistrate can give, and this beside. 5. It proveth more convincing and edifying to the person censured: for, (what ever is said to the contrary) experience doth prove, that no censure hath such convincing weight on consciences, as when it's distinctly administred by Church-officers. 6. It doth more shew the Holinesse of the Head Christ, and the p. 103compleatnesse of His Ordinances, and other advantages that may be gathered from what we said at the entry to this d…gression. In a word, if civil powers mind edification in their place, and to be a terrour to evil doers, this proves strengthening to them: because it furthers that end. If they mind not that, it is no marvell such a power be suspicious like, which tendeth only to the carrying on thereof.

It is ordinary to men to suspect more the encroaching of Church-men in Power and their exorbitancy than of any other, that being ever thought by naturall men to be a bondage, and these ever esteemed to be more proud, rigid, &c. and I know not what in the exercise of their Power. But men would soberly consider, 1. If that be the fault of the Ordinance, or of the persons, and if Discipline well discharged and Ecclesiastically followed with love, meeknesse, conviction, &c. if so it were not usefull? And if the fault be in the persons, why should it be imputed to the Power it self in this case, more than in other cases? 2. Is there any thing in a Church-office to occasion this exorbitancy and miscarriage, more than in another civil Station? This looketh not like in it self. 3. If more neerly we consider Church-officers, there is no such reason to suspect them: for, is there any rank of persons so regulated, and to be tried in their qualifications for the exercise of their Trust, as by the Scripture they are? Or, are any places more deliberately filled, that men conscientious and fit for such a Trust may be called thereto? And are there any sort of persons so bounded with profitable rules in the exercise of their Authority? If there be defect in the observing of these, it ought tenderly to be remedied; yet, it cannot be thought but Church-officers must be most fit to mannage Church-matters. 4. Let them that are imployed in Church-power be considered, without respect to that, are they not of themselves men of tendernesse, conscience, and gifts proportionably, as men in any other Station are, so that it may be supposed for their qualifications and carriage, they might have been men of other Stations; and if called thereto, Judges, Rulers, &c. without any just ground of suspicion more than others? And if so, shall the very Office, which ought to capacitat them more, only render them obnoxious to suspicion? This had need to be adverted unto, least their office be reproached. And may not that Power put in civil hands, be as ready to miscarry as in theirs? 5. What Church-men are usually most mistaken? is it not they who still have been most faithfull and zealous in their duty? Have not such ever also been thought most intolerable even in respect of their freedom in the Word, as we may see in the case of Elia, Iohn the Baptist, &c. and the two Prophets, chap. 11. Shall therefore Doctrine and Power in the Word, be thought insufferable? Or, shall the false Prophets of Baal, or of Antichrist, be thought more fit to have place than the Lords faithfull servants? This can be no good ground that doth reflect only upon these that are faithfull, others being ready to apply themselves to the pleasing of men both in Word and Discipline. 6. It would be considered, what may move men of judgement and parts (especially if they be conscientious) to top with Magistrates? It's not like that self interests doth that; seing flatterers that seek that most, take the contrary way and come speed, when as the most faithfull are often under a cloud. Or, is it like that the most zealous, humble and tender, should be most subject to miscarry? And if there be ground to reprove or censure either by Word or Discipline, is it not most profitable, even though most displeasing, that it be done? 7. Consider, who most readily fret at this Power? it will be found they are such, who from inclination to lousnesse or errour cannot abide any bands, or from a principle of politick indifferency in the matters of Religion, would mould all in a State-frame; and such are imbittered at freedom in Preaching, as well as Power in Governing; or, they are such as are led with a prejudice at the power of Ordinances, which certainly men naturally are not free of: and it would be adverted in this. 8. Consider, that this mistake of Church-mens Power, doth often arise in such cases, wherein they are serving Christ: and men entertain it most in such times, when their frame is least spirituall and sober, as the observation thereof in experience will evidence. What man at the approach of death hath been comforted in such an opposition, or challenged for submission? Although contempt thereof hath lien heavy on many, and that to scare others from following their wayes. All therefore of all ranks, would be obtested to advert to this, lest they be found even fighters against God: especially at such times, when this designe by some is driven; least by putting to their hand to pull down this Authority, they themselves perish in the fall thereof. And what doth the advantage at most amount unto? It is this, there shall be p. 104greater freedom to sin, and fewer means to reclaim from it; or what censure shall be inflicted, may be done in such a way as may stand with mens laughing at their sin, without being affected in the conscience by any convincing mean? Hath this ever profited any hitherto? Or, hath the right exercise of Discipline ever been prejudiciall to any? And do not ordinarily Religion and Discipline flourish together? And are not Congregations in best case, where this Ordinance is most vigorous? And do not the sad effects of the want of this in other places evidently demonstrate the necessity thereof? People would consider these things, especially these who are engaged singularly for the supporting of this Ordinance: for, a time of reckoning will come, when this exercise of Discipline and submission thereto according to mens places and engagements, will not be found so indifferent as now it is esteemed by many. And disputes of this kind, we suppose, will not be admitted, when the Lord will declare that he hath ratified in Heaven, what according to His will hath been pronounced in this ordinance of Discipline upon earth: which by Divines, is well accounted to be the ratification and confirmation of the threatnings contained in His Word, and added to make them the more weightie, as the Sacraments are unto the promises of His Grace.