The Divine Right of Church Government and Excommunication, Religious polemic · Chapter 19
CHAP. XIX.
Queſt. 15.
Of the uſe of Excommunication toward the Magiſtrate eſpecially.Lib. 5. c. 1. Eraſt. 298.
Erastus. How many thouſands of men have been killed by occaſion of Excommunication in Germany? it hath ſubjected Kings and Scriptures, and all to the Pope.
Anſ. All this may be ſaid of the Goſpell and of Chriſt, that hee is appointed for the fall and ruine of many, and that he came not to give Peace, but the Sword, 1 Pet. 2. 8. Luke 2. 34. Mat. 10. 34, 35. But the cauſe is not in the Goſpell, or in Chriſt, but in mens corrupt nature: Excommunication is the Rod of the King out of Zion, and we know how impatient men are of the yoke of Chriſt; Excommunication abuſed by the Pope doth all this.
Erastus. Excommunication cureth not wounded conſciences, but begettethpage 299. Hypocrites.
Anſ. So publike rebuking of thoſe that ſin publikely, 1 Tim. 5. 20. being abuſed doth beget Hypocrites, Eſa. 57. 1, 2, 3. Ezek. 31, 32, 33. 1 King. 21. 27. 28, 29. ſo doth the Rod, the Word, the giving of almes, praying, being abuſed to wicked ends, make hypocrites, Mat. 23. 14, 25. Mat. 6. 1, 2, 3, 4. Pſal. 78. v. 34, 35, 36. Hoſ. 7. 14. Excommunication is innocent of all theſe.
Erastus. I thinke it not amiſſe that the Magiſtrate chuſe godly andpage 29…. prudent men, and joyne to them godly Miniſters, who in place of the Magistrate may inquire in the life and manners of men, and convene before them looſe livers, and rebuke them, and if need be, deferre them to the Magiſtrate; But this is unjuſt, that ſuch a Senate be choſen by the Church, which hath no power to chuſe them. 2. That they are not choſen in the Name of the Magiſtrate, but againſt his will. 3. That they ſubject the Magiſtrate to them.
Anſ. Eraſtus is willing there be a Presbytery: 1. Of mixed men, prudent men, and godly Paſtors. 2. Choſen by the Magiſtrate. Eraſtus yieldeth there is a Presbytery.3. That they judge and rebuke Murtherers, Extortioners, Oppreſſors, Thieves, &c. But 1. he ſhould give us Scripture for this his new Presbytery. He condemneth ours, becauſe it wanteth (as he ſaith) the Authority; and the like of his Presbytery in the Old or New Teſtament you finde not. 2. That Miniſters ſhould judge of bloods, thefts, treaſons, paricides (for all theſe are looſe livers) and of goods and inheritances, and give an account to the Civill Magiſtrate, is all one as if the Miniſters of the Goſpel ſhould be Iudges as the Lords of the Gentiles, ſuch as Pilate, Foelix and the reſt, ſo they do it at the Command of the Supream Magiſtrate; then the King may warrant Miniſters to go againſt the Command and practiſe of Chriſt, Luk. 22. 24, 25, 26. and 12, 13, &c. 2 Tim. 2. 4. For this is a Civill Judicature. 3. Then the Miniſters rebuking in the name of the Civill Magiſtrate, may make him to Preach & exhort in the name of the Civil Magiſtrate. So Miniſters, are they to hear the word at the Magiſtrates mouth? I thought Miniſters had been the Ambaſſadors of an higher King, Ezech. 2. 7, 8. and 3. 3. Speak with my words to them, Rom. 1. 1. 2 Cor. 5. 20. 4. If the Miniſters rebuke as Ambaſſadors of Chriſt: Thoſe to whom they Preach the word of reconciliation, thoſe they are to rebuke with Authority, and all hearers are ſubject to them: Magiſtrates or others,The Magiſtrate under Church diſcipline. high or low: This is clear by 2 Cor. 5. 19. 20, &c. 2 Tim. 4. 1, 2. For rebuking in way of Preaching, or in way of cenſure, is a part of the Goſpel. But Paſtors are to Preach the Goſpel to all, to great and ſmall who ſtand in need of Reconciliation, 2 Cor. 5. 20, Act. 9. 15. He is a choſen veſſel to me, to bear my name before Gentiles and Kings, and the Children of Iſrael.
Erastus. It is falſe that the Sword of the Magiſtrate is not ſufficient to coerce ſins, Pſal. 101. Kings have put to death thoſe that ſeek not God: It is nothing that you ſay, the Prieſt judged thoſe ſame ſins in a ſpirituall manner, that the Magiſtrate judged politically; for it is falſe, that the Prieſts judged in a Judicature ſeparated from the Civill Judges, as your Presbytery ſitteth. See Levit. cap. 4. 5. 6. God ſeemeth to have given no Laws of puniſhing offenders by themſelves, as with us, least we ſhould imagine two diſtinct Judicatures.
Anſ. We deny not, but the Sword is ſufficient to puniſh offenders, in its own kinde, in order to the peace of the Common-wealth. to remove evil; to cauſe others fear, to pacifie Gods wrath, as the Scriptures ſpeak: ſo David and good Kings purged the city of God, but Eraſtus cannot deny but God ordained ſpirituall means of rebukings, putting out of the Camp, eſchewing the company of offenders, that they may be aſhamed, and thoſe ſpirituall means have a ſpirituall influence on the ſoul to remove offences, to gain the offenders, Matth. 18. 15. Pſal. 110▪ 2. Iſa, 11. 4. Pſal. 141. 5. 2 Theſſ. 3. 14, 15.
2. The word maketh the Prieſts ſeparated from Civill Iudges, Zach. 3. 7. The Angel of the Lord proteſted unto Ioſhua the high Prieſt, if thou wilt walk in my wayes, and keep my charge, then thou ſhalt alſo judge my houſe, and thou ſhalt keep my courts. The Civill Magiſtrate judged not the houſe of God, the way that the High Prieſt did. The Divines that noteth on the place, ſay, The chief part in Eccleſiaſticall affairs was upon the High Prieſt, Deu…. 17.Annot. on the Bible, An. 1645. in Zach. 3. 7. 12. 2 Chron. 19. 11. The word foreign that is given to the Prieſt is to judge, to give out ſentence in judgement, the very word that is given to King Ioſiah; He judged the cauſe of the poor and needy, and Ier. 5. 28. They judge not the cauſe, the cauſe of the fatherleſſe, and Ier. 21. 12. O houſe of David execute judgement in the morning, and the ſons of Aaron the Prieſts, 1 Chron. 24. 5. are made ſome of them Governors of the ſanctuary, and Governors of the houſe of God: It is the word that ſignifies Princes, 2 Kin. 9. 5. A word to thee O Prince foreign, 1 Sam. 22. 2. 1 Chro. 11. 6. Ier. 17. 25, Num. 23. 3. 10. All the princes of Moab, Iſa. 30. 4. Iſa. 10. 8. Are not my princes Kings? and Lev. 4. 5, 6. chapters, judiciall acts are given to the Prieſt that are proper to him as Prieſt, which none do but he, nor have the Civill ludges any part in it, more then they can offer ſacrificesA judicature proper to the prieſts as prieſts. which none do but the prieſts, for he was to judge of the quality of the ſins, and might not offer any ſacrifice for every ſin, nor dip his finger in the blood of the bullock ſeven times, for every ſin, this ſpirituall judicature was the Prieſts. And neither Moſes the Prince nor any Civill Iudge on earth could ſhare with the Prieſts in judging this: all the world will ſay the judge may uſe the ſword againſt the Murtherer, and Elders or Paſtors have not to do with the ſword at all: and the Paſtors are to convince, rebuke and work upon the conſcience of the Murtherer to gain him to repentance, and no civill judge as a civill judge hath to ſhare with him in this: here be diſtinct puniſhments, one corporall and civill, another ſpirituall, why then muſt they not flow from two diſtinct Iuriſdictions? or if it diſpleaſe any man, that we call Churchcenſures with the name of puniſhment, we can forbear the name, for rebukes, ſuſpenſion from the Sacraments, Excommunication, becauſe they are intrinſecally, and of their own nature ſuch as tend not to the hurt, but to the gaining and ſaving of the ſouls of the perſons cenſured; they are unproperly puniſhments, as the power and court they come from is unproperly a rod a Iudicature, a Court, and thoſe that inflict the cenſures improperly Iudges, yet can it not be denied to be ſpirituall Government, and that there is a ſpirituall ſword, the word of God, and a ſpirituall coaction, flowing from Heralds, or ſervants in the name of the King of Kings and Head of the Church, who reigneth in his own Ordinances, and Miniſters.
Erastus. The prieſts bade Uzziah not burn incenſe, becauſe it wasPage 300. their part only to ſacrifice: But vvhere is it vvritten that the King vvas condemned by the ſentence of the Prieſts?
Anſ. The Prieſts were a Colledge of Elders, who not only judicially condemned the Kings fact as againſt the Lavv of God, but 2 Chron. 26. Azariah and eighty priests vvith him vvithstood him, and reſiſted him, yea, they gave out ſentence againſt him, ver. 18. It pertaineth not unto thee, Vzziah, to burn incenſe to the Lord, but to the Prieſts the ſons of Aaron, that are conſecrated to burn incenſe; go out of the ſanctuary, for thou haſt treſpaſſed, they give out the ſentence of the Law of God, Numb. 16. 40, Nor might any come in to the Holy place, but the Prieſts and Levites, Num. 18. 6, 7. here is a ſentence judiciall by the voyces of 80. Prieſts in an externall court, given out againſt the ſupream Magiſtrate: for they gave not out this ſentence as private men, but as Prieſts, judging according to the Law, and in this the King was ſubject to Eccleſiaſticall juriſdiction.
Erastus. It is a vaine thing to ſay, they Excommunicate not thePage 301. Magiſtrate as the Magistrate, none but Kata-baptiſts and ſuch as deny Magiſtracy to be an Ordinance of God, can ſay that: Every man might excuſe rebellion ſo, and ſay, I perſecute not the Magiſtrate as he is a Magiſtrate, but as he is a tyrant: But I ſay you may not reproach the Magiſtrate, Exod. 22. farre leſſe may you puniſh him. How can I obey him, whoſe whole life and actions, I may by Power, and coaction limit? The Magiſtrate ſo is but a ſervant to the Presbytery.
Anſ. Eraſtus ſcorneth this diſtinction, to ſay, the Magiſtrate not as a Magiſtrate, but as a ſcandalous man is Excommunicated: Yet we can make him receive the diſtinction whether he will or not: For Eraſtus ſaith, that Paſtors may rebuke, convince, and threaten the Magiſtrate? Good man, may Paſtors threaten and rebuke thePage 300. Eraſtus, Quis unquam dubitavit, an Miniſtris liceat improbe age…tes, Magiſtratus, ex verb… Dei, objurgare, arguere, reprehendere, increpare, adeoque ſolvere & ligare? Magiſtrate as the Magiſtrate? or may they only threaten, and rebuke him as an offending man? Eraſtus dare not ſay the firſt, for ſo he were a groſſe Kata-baptiſt, for then Paſtors were to rebuke the very office, and to condemne it; if he ſay the latter, as he doth in expreſſe words, then he acknowledgeth that Paſtors may bind the ſinnes of wicked Magiſtrates in heaven, is this, good Thoma, no Eccleſiaſticall coaction, no juriſdiction? and this is to receive the diſtinction whether you will or not. 2. The rejecting of this diſtinction is a tenet of Royaliſts, for certainly we uſe no defenſive armes againſt the King as King, but as he is a miſled man; and I think the King will ſay, he uſeth not offenſive armes againſt the Parliament as the Parliament, but under another very undeſerved notion, as Rebels. 3. It is leſſe that we may not rail on rulers, which is a ſinne, (for to rail upon any curſing-wiſe is unlawfull) then that we cannot puniſh the ruler, which is more? To puniſh the ruler as a ſinfull and wicked man, is a work of juſtice, and ſo leſſe unlawfull then ſin. Eraſtus taketh for confeſſed (as his cuſtome is) that which we deny, that to puniſh rulers with an Eccleſiaſtick cenſure is a ſin, as to rail on them, and curſe them is a greater ſin. But to binde the rulers ſinnes in heaven, is a puniſhment, and this the Elders may lawfully do, and to eſchew the company of a ruler, if he be a fornicator, an extortioner, and idolater, is either to puniſh him, or put ſhame upon him, 2 Theſ. 3. 14. But one private Chriſtian, farre more a Church may do that, Rom. 16. 17. 1 Cor. 5. 9, 10. 2 Theſ. 3. 14. except Eraſtus except the Magiſtrate from being under a Divine and Apoſtolick command; this he muſt ſay, and ſo we have the Apoſtles meaning; withdraw from thoſe that cauſe diviſions, and walk unordinately, and are fornicators, coveteous, extortioners, leaſt they infect you, and that they may be aſhamed, and repent, except they be Magiſtrates, though in the loweſt rank; if they be Magiſtrates, they are gods, and you their ſubjects, and you may in no ſort ſhame them. I ſhould think God both accepted perſons, and would not have us to indeavour the repentance and gaining of the ſouls of Magiſtrates, becauſe they are above Goſpel-rules by this way of Erastus; and becauſe the Presbytery may not rail on Magiſtrates, for that is ſinne, it followeth not, the Presbytery may inflict no Eccleſiaſticall cenſure on them; Yea, let me retort this, The Magiſtrate may not rail on, or curſe and revile the Prieſts; So Paul expoundeth it, Act. 23. 5. againſt reviling of Prieſts, nor may the Magiſtrate revile or curſe any ſubject, for I conceive reviling to be ſinne, Mat. 5. 11. and 27. 39. Joh. 9. 28. 1 Cor. 4. 12. 1 Pet. 2. 23. 1 Cor. 6. 10. Iſai. 51. 7. Zepha. 2. 8. 1 Pet. 3. 9. Jude 9. and the Magiſtrate is under the Moral Law. Hence I inferre by Eraſtus his reaſoning, that the Magiſtrate may not puniſh, Prieſts, Prophets, Paſtors, or any ſubject, though they moſt hainouſly treſpaſſe againſt all Lawes, which is abſurd. 3. That the Magiſtrate is made a ſervant, not a Magiſtrate, if the Elders may uſe the rod of Chriſt againſt him is a vaine conſequence; Paul preached himſelf a ſervant, in a ſpirituall Miniſtery, to all the Chriſtians in Corinth, 2 Cor. 4. 5. and all Elders are thus ſervants to Magiſtrates and flock; Yet Eraſtus knoweth that Paul had a rod of miraculous killing the diſobedient, as Eraſtus expoundeth, 1 Cor. 5. & 1 Cor. 4. 21. What will ye? ſhall I come unto you with a rod, or in love? Suppoſe there had been a Chriſtian Magiſtrate at Corinth that ſhould fall in inceſt, as one did, 1 Cor. 5. 1. Paul could not come to him with the rod; or ſuppoſe the Roman Emperour had been a Chriſtian and within the Church, and ſhould have his Fathers wife; Paul could uſe no rod againſt him, and ſhould he not have in readineſſe revenge againſt all diſobedience? 2 Cor. 10▪ 6. and authority, foreign, given him by the Lord for edification, v. 8. againſt all offenders within the Chriſtian Church? in regard that Chriſt is head and King of the Church; but he ſhould have neither rod nor revenge in readineſſe againſt the diſobedience of the Emperour? why, is not the rod of Paul the rod of Chriſt? 2 Cor. 10. 8. yea certainly, is not then the Chriſtian Emperour the ſubject of Chriſts Kingdome? and ſubject to the King Chriſt, and his rod? No but (ſaith Eraſtus) Paul, Is the Emperour ſubject to thee? and if Paul ſhould have a rod to puniſh the Emperour, then the Apoſtle could not be the Emperours ſubject, nor obey him as a God on earth: for (ſaith Eraſtus,) no ſubject may puniſh the Magiſtrate. This is downe right to make God an accepter of perſons, nor can Eraſtus deny but ſharp rebuking was a puniſhment, Tit. 1. Rebuke them ſharply that they may be ſound in the …aith; And this the Apoſtle urgeth all Miniſters and watchmen to do, not being afraid of the faces of Kings, Iere. 1. 17, 18. Joh. 2. 1, 2, 3▪ 4. 2 Tim. 4. 1, 2, 3. Erastus teacheth Magiſtrates to break Chriſts bounds, and to ſay, we will not have this man to reigne over us, he needed not employ a wicked pen for this, they need no teacher, vitia diſcuntur ſine Magiſtro.
Erastus. Some of yours ſay, there is need of the Magiſtrates conſentPage 302. 303. How the Magiſtrates conſent is requiſite in Excommunication. to Excommunication, but certainly he will never conſent to be Excommunicated himſelf, Theodoſius was not willing, nor will good Magiſtrates conſent, when they ſee the danger on themſelves, you would not bring in again the Church-penances of the ancients.
Anſ. 1. We all think the Cumulative conſent of the godly Magiſtrate, is neceſſary to Excommunication: Becauſe he is obliged to joyne his ſanction and authority to all Chriſts Ordinances, but we think not the privative, or negative conſent is required; ſo as no mans ſinnes ſhould be bound in heaven, except the Magiſtrate ſay Amen. 2. Put Erastus his Arguments in forme, and you ſhall ſee their weakneſſe as thus: He whoſe conſent is required to Excommunication, cannot be puniſhed with Excommunication himſelfe, becauſe no man will conſent, not Theodoſius, nor the godlieſt man, that he be puniſhed himſelfe: But the Magistrates conſent (ſay the Presbyterians) is to be had to Excommunication; Ergo, the Magiſtrate cannot be puniſhed with Excommunication himſelfe.
Anſ. I retort it, he whoſe conſent is required for threatning wrath …o, and rebuking of offenders and ſcandalous men, he is not to be threatned with wrath, and rebuked for his own offences and ſcandals; becauſe no man, no Theodoſius, no godly Magiſtrate, when he ſeeth the preſent danger, will conſent, that he be threatned with the wrath of God and rebuked himſelfe; We know Nathan was afraid to rebuke a Magiſtrate according to Gods heart, but in the third Perſon. But Eraſtians teach that the Magiſtrate, when he ſcandalouſly offends, ſhould be threatned and rebuked; Ergo, the Magiſtrates conſent is not requiſite to threatnings and rebukings of Paſtors. But the concluſion is againſt Eraſtus, for the Paſtors preach, and rebuke, and threaten as the deputies and ſervants of the Magiſtrate, and as ſent by him; and the Magiſtrate preacheth, rebuketh, threatneth all offenders, and himſelfe alſo in and through Paſtors as his ſervants, as Erastus teacheth; then he muſt conſent, that they threaten and rebuke himſelfe. 2. The propoſition is falſe, it is preſumed, all the ſubjects do conſent to lawfull penall Lawes againſt ſorcery, murther, inceſt in the generall, and virtually, that they ſhall be put in execution againſt themſelves: yet the Sorcerer will never formally conſent, that he himſelfe be put to death, though he once, as a ſubject, conſented to the Law, that all Sorcerers be put to death: For when the penall Law againſt ſorcery was enacted, he conſented to this. 3. He whoſe conſent accumulative is requiſite, that ſcandalous offenders in generall be Excommunicated, but not that this or this man, poſſibly the Magiſtrate himſelfe, he is not to be Excommunicated, is moſt falſe; he whoſe conſent negative, is requiſite for Excommunication, he is not to be Excommunicated himſelf, the propoſition is true; But I aſſume, the Magiſtrates conſent negative, is requiſite to Excommunication, there is nothing more falſe: For ſhall that which the Church bindeth on earth, not be bound in heaven, except the King, the Iuſtice, or Maſter Conſtable ſay Amen to it on earth? We ſay not that the Magiſtrates conſent as a Magiſtrate, is requiſite, for the Excommunicating of himſelfe. For though as a Magiſtrate he ought to give his conſent to Excommucate all offenders, and adde his civill ſanction, as one of the ſeven wiſe men of Greece ſaid, Patere legem, quam ipſe tuleris. Yet he is not Excommunicated as a Magiſtrate (except with Kata-baptiſts, you condemne the Office of Magiſtracie as an unlawfull Ordinance) but as a ſcandalous man. 3. The old penances, as they do us that ſervice to make good that Excommunication was in the ancient Church, and that Erastus wanteth the authority of the Fathers, and upon his ingenuity ſhould have been aſhamed to cite them for his way, ſo we condemne them as introductory to Popery; but let Eraſtus forme an Argument from this, and logick ſhall hiſ…e at it. That which bringeth in old ſatisfactions and penance, is not to be holden. But Excommunication, or the Excommunicating of Magiſtrates doth this; Ergo, The aſſumption muſt be proved.
Erastus. It hath no more truth which you ſay, that the Magistrate,Page 302. The Magiſtrats ſword no kindly mean to gain ſouls, as Eraſtus dreameth. while he puniſheth, cureth not the conſcience, for God calleth many by tribulations to himſelfe, and farre more then by your Excommunication.
Anſ. I would Erastus had drawen up an Argument, which ſeldome he doth, for this it muſt be:
That which is a ſaving mean to gaine ſcandalous offenders to Ieſus Chriſt, and better then Excommunication, is an Ordinance of God, and the other no Ordinance; But the Magiſtrates puniſhing with the ſword the ſcandalous offenders, is a ſaving meane to gaine ſcandalous offenders, and better then Excommunication; Ergo,
Anſ. Neither Major nor Minor propoſition hath any truth at all. 1. Though the Magiſtrates ſword were a better meane to gain ſouls, it followeth not that Excommunication is no mean. The Law is leſſe powerfull for gaining ſouls, The Goſpel more powerfull. But the Law is not for that no Ordinance of God. 2. Erastus his reaſon to prove, that the Magiſtrates puniſhing cureth the conſcience, as a ſaving Ordinance, no leſſe then Excommunication, muſt be this; That, by which God calleth, and draweth many to himſelfe, is a ſaving mean, to cure the conſcience; but by the Magiſtrates puniſhing of ſcandalous men, God doth this as by other tribulations. The propoſition muſt be, a propoſitio per ſe; That by the Magiſtrates heading, and hanging, ſcourging, and impriſoning of themſelves, as kindly and intrinſecally ſaving means, ſuch as rebukes, promiſes, commands, excommunication are, the Lord calleth men, and converteth them, that is falſe, God no more uſeth the Sword of the Magiſtrate, as a kindly mean of gaining ſouls, then the ſword of an oppreſſing Tyrant; ſo Nebuchadnezzars oppreſſing of the Church of God, and the Aſſyrians unjuſt waſting of the people of Iſrael, ſhall be kindly means of gaining of ſouls; becauſe God bleſſed the rod to many to humble their uncircumciſed heart; but this is accidentall to, and beſide the nature of the rod: but it is not accidentall to rebuking, threatning, promiſes to the preaching of the Goſpel, nor to Excommunication to ſave ſouls and gaine them to Chriſt. The Goſpel, and all the parts of it, are kindly, and of themſelves theRom. 1. 16. power of God to ſalvation: The Magiſtrates ſword to Eraſtus muſt be the power of God to ſalvation, and Chriſt, Matth. 18. in his order of gaining an offending brothers ſoul, by this reaſon muſt deſcend, not aſcend, contrary to the order of Chriſt, for Chriſt maketh the rebuking between brother and brother, to be the firſt ſtep of gaining an offender to Chriſt. 2. The rebuking before two or three. 3. Before the Church. 4. Excommunication: Now all theſe are ſpirituall means and more efficacious, the ſecond then the firſt, the third then the ſecond, the fourth then any of them. But Eraſtus maketh Chriſt in the fourth ſtep, to deſcend from three ſpirituall ſteps of gaining the mans ſoul, to a fourth, which is carnall, to wit, let him be as a heathen, &c. this is Caeſars ſword, which certainly is a carnall weapon, proper to the Kingdomes of this world, Ioh. 18. 36. whereas rebuking, exhorting, promiſes, and Excommunication, are the ſpirituall weapons of the warfare of the Miniſters of Chriſt, 2 Cor. 10. 4, 8, 9. Rev. 1. 16. Eſai 11. 4. Pſal. 45. 4. Rom. 1. 16. The exerciſe of the ſword is a mean of edifying conſequenter by removing falſe teachers, that hindreth edification; but no man can ſay it is a mean of it ſelf, and kindly in regard of the man againſt whom the ſword is uſed; Farther, that which is a common mean of conſerving peace in all ſocieties and corporations, even without the Church, where the Goſpel was never heard, cannot be a kindly mean of gaining mens ſouls that are within the viſible Church.
Erastus. Ambroſe following the example of Azariah, cannot be defendedL. 5. c. 1. p. 302. 303. in debarring Theodoſius from the Sacraments; Yea, it was tyranicall and damnable to debarre a man deſirous to hear the word, who otherwayes repented and acknowledged his fault, from the means of ſalvation. It was like the Popes proud fact in trampling …on the Emperours neck▪ he had no cauſe of wrath againſt Theodoſius, but as Nicephorus ſaith, the Emperour hated Ambroſe.
Anſ. 1. If Eraſtus had come to Logick, he refuteth here but a Law by a fact of Ambroſe. 2. What if Ambroſe debarred Theodoſius from hearing the word; Ergo, there is no Excommunication, it followeth not. 3. That he debarred Theodoſius from the Sacrament, after he gave evidences of his repentance to the Church, is an untruth. 4. That after ſuch a cruell fact of murthering ſo many innocent perſons of Theſſalonica, Theodoſius ſhould have been admitted to the Sacrament, or remained a Member of the Church, to eat and drink his owne damnation, and not be caſt out, as 1 Cor. 5. no man but Eraſtus could ſay: ſo it is cleare, that Ambroſe did no more then a faithfull Paſtor, and Amariah and the 80. valiant Prieſts did, in not ſuffering the holy things of God to be polluted; Lipſius, no religious man, ſaith, l. 2. c. 24. de Conſtantia, quo facto nihil magis impium omnis ve…us impietas habuit. Beza, Bucer, P. Martyr, Melancton, Calvin, Anto. Waleus, Gomaras, commend Ambroſe. And truly to kill ſeven thouſand Citizens of Theſſalonica, of which the moſt part were innocent, deſerved more then Excommunication, if more could be inflicted by the Church. See Ambroſe, Epiſt. 5. 28, 29. Eraſtus had no reaſon to compare ſo laudable a fact to the proud fact of an abominable Pope trampling on the Emperours neck, and abuſing the word of God, Pſal. 91. to defend his deviliſh pride.