A Brief View of Colemans New Model of Church Government

A brief View of Mr. Coleman his new Model of Church Government; delivered by him in a late SERMON upon Job. 11. 20.

LEt it not be offensive unto you; that one (who is not satisfied with what you have delivered in your late Sermon, upon Job 11. 20.) should, with submission to better judgments, offer unto you a few things further to be considered by you; the rather, because you have occasioned not only some scruples to myself upon the reading thereof, but to others also; and yet I do assure you, I am neither of the number of them, who (as your Epistle saith) approved your pains above commendation, nor disliked them below detestation: What I conceive is therein warranted by Divine truth, I willingly approve and assent thereunto: and where I stick (as questioning the truth) I now crave leave to offer my doubts to your second thoughts.

You are persuading to unity in the Church now miserably distracted, and you said that Government is eyed, as the only help to the allaying of that trouble; and for the effectual furthering of that work, you are pleased to lay down to the Honorable House several Rules, or Essays; which I think being weighed in the balance of the Sanctuary, will be found too light, and cannot be made good by the word of God, the true touch-stone of all truth; but how ever my purpose (God willing) is to examine;

1. Your Rules, and bring them to the Test, that we may try whether they conduce to the end for which you propound them?

2. We'll consider, whether you have not unjustly fastened upon some eminent Divines in the Assembly an uneven bya • , which to you seemed to mislead them in the same.

3. Somewhat shall be added of your unbrotherlike slighting of the Assembly.

In all which I shall endeavor with as much brevity as I can to offer unto you my thoughts, and crave your resolution.

I confess it may peradventure seem superfluous for me to examine what you have said, after a judicious trial that is already past upon your Rules by a Reverend and learned Divine: I am of his mind; who thought it was conducing to the benefit of the Church, that sundry books should be written by sundry men (differing in style, but agreeing in the same truth) about the same questions, that the subject insisted on might be made known to many, to some in one way, to others in another.

The Rules or Essays for unity and agreement produced by you I have perused, and do not see what clear reason they carry to make them serviceable to that end for which you offer them; and therefore how they should be either helpful to the work, or useful to the workmen, as yet I see not: For in your second Rule you seem to intimate, that there is no strength in your Arguments, of which according to our light one may conclude different ways: Sure I am, he that should hold out the contrary to all your Rules, might upon as good ground call them Essays for agreement and unity; as for instance, he that should say,

1. Establish as much Jure Divino as may be.

2. Do not straighten Institutions to express Scriptures.

3. Let the Ministers of Jesus Christ be invested with the actual exercise of that power and Government, which Jesus Christ hath betrusted them withal.

4. Let the Civil and Ecclesiastical power both of them act in their own sphere, and not the one encroach upon the other: let it be equal Sacrilege to rob the Kingdom of Christ of the power of the Civil Magistrate, and for the Civil Magistrate to engross all the governing power of the Church.

He that should draw forth rules of this nature, should as much further unity and agreement in the Church, and more, then he that shall adhere to your rules; therefore they seem to me, not to be conducing to the end, for which they are brought forth, but to the Rules themselves.

In your first Rule, you insist on two things:

The first thing in the Rule you drive at, is, That at few things be established Iure Divino as can well be: this Rule would have better become a Politician then a Divine.

Sir, Remember your place: a Divine, his part is to plead for as much as God hath laid down to be his right, reason would require you should either plead for your Masters right, or quit your station to others, who speak in the defense of their masters just cause; are his ashamed to plead our cause, take heed that threatening befall not you, Mar. 8. 38. Or are you afraid to appear for it? where is the cause of your fear? Authority commands you to search for it, why should you then shrink to hold it forth unto them, and by them to the Church? all that I conceive you can plead, is this, It is not clearly held forth to your light, though others see it: have not these things been debated before you, and was there no weight in all those debates: I presume, you being a Member of the Assembly, cannot be ignorant what was there discuss'd in your hearing: I cannot think that you did Obturatis auribus, hearken thereunto: either then give place to their Votes, or in a rational way bring forth your exceptions against them: Paphnucius indeed dissented from the great Council at Nice, but he brought for his Warrant of Divine Authority, and laid about him with the sword of the word; that satisfied the rest, and so they all gave place unto him whilst he pleaded Scripture for what he maintained; do you so, and then shall you wi • your erring Brethren: Hitherto you have▪ only on the bare authority of your word, denied that which is maintained by so many learned men amongst you here, and in famous Churches abroad, with strength of Argument, and authority of the word; herein you cannot but see you are wanting to the cause which you would defend.

Why should you be so shy of holding out of Divine right, a •• we not to endeavor a Reformation of Religion in Discipline and Government, as well as in Doctrine and Worship according to the word of God? Why should we then be afraid of the Jus divinum in the one more then in the other? when I seriously consider with myself, what may be the reason why you bogle at Ius Divinum in Government, and would not have it held out, I cannot but wonder; this was not the practice of God's▪ Ministers in former Ages, when the holy Prophets came either to quicken the people in the ways of God, or to reduce them from idolatry▪ the first thing they did, was to hold forth unto them the Divine Authority, with which they were strengthened to speak, therefore▪ usually they begun, Thus saith the Lord; and is not this the judge • meant of all Reformed Churches, that in all matters of controversy, the Church hath no determining power either without, besides, or against the Scripture; whereby its apparent they conceive as much must be held forth in all controversies in the Church, to be by Divine right established as may be.

Secondly, in this Rule you require, That the practice, but not the ground of the practice, be held out: Why both these two should not be held out, when they may clearly be gathered up, I see not: for, will not the knowledge of the ground always make way for the right settling and ordering of the practice? Some may look upon this position of yours, as upon a Proposition which comes near to the verge of Popish Fide • implicita; because it seems to drive at this, that men should more depend upon the States or Churches authority then on God's word which ought to be the ground of that Authority▪ for in your sense, if they have the practice imposed on them, they must rest therein, and never seek for any warrantable ground of the same, which will yield but small comfort to any in that practice.

Sir, you know that kind of Demonstration hath ever been held in the Schools to be most Scientificall, in which men proceed from the Causes to the Effects; and from the essence of the thing to demonstrate the passions of the same: And why should not that rule hold here? For when men see the ground upon which the practice is imposed, and from which it doth arise; then will they ever more willingly yield unto the practice, and better be established in the same. So have the Church formerly thought, and therefore were ever careful to hold forth to the world the ground of their practice; when the Orthodox had to do with the Arians in Constantius his time, and could come to no accord with them, they sent from the Council to the Emperor twenty of their Opinion, to represent what they held unto him; but withal, they charged them to confirm the Opinion of the Council by the light of the Scripture. Here both the practice, and the grounds upon which they proceeded, were held forth together: And why we should not do the like in this Age, I know not.

The Reasons by which you seem to strengthen yourself herein, are two: First, because Knowledge of that practice alone will gather more: Nay, Secondly, Men differently principled may meet in one practice: You know who said of old, if men live exactly accordingly to the principles of their own Religion, though they agree not in the same truth • , they might be saved. Me thinks in this phrase of yours, you come near him: I would not have that Haereticall spirit, long since laid in the dust, and exploded by the Church, raked up again by you.

Secondly, You say it may be, will be of larger extent then it must be: Suppose that upon prudential considerations, the Rule is carried no higher then i • may be, yet why should not the ground of this it may be, be held out as well as the practice? Can there be more Lordly and Domineering power exercised over the Consciences of men, then to prescribe unto them in maters of the greatest concernment, the practice of that of which there is no ground; o • the ground thereof is not fit to be held out unto the people. In your third Rule, you will call that a Domineering Power, which hath no boundary, do you not in this then make way for such an Arbitrary power? A practice without a ground, hath no bounds but in the wills of men.

In the closure of this Rule, you lay forth the Reason which to you seemed to be the cause that hindered Union in the Assembly: This shall be, God willing, taken into consideration, (when I have viewed all your Rules) in the last place distinctly by itself: And so I come to your second Rule;

In which you mention many things, which because they have no necessary dependence one upon another, I will take them up as they fell from your pen. In general, I say of this Rule, that you do not hold out anything distinct from the former: I take it only for an Explanation of what you meant by jus Divinum, viz. That which only is contained in express and clear Scriptures. But more particularly to the Rule, in which the first thing you fall upon, is, That Institutions should have clear Scriptures: Wherein you drive at this, that no practice without an institution expressed in clear Scriptures, must be a Rule to guide the Church by. How this Rule can be useful for Government in the Church, I see not: But if it should be granted to be good Divinity, it would not more strongly conclude against the Presbyterial Government, then it doth for the Anti-Sabbatarians, Anabaptists, and other Sectaries, &c. who call for institutions expressed in clear Scriptures for many things, which cannot be brought forth: yet the practice of them is very lawful & agreeable to the Word, and necessary in the Church. But Sir, Are there not many things of Divine right, of whose formal institution we read not, where have you any formal institution or precept expressed in clear Scriptures, for Womens receiving the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, of Administring the Sacrament of Baptism in water: And yet if the institution of both these may be gathered out of practice recorded in Scripture, why may it not be admitted? though we read not of the institution totidem verbis: 'It is true, we read of an injunction given by Christ to his Church to Baptize, but whether in Water, or any other Liquor, it is not particularly let down: yet because the Administration of all Baptismes recorded in the Scriptures was by water, it is warrant enough for the Church now to use water in the Administration of it, and who can justly except against it? Where doth the Scripture say expressly that there shall be particular Congregations, to one of which everyone that receiveth the Word should have reference: yet the distinguishing of Congregations gathered from the practice of the Church in the Apostles times, and appropriating officers to them cannot be rejected as unwarrantable, but is held necessary by all. According to your Divinity herein I desire to know of you, why the government of the Church should belong to the civil Magistrate, (as you plead) seeing I find nowhere any precept or institution laid forth in clear Scriptures for it. That which is warranted in the Scripture, to have been the common practice of the Church in the Apostles times, no doubt came from the Apostles. The Apostles ordained Deacons, Act. 6. so did they Elders in every Church, Act. 14. 23. in whose ordinations they used imposition of hands; but where do we read of any express precept in clear Scriptures comcommanding any of these? yet who shall be so bold as to question the Apostles practice in all these, or the Churches continuing of them at this day, by virtue of the Apostolical practice that went before, and gave light unto the Church therein: Did not the Apostles in all things deliver that to the Church, which they received from the Lord, 1 Cor. 11. 23. and did they not by Christ's command teach men to keep what Christ commanded them, Mat. 28. 20. upon which ground Tertullian said well▪ The Apostles did not choose of their own free-will what they should bring in, but they faithfully appointed to the Nations the Discipline which they received of Christ. And I see no reason why we should not believe that the holy Apostles were guided by the Divine instinct of the Spirit, as well in the practice imposed by them on the Churches, as in the delivering of the Gospel unto them; which gave occasion to the Apostle to say, If any man think himself to be a Prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the Commandments of the Lord, 1 Cor. 14. 37.

You add further that an occasional practice, or a phrase upon the by, or the naming of a thing, are too weak grounds to uphold such a building; I say, examples of the Church • practice in the Apostles times, and hints from their writing • doth sufficiently warrant us for the institution of such things for the practice of the Apostolical Church sets out plainly before us, that there was an institution of such things as are read in their practice, albeit in terminis terminantibus we read not of it Ergo, We read of Elders at Jerusalem, Act. 11. which argues that they were ordained, though we read not how and where they were ordained: because the Apostles writing after they had called them, speaks of them occasionally, they that stand precisely upon institutions must confess what Socinus saith, the Apostles practice is not our rule; such must hold what they did was only for those times, and they grant what they did then, is lawful now to be done, but not necessary; conclusions of this nature must necessarily follow upon your premises, and what will follow upon them, I wis • you would in time consider.

Then you tell us, that you could never see two co-ordinate governments exempt from Superiority and Inferiority; this you look upon as a Monster which cannot be in one State, neither is it as you think exemplified in Scripture. Sir, for ought I know here you fight against your own shadow, who saith that two governments which are exempt from superiority and inferiority are in one State: Indeed two governments are asserted, one for the Common-wealth, the other for Church affairs, the Ecclesiastical governors have ever judged themselves inferior to the civil Magistra •• , (to whom they have yielded all due subjection and obedience, in things proper to his authority to command) nay to contradict the civil Magistrates commands, they have judged it madness, yet in the sphere of their own government they moved acoording to the pattern they received from the Lord, the civil Magistrate did not break in op • n them, nor did they ambi • iously seek to exceed the bounds appointed to them by the Lord.

Again, you say, that in Scripture you find no such thing, I beseech you what were the governments appointed in Israel, whereof some were appointed for ordering the King • affairs, or the chief affairs of the Common wealth, the other were appointed for matters of the Lord, were not there two distinct governments, each of them handling what was proper to them; and whether there were two distinct Courts of judicature, in which each of them took cognizance of the matters proper to them, but one, (as without any ground from that Text some conceive?) ye • sure it is, here were two several officers delegated to take notice of the several questions that should come before them: so they were distinct governments, whilst each of them judged or handled what was proper to his place, and might you not observe so much, and is it not to be found in that instance recorded, 2 Chron. 19. I say no more to you herein, only I desire you you may remember what was the vote of the Assembly in this point; Was it not, That Jesus Christ hath instituted a government and governors Ecclesiastical in the Church; This Vote past in the Assembly, Nemine contradicente, it seems then Mr. Coleman had not a tongue to speak against it.

You go on, and fall upon two places on which Censures of the Church ever hath been grounded; as for one of them, it takes no hold on your conscience, and you wonder that the other should of any; I have heard (but how true I know not) that some Soldiers have their bodies shot-free, but that any should have his Conscience Scripture proof, to me it seems very strange, especially knowing what is said, Heb. 4. 12. Why may it not then be mighty in operation to you as well as unto another? But Sir, though you c • st off both these places as not countenancing Excommunication in the least, yet you cannot be ignorant that the Assembly hath resolved Excommunication, and upon a full debate from Mat. 11. they have proved it; as for the other place, they did take that for granted, that it mentioned Excommunication, some debate there was from that place how far the people's presence was required in the execution of it; if you assented not to that debate, why did you not according to the Ordinance by which you sit in the Assembly, enter your dissent.

As for the places themselves (which you say take no hold of your conscience) I am sure that which you say against the common received construction of them, must take less hold on the conscience of the reader: for whatsoever you say against the received opinion (which is just nothing) eâdem facilitate refellitur, quâ asseritur: when you lay down the judgment backed with some reasons (for I know no man that is bound to submit to your naked affirmation, unless it were clothed with more truth) it will be time enough to answer them, hitherto you have added none: only your margent in that place sends us to all books on this subject written heretofore, or lately; in obedience to your command I have perused some, and I will tell you what they say.

The ancients tell us in their books of no suspected credit, 1. That Excommunication was in use in their time, Tertull. Ep. ca. 39. the place is clear and evident, setting down how far it extended, by whom it was exercised, it was an act of judicature which past on such Members of the Church, •• walked not according to the Rule of the Gospel, by the Presbyters: which was so formidable, that it was accounted pr • ludium futuri judicij, a giving notice before hand of the last judgment. In Cyprian there are many places in which he makes mention of this censure: Origen likewise mentions it in several places, as Hom. 11. in Jere. he says, Which we see often to fall out in the Churches: if any man offend in anything, he that Rules the people and governs Ecclesiastical discipline, casts him out from the Congregation of the Saints.

Again he shows the use of it, Hom. 10. in Ezek. So Hom. 7. in Iesaiam. et Trat. 6. in Math.

Secondly, as these assert the use of it, so do they also ground that Ecclesiastical censure upon that place which you admire should take hold of any man's conscience, Mat. 18. Cyprian forbids communion with heretics either at talk or conference, and why? sunt illi de ecclesia profugi, quia scriptum est, si autem et ecclesiam contempserit, sit tibi tanquam Ethnicus et publicanus: That place tells us that he would have a separation from heretics who forsake the Church, and this he proves by Mat. 18. whereby it appears he grounded it on the Text. Ep. 55. and Ep. 76. speaking of the same subject, he brings forth the same testimony: Origen enquiring after the meaning of the Text now before us: sit tibi tanquam ethnicus, &c. acknowledges it is a casting out of the Church. Tract. 6. in Math. and Hom. 7. in Iesaiam, tertio admonitum jubet ab ecclesiae corpore resecari per ecclesiae praesides: Where he speaks of a threefold admonition (before the party be cast off) so doth that Text, then he tells us what followed on it: viz. casting out of the Church; lastly he adds by whom it was done, the Governors of the Church were the men by whom it was exercised. For latter Divines, I appeal to any that hath perused them, whether may not he that shall see their constant expression of both these Texts, rather wonder at the singularity of your opinion in striving against the general stream of all Orthodox interpreters of these places, then you should wonder at any so expounding them, the books which I have seen gives me warrant to say so much: All which are so numerous and full for us, that it would require a volume to recite them all, therefore I pass them over, knowing you cannot deny the truth of this my objection.

Having pleaded against institutions, you add you see not any one act of Government in the whole Bible performed: I beseech you what is the meaning of that place, Tit. 1. 5. I have ever understood ordination of Ministers as a main act of Government, this was delegated by the Apostle to the Evangelist Titus, which he faithfully performed, and was not that act of Government performed in every Church, Act. 14. 23.

Again you ask, how can it be evinced that a ruling Elder is an instituted officer? a man would have thought that you who plead that the whole work of Government of the Church, is cast upon the Civil Magistrate, should not have been so hard hearted towards ruling Officers, as to give them no place in Church Government: Remember you not what the Vote of the Assembly was in this, that It is agreeable to, and warranted by the word of God, that some others beside the Ministers of the word be Church Governors to join with the Minister in the Government of the Church, which Officers reformed Churches commonly call Elders: To this Vote you have entered no descent, and yet can at your pleasure speak against it. I pray you again consider how fairly herein you deal with the Assembly, in which the several places of Paul were understood and construed upon long debate for the same Officers, 1 Tim. 5. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Rom. 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 1 Cor. 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : All these were clear • up in the Assembly, to be amongst those, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 why may not that Text be translated, whom he hath instituted in the Church? 1 Cor. 12. 28. one of these places Rom. 12. tells us of a Ruler distinct from a teacher, that of 1 Cor. 12. speaks of Governors in the Church, distinct also from other Officers there mentioned by him, and this was then, when no Civil Magistrate was Christian; the third 1. Tim. 5. 17. is a mandatory place, commanding the Church how to use them, and what to do to them; even to give the • double honor: is not this enough, that the Scriptures mentions their Office in the phrases and titles, wherein they speak of them, and then tell us in what account they are to be had. When God hath by his Apostle said, that thus and thus they shall be honored, who shall question whether God would have such Officers in the Church, or no? and for mine own part, that of 1 Cor. 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , is to me warrant enough for institution.

These were Officers called to assist the Minister, in watching over the lives of the Members of their several flocks; for is it not as needful, that there should be some whose charge is to see that men live according to the Rule, as th •• there should be others to teach the Rule, and others to see that the necessities of such as were in want, should be supplied▪ Therefore Christ hath appointed the Pastor to teach, Elde • to assist in Government, and the Deacon to sce to the poor.

You quarrel the institution of this Officer; somewhat hath been already spoken of institutions, to which the Reader is to be referred: I only here add this; We read of many particular Officers of the Church, recorded in the Scriptures, as Rom. 12. 1 Corin. 12. Ephesi. 4. but their institution is not formally mentioned in them, yet we question not the Officers. Where do we read of a formal institution of an Evangelist, or a Prophet, of a Pastor or Teacher? We read of all these among the gifts & administrations given by Jesus Christ for his Church; why should any startle at a ruling Elder, more then at these, or call for their institution, more then for the institution of the other? The Apostle tells us that Christ hath appointed Pastors and Teachers, who can bring forth their institution; why should we seek for the institution of Elders more then of other Officers, especially when the Apostle speaks of the respect due unto them, but intends not to speak directly of the Officers themselves in that place 1 Tim. 5. 17. and elsewhere reckoning up the Officers of the Church, he names them; is not that sufficient to us?

Sir, were there no other argument to plead for these ruling Officers in the Church; yet this is of some weight with me, that as I find they are mentioned, to have been in the Apostolical Church: so have they continued when in succeeding ages the Church was in puri • ie: here could I bring forth unto you variety of testimonies; by which it may appear,

1. That in the ancient Church there were such Officers.

2. That they were distinguished from them that taught in the Church.

3. That they were distinguished also from other of the people.

4. That they had a hand in that Government of the Church, all which reverend Antiquity makes good, but I forbear to weary you with instances; these things being abundantly of late cleared up in opposition to the Prelates, who engrossed all Government into their own hands, to which Treatises I refer the Reader: Only before I pass from hence, I desire it may be taken into consideration, if we cast out this Officer from the Church, how we shall divide ourselves from other well reformed Churches, to whom we have solemnly vowed to God to come as near as we can. Now what Church is there among them, that holds not out these Officers as established by divine authority? If learned Calvin, acute Beza, solid Za • chi • , famous Junius, &c. were all these or any of them to read your Sermon; would they not wonder at your judgment, and plead against you for these Church Officers▪ I say nothing of the advantage that you give to Papists on the one side, to the Prelatical party on the other, all which will not a little triumph in that singularity of your fancy in this.

And lastly let me (besides all the light both of the ancient and present Church, given to these Officers) put you in mind what past by the 32. learned men appointed first by Henry 8. and afterwards by that pious Prince Edward 6. Whe • they drew up a draught of the reformation of Ecclesiastica •• laws, they denied not these Officers a place in the Gove •• meant of the Church; but tell us, when the Sermon and evening prayer is ended on the Lord's-day, the Minister shall •• sult cum senioribus, with his Elders about such, whose • m •• ners are reported to be evil, and their life's found flagitious: First, in a brotherly way of charity according to Christ's c •• mand in the Gospel they should deal with them, if they herkened to their admonition, then thanks are to be given to God; if they persisted in their sin, they were as the Gospel prescribes, to be punished: Here are they named by their names seniores, (who are distinguished by them from Ecclesiarum gardiani, or Church-wardens of whom they speak distinctly afterwards,) Secondly, they make mention of their office, which is to assis • the Minister in watching over the lives of the flock, and taking order with such as walk unruly, or not answerable to the Gospel: And what said the Assembly more of these Officers (against whom you plead) then hath been held forth both by the Holy Scriptures, and Church of God in several ages, all which are slighted by you; but whether it will be more safe to adhere to Gospel-light, when we are compassed with such a cloud of witnesses, or to go alone with you, let all the Church judge: To me it is enough, that the Scriptures mentions these Officers, the ancient Church acknowledged and received them, and the present best reformed Churches own them, and may not all this evince to any of a moderate disposition, that an Elder is an Officer in Christ's Church? In your third Rule, you desire no more burden of▪ Government, be laid upon the shoulders of Ministers, then Christ hath laid upon them, and the Holy Ghost hath clearly given them: In the first place I take notice here, that you moderate what you said in the closure of your former Rule: Where you affirmed, that you see not any one Act of Government in the whole Bible performed; Here your marginal note would incuse that, wherein you tell us, you take Government for the correcting part; but let us try, whether even that part hath not lien • pon such as preached the word: Did not the Apostle deli • er up to Satan, Hymenaeus, and Alexander, 1 Tim. 1. 20▪ 〈◊〉 which phrase Excommunication i • constantly understood; tis true, some (especially of the Greek Fathers) add, that when any were given up to Satan then some extraordinary judgment followed upon the parties so delivered up; yet all agree in this, that none but Excommunicated persons were delivered up to Satan: here then was an act of Government performed by Paul; and who would not think that Paul was a Minister of the Gospel, yet exercised a corrective part of Government, and who dare say, that Jesus Christ endued him not with power to enable him thereunto. Nay, not only did he exercise that corrective part of Government himself, but he requires the Corinthians to do the like to the incestuous person, 1 Cor. 5. 5.

But to the words of your Rule; you advise to lay no more burden of Government upon the shoulders of Ministers, then Christ hath laid upon them, and to let them have no more hand therein, then the holy Ghost clearly gives them; albeit, you would be thought to express yourself warily in this advice, yet I guess at your meaning by that which follows; you should have spoken out plainly thus, Let the Ministers have no hand at all in the burden of the Government, for so you express yourself afterwards, give us Doctrine, and take you government: Its true, Ministers have other work enough, this is not denied; and therefore Christ hath added others to them in the work of Government, by whose advice and furtherance they should be aided therein; shall I once more remember you that the Assembly Voted, That the Pastor as a Pastor hath a ruling power over the flock: What? have you resolved to be Anti-Synodical in all your Rules, and yet sit whilst these Votes pass, and not appear against them in entering your dissent, and now be • ch out what you please against these Votes? none of which past without long debates and serious consideration of the question in hand; assuredly a more favorable construction of the Assembly proceedings would better have become a Member of the Assembly.

To your Assertion; how plainly and clearly the burden of Government is laid upon the Ministers, hath been before shown to you: I shall only add, that he that doth deny the ruling power of a Minister in his charge (so clearly held out in Scriptures) had need to bring more convincing grounds, then these fetched either from his own unfitness for the work, or other men's abuse of their power by ingrossing too much, when ever they had a hand in any, which yet are the only grounds you▪ insist upon.

For the former; whilst you plead your own unfitness for the work, me thinks you express a great deal of pride, when yo • would make a show of humility: consider your words again▪ Might I measure others by myself, and I know not why I may not; Is not this your meaning? you have reason to think as meanly of others, as you do of yourself; but the Apostle, Phil. 2. 2, 3. exhorting to Unity, to be of one accord, and one judgment, gives this rule; in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better then himself: in your Epistle you are more ingenious, there you speak confidently of some Reverend men who distaste these passages in your Sermon, that their wisdom and humility may be trusted with as large a share of Government as themselves desire.

I grant that the work is great, and the burden heavy, and do not you call to mind who said it, Who is sufficient for these things? But I hope you will not thence infer, Therefore let no man meddle with them.

For the latter, viz. the abuse of that power▪ That power which you cannot weaken by strength of Argument, your endeavor to disparage, by odious comparisons of it with Prelacy and Papacy, as being that which plunged the Christian world into confusion and blood for many hundred years past; all this you seem to impute rather to the nature of the power, then to the abuse of the same. You call it a domineering power, a Prelatical honor, therefore you would have it bounded, that it might be said, Hitherto shall you come, and here shalt thou stay thy proud ways.

Sir, these Rhetorical flowers (such as they are) might have passed with some for an ornament to Martin his late Echo; but how harshly they sound in a Sermon to the Honorable House of Commons at a Monethly Fast by Mr. Coleman, an applauded Preaches of the Gospel, let the Reader judge; how deeply all this reflects upon the Government held in all the Reformed Churches, I forbear to mention. Your Argument is good against the Popes and Prelates sole power in jurisdiction, which they engrossed to themselves, Lording it not only over the people, but over their fellowbrethren, divesting them of that right and power committed equally to all Ministers: this we complain of as much as yourself: but whilst you would make an Argument of this, your inference is as weak, as your comparison is odious. It is as if you should say, because Diotrephes loved the preeminence among his fellow-laborers, abusing the power betrusted to him, by ingrossing it to himself, therefore let not Ministers have a hand in ruling anymore, least they die as Diotrephes did. The Apostle prescribes no such way of cure, all that he infers upon it, is only this, 3 John. 11. Brethren follow not that which is evil, but that which is good.

But Sir, I desire in earnest to know of you: Whether it was Church Government, that brought forth those hideous inconveniences (you have mentioned) or was it the usurping power of Prelates and Popes sheltered under the name or vizard of Church-Government, that thus imbrued the world in that blood, and raised those combustions? Had you followed in this question that grave Counsel, given of old by Irenaeus, you might have learned better; His Counsel was, When any disputation about any question did arise, that men should have recourse to ancient Churches, by whose practice they might be informed, what to think of the present question: Had you consulted with the best and purest Churches of old, you might easily have seen your error, in not distinguishing the power granted by Christ unto the Church, and exercised by them in the purest times, from that boundless (the true Seminary of all the troubles mentioned by you) power usurped by Prelates and Popes afterwards: the not observing hereof led you into that error, which now you vent: their Government was a plant in the Church, which Jesus Christ will never acknowledge to be planted by his Heavenly Father. Had you consulted with Master Tho: Coleman on the Covenant, he would have told you, that the Prelatical Government was most wicked and Anti-Christian, that it is not possible it should be convenient for a State or Kingdom; therefore it is no marvel if it caused stirs in the world: if you believe the exercise of Ecclesiastical Censures in the Church to be such • , speak it out plainly, and prove it if you be able. All the while the Church exercised no other power then what Christ granted, then was the Church free from the Domineering power you speak of: for when any question did arise fit to be judged or considered of, it was heard and debated 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Presbytery; for then they thought with Cyprian, that Singulis pastoribus portio gregis est adscripta, quam unusquis{que} regat & gubernet, ratio nem sui actus Domino redditurus; Epist. 55. So went they on, each taking care of their own flock: If any question did arise which was too hard for them to determine; then they called in the help of their Sister Churches: The same Author gives the reason of it.

Therefore are there many Priests cemented with mutual agreement and the bond of unity, that if any of our College should strive to raise up an Heresy, or to rend the flock of Christ, the rest should help, and as profitable and merciful Shepherds, should gather in the Lord's sheep into his flock. The Church then went on in a friendly agreement and sweet amity, no wise ensnared with ambition, or seeking to domineer one over another; for though the Churches (as Basel speaks of them that went before him) Were many, yet were they all guided by one Rule, then were the people united together, and their Pastors were endued with that mutual love one towards another, that one did use another as a Master or a guide. All this while their faithful adhering to the exercise of the power granted to them by Christ, gave them no occasion of raising tumults, of plunging the Christian world in confusion and blood. But afterwards when by the bounty and liberality of Christian Princes and others, Church-men grew great in the world, laying aside their main work (the Preaching of the Gospel) to which they were called, and gave themselves to affect worldly greatness, and to wait upon secular affairs; this gave them occasion to strive to exalt themselves one above another: Thereupon followed divisiors in the Church, and all the stirs that troubled the world afterwards. Then came Prelates and Popes to act their part, each of them striving to engross all power in his own hands; then did they strive to exalt their own Jurisdiction, deserting the Government established in the Church. These things cannot be unknown to a man of your parts, which makes me to wonder that you should fasten these foul consequences upon the true Government of the Church, by which they never were produced: any Sophister can tell you your fallacy herein, that you reason a Non causa pro causa, and therefore I cannot excuse you for your injust insinuations, whereby you seek to fasten no small hatred upon Church-Government, which, with your favor; is your gross mistaking of the thing in question.

Then you add all that you have said of this exorbitant power of Prelates and Popes, was authority abused. No Sir, the question now, is not whether they abused their Authority or not? for no man doubts thereof, but the present question is, whether that Authority, which they pretended, was that Church Government we now speak of, and which you oppose? This I deny, and leave it to you to prove who hath mentioned it: Their Authority was usurped, and inconsistent with that which by Gospel Charter was granted to the Church, as before hath been explained. Again, all the abuse of their Authority, you fancy to have been in the transcendent greatness, or unsufferable height of it; and therefore you put this Question, Who shall set bounds to it to prevent the like? I Answer, Authority devised by man, can hardly be stinted by man, so ambitious is man in the pursuit thereof: It is said of Romulus, that he would appoint no bounds to the Fields of the People, that so they might go as far as ever they could, taking from others and adding to their own, that by this means they might believe, that whatsoever they could possess themselves of by their arms, it was their own: Thus men set no bounds to their ambitions designs, but close with all occasions that may enlarge their own • urisdiction.

You ask, Who shall bound this Authority to prevent the like? Who shall bound it, but he who is the Author of it? Was there ever any Court of Judicature appointed by men, which was not bounded by such as did authorize it at the first? And can we think that Jesus Christ, the wisdom of his Father, shall appoint a Government for his house, and not prescribe limits to it beyond which the Governors of it must not go?

Let me follow you, and add further, it was not Government that bred Enmity between the Clergy and Laity, (as you suppose) as appears by the Amity and Concord in the Church amongst all her Members, whilst the right Government took place: But when they left that, and followed their own devices, usurping power to themselves, which Christ never granted to them, then came they to be •• bittered one against another.

Lastly, you come to crave of the Honorable House of Parliament, two things: 1. That you may have Learning. 2. Competency; and Government you leave to them. For advancing of Learning, you desire, That Schools of Divinity may be set up, &c. Is not right Government a means of furthering Learning? When Julian would have suppressed, not only Church Government, but the Church it self; he indeed denied Christians means of Learning for their Children: But Church-Government did never abridge them thereof, but rather sought to establish it, and encourage them therein: A • Paul did exhort Timothy, 1 Tim. 4. 13.

As for that you require that we may have in our Classical meetings: Had you taken notice what is done in these meetings in in other Churches, (where they are through God's blessing well settled) then you might have seen all you mention, there more fully act •• then here you relate them, and so you might have forborne what here you seem to desire in this.

I say nothing to the competency which you crave for a comfortable subsistence: Church Government will be no enemy to that, knowing that such as Preach the Gospel should live thereon: For who goeth a warfare at any time at his own cost, 1 Cor. 9. 7.

In your fourth Rule you tell us, A Christian Magistrate is a Governor in the Church; And why, Christ, you say, hath placed Governments in the Church, 1 Cor. 12. 28. Nay, You finds no institution of other Governments besides Magistrates.

Concerning the Civil Magistrates power mentioned by you▪

First, your expression is ambiguous, when you say, The Christian Magistrate is a Governor in the Church: if you mean he hath a stroke in the Government of the Church▪ Its granted, because, as Godwilling, we shall hear by and by, God hath raised up Christian Magistrates to be Nursing Fathers to his Church, which they do when they see that Government exercised, which he hath appointed for the well ordering of his Church, though it be not managed by the Magistrates immediate hand; and in this respect they ought to manage their office under and for Christ, as you say▪ But if you mean that there are none, by whom the Discipline of the Church is to be exercised, but by the Magistrate, that (as I conceive) is your mistake. Truly, here I cannot but wonder that you (who stand to have the Scriptures speak expressly, and to have institutions appear institutions, that all may bow, ) should herein aver what you say, and yet bring forth no express testimony of Scripture to confirm your judgment: Nor yet mention any express institution to make good your opinion: The place which you have wrested to ground it on, shall afterwards be tried.

Secondly, You say, A Christian Magistrate is a Governor in the Church: Yet you are not ignorant how many ages past, before the Church had any Christian Magistrates members of it; and can it be thought, that God would have his Church all that while without a Governor, because there was not a Christian Magistrate to supply that place?

Thirdly, in as much as the Apostle would not have the Church to bring Questions about their 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 before Heathen Judges; I wonder why any should think them only fit to Judge and determine 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

But to come nearer to the Question in hand: For the clearing of the Truth therein, I desire you to consider:

1. What God hath expressed in Scripture, to be due to the calling of the Civil Magistrate.

2. What the Church hath ever willingly afforded thereunto.

3. What the Christian Magistrates have done, in and about the Government of the Church?

The opening of truth in these several branches, will make clear the Question in hand, that all may see, whether the Magistrate be the sole Governor in the Church?

For the first, God hath taught his Church, that all respect and obedience (which is consistent with obedience due to himself) is due to the Honorable calling of the Magistrate: Yea, so exact is the Lord herein, that he will have no soul ( i. e. no person) exempted from the same: Where Chrysostom says, That neither Prophet nor Evangelist is free from that subjection, neither is Religion prejudiced thereby. 2. The Lord Commands, That Prayers and Supplications be offered up for Magistrates. 3. That Tribute, Custom, Honor and Fear be given to them: There was Bread: that is, maintenance given to the Rulers, Nehem. 5. 18. 4. As their honor was to be upheld, so their persons and lives to be secured and defended, 2 Sam. 18. 3. &c. All these things and more, are by Divine Authority to be given to that Honorable calling of the Magistrate.

Secondly, In the performance hereof, God's Church, neither Ancient nor Modern, hath ever been wanting. As for the Apostolical Church, what they were to perform towards the Magistrate may be read in the several instances pressed upon them by the Apostles, already quoted in the former branch: For the succeeding Churches, (before that hideous Monster of Popish Supremacy started up) let Tertullian speak for all: Did not the Church in his days freely testify their opinion of that calling, though then executed by Heathens: Yet did they honor the Emperor so far as was lawful for them, they acknowledged him, as being next under God the Supreme Power on Earth.

Amongst Modern Divines, there is a full harmony in their opinion herein with the Ancient Church; witness their several confessions, in which they mention the Magistrates office, they confess Religions curam in • primis pertiner • ad Magistratum sa •••• : They conceive the care of Religion in the first place belong • to 〈◊〉 . Withall, they add, how he may discharge that duty; when in the fear of God he maintains the public Peace, furthers the publishing of the Truth, prevents by his Authority the spreading of Error &c. They further tell us, That Magistrates ought to • ule their Subjects, that their Common-wealths may be as Sanctuaries, or safe harbours for the Church.

They have gone farther, (as may be seen in the former Confessions) and set forth the difference between the Civil and Ecclesiastical Government, wherein they have adhered to the holy Scriptures. The Magistrate his power is over the outward ma • , to keep that within due obedience; to this end, that all may live peaceably and quietly one with another: But the Church of God is all her Government, seeks to maintain a communion amongst her members, in holiness, that the Doctrine of our Savior may be adorned, and they mutually build up themselves in their holy Fa • th.

Secondly, The Civil Government hath a principal respect to the outward estates of men; but the Government of the Church doth principally aim at the right ordering of the inward man, t • bring that to due obedience unto God. Whilest Tertullian • pounds that place, Give. unto Caesar, the things which are Casari • He says, Caesari quidem pecuniam tuam reddas▪ Deo tem • t ips ••• alioquin quid erit Dei, si omnia Caesaris? He would have M • give their money to Caesar, and themselves to unto God; otherwise what shall the Lord have, if Caesar have all? Ecclesiastical Government, doth especially respect the right ordering of the heart, that it may give that obedience unto God, which is due unto him. To this purpose speaketh Augustine: In the things which appertain to this life we must be subject to powers, that is, to men Honorably admi •• string human affairs: But in the things whereby we are taught to believe in God, and whereby we are called to his Kingdom, we must be in subjection to no man: Thus these holy men teach us, that the one Government watcheth over the body, and the bodily estate; but the other over the soul: And they that manage this Government, must (according to the Scriptures) so watch, as they that must give account thereof to God.

Thirdly, They tell us the Magistrate is ber • usted with the Temporal Sword, in this life to honor and reward such as do well: or to terrify and punish such as do amiss, either against the first or second Table; but the Sword of Church Government is Spiritual, Eph. 6. 17. which she useth both in the defense of her Children, and just offense of her Enemies.

Lastly, They tell us, it is not the Civil Magistrates part to exercise the Government of the Church, but to see that it be fulfilled and exercised aright by those upon whom God hath laid it, as Constantino, Theodosius, Arcadius, Marcianus, &c. have done.

These Pious Emperors did not with Uzziah adventure upon that to which they were not called, 2 Chron. 26. 16. But they followed the practice of worthy Hezekiah, who first commanded the Levites and Priests to fulfill the duties of their places, 2 Chron. 29. 5. 27. Then he commanded the People to fulfill what God required of them, 2 Chron. 30. 1. And in so doing, he is said to cleave to the Lord, and keep his Commandments, 2 King. 18. 6.

Sir, you see what God's Church in all ages according to the Scriptures, hath held concerning the Civil Magistrate; yet none of them tell us what you hold out, that the Government of the Church is by God divelved on the Magistrate. If you can find that either in the Scriptures▪ or warrantable records of the Church, I beseech you bring it forth, and let the world see you are not alone in venting of this new Divinity, to which the Christian world hath been a stranger for so many hundred years.

Lastly, for the full clearing of this truth, to all who are willing to receive the truth: I desire it may be taken notice of, whether the Christian Magistrate • have challenged Church Government, as a work proper unto their place? If Jesus Christ have devolved it upon that calling, why then should not Christian Magistrates have owned so much, and challenged their right therein? which we read not that they did: We read indeed of many pious Emperors, to whom the welfare of the Church was dear, and whose care of the Government of the Church appeared many ways; They saw that the officers instituted by Christ in the Church, should attend their places in Governing of the same, yet they never took upon them the work of Government it self; that famous speech which fell from Constantine the Great, in the presence of divers Bishops is well known, v • t quidem intra templum, ego autem extra templum a Die • onstitutu • sum Episcopus • His meaning was, that God had appointed him to see them fulfill the work to which God had called them unto in his Church, his Imperial place bound him to see that done by them; but not to fulfill it himself▪ For he clearly distinguishes between the administration of the affairs ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) within and without the Church. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was far from him: He kept himself where he was, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , where God had set him.

Secondly, we read that when the Church was troubled with any unruly Member, that would not submit himself to Her Government; such by the power and authority of the Magistrate were reduced to order: For by the Imperial power, and Counsels of Bishops, heretic • s have been suppressed: As Arius was banished by Constant. M.

Thirdly, we find further that when a question hath had much debate in the Church, and yet was brought to no final conclusion, the Emperor heard the cause debated, and so put an end unto the same, as appears in the case of Caecilian and his adversaries; which being twice heard in Episcopal Synods (the paries not resting in their resolutions) at length it was heard and determined before the Emperor; but what did he therein? only hearing the cause fully discussed, he made such as were refractory, give way unto the truth, but he did not determine it himself.

Fourthly, Emperors were so far from challenging any Power in Ecclesiastical Government, as proper to their places, that when it was exercised upon themselves by Church Officers, they willingly submitted to it: Let that memorable instance of Theodosius witness it. It is storied of him, that having caused in his fury 7000. Thessalonians to be slaughtered, afterwards coming to the Church of Milan • , Ambrose goeth forth to meet him, and after a long speech denies to admit him; yea bound him with that heavy sentence of Excommunication, with which he stood bound for eight months. This godly Emperor: did not tell Ambrose he had no power to do it, He pleaded not that it did belong to his Imperial Crown, to determine who should be shut out, or admitted into the Church nay rather, he acknowledged to R • ssinus (a principal Officer of his Court) the equity of the sentence, he could tell him: He kn • w well (that is, Ambrose of whom he is speaking) what was the Office of Priests, and what was proper unto Kings.

Doth it not appear by that memorable passage, that that Christian Emperor was not of your mind, to think the Government of the Church was his let, as you suppose? No, he durst not assume that to himself, which you affectionately strive to lodge in them, who never sought it, but your bolt is soon shot; and forward you are to grant that to the Magistrate, which Christian Magistrates never owned, nor challenged as their due: I beseech you if they had a Divine right unto it, why did they not exercise it? We have heard that what they did (as the Religious Kings of old, David, J • hosaphat, Ez • kiah, &c.) they were careful to see Church Government exercised by such as were appointed thereunto by the Lord; If any were disobedient, they drew forth their authority against them, to make them stoop unto it, which gave occasion to the Bishops (when they humbly sued to Arcadius to have John banished) to say, Ecclesiastical and Civil affairs, or duties, differ. The care of the one, they say, is commended to the Emperor, the administration of the other to Church Officers.

May not all this now observed from the Scripture, and read in the constant practice of Christian Magistrates, let you see, that God's Church hath ever given the Magistrate that wherewith God hath honored his place, which was his due; and that the Magistrate ceased to require more. Their care was to move in the sphere wherein God had placed them, neither would they go beyond it, in stretching their authority to do that, whereunto they were not called of the Lord.

Now to your construction of Governments mentioned, 1 Cor. 12. 28. we'll briefly examine what you say herein, and that is only this, Christ hath placed Governments in his Church, and you find • no institution of other Governments besides Magistrates; of Magistrates you do, Rom. 13. 1. 2.

Sir, that Christ hath placed Governments in his Church, with the Scriptures affirming it, I fully agree: As also, that there are Civil Magistrates, to whom obedience is to be yielded by all, I likewise do agree; but that there are no other Governments in the Church, but the Civil Magistrate, I cannot assent to that assertion; Nay, I conceive your inference from that Text, 1 Cor. 12. 28. (which Magisterially you lay down, without the least show of proose) where Governments are mentioned, therefore the Civil Magistrate must be understood; it is an inconsequence, and to me of no more validity then his was, who said, that Tenterton steeple was the cause of Goodwin Sands; because these Sands were first discovered, when the structure of the steeple was first begun.

Its very probable to me, that you do expound this Scripture, just as a Divine (well known to you) once preaching at the taking of the Covenant, did expound Cant. 6. 4. where he brings from a Rabbi, a rotten exposition: Which was so improbable, th •• himself says of it, he doth not deliver it as the true sense of the place; yet it did not dislike him, because it seemed pretty: Or you do herein as he did, who when he preached, that Hezekiah was the first man that ever was sick in the world; and did recover; being asked if he believed that Jewish tradition, answered, he neither believed, nor questioned it. I believe that you in your exposition of this Scripture do the like, you do no • deliver that which you think is the true sense of the place, only it pleased you, and you inconsiderately vented it. For who sees not that it is an inconsequence • Christ hath appointed Governments, therefore these Governments must be understood of the Civil Magistrate, that consequence cannot be inferred on these premises, the Text duly considered will free it self of that construction of Governments, which you bring.

That we may clearly see it, set us consider the scope of the p •• ce, 1 • Cor. 12. 28. amongst other disorders which had crept 〈◊〉 the Church of Corinth, (all which the Apostle labors to reform) this was one in their public meetings, the abuse of their gifts, (with which the Church did much abound, 1 Cor. 1. 5.) this • e labors to remove, by setting before them the author of these gifts, even the holy Spirit of God, by whom they were disposed to the several Members of the Church, to edify the Church withal And lastly, he sets forth of all these gifts which is the most excellent and useful to the Church; all this he ^l doth, because as some excelled in these gifts, so others were grieved that came short of their fellow Members in the same; upon this occasion he inform • them about these gifts, which he calls spiritual, 1 Cor. 12. 1. Because they were wrought by the spirit: and first, he mentions the several 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 gifts where with the holy Spirit had blessed that Church; then he mentions the Officers upon whom these gifts are bestowed, ver. 28. for the edification of the Church: Several sorts of these Officers are reckoned up, and here amongst them, Governments are mentioned, which cannot be understood of Civil Magistrates, because the Apostle is speaking there of such Officers is were endued with spiritual gifts for the edification of the Church in their public Assemblies, the abuse of which gifts he is laboring to reform; and can you upon any warrantable ground affirm, that the Civil Magistrate was to exercise his Office in their public Assemblies? its true, the Church exercised the corrective part of their Government in their public meetings; but what is that to the Civil Magistrate.

Amongst the several Officers of the Church, in three several places (as we have touched before) mention is made of some that were interested in Government, and are distinguished from Teachers, Rom. 12. 8. 1. Cor. 1 • . 28. 1 Tim. 5. 17. in the first, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , A Ruler, in the next 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Governments; in the last 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that rule well, who are distinguished from such as labor in the word and Doctrine.

Shall I tell you what have been thought of these: One saith, they are the chastisemerts of the fl • sh▪ And what is that I beseech you, but the wholesome Government we speak of, and for which we plead? whilst that prudent men observing the lives of the several Members of the Church, and finding any to give way to the unruly desires of their flesh, by admonition did chastise them, or bring them under further Ecclesiastical censure, that they may • ame the flesh: This construction is answerable to that of Origen, who tells us, there were some 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , appointed to inquire after the lives of such as came under their Government, to keep off such as did not, that which did beseem them that professed Religion, especially such as walked in uncleanness: Did not such labor to chastise the flesh, whilst they endeavored the just restraint of the unfruitful work thereof. Theodoret, he calls these Governments, Rulers of the Church, which he distinguisheth from Teachers; these Greek Fathers never dreamed of the Civil Magistrate in that place: Ambrose on the place saith, Governments are such as teach men by spiritual restraints: All which lets see that in their construction, Governments were such, as by the rod of Discipline chastised such as waxed wanton, or were unruly in their lives: which gave occasion to • rimasius to say, Gubernationes, qui sciuni singulas gube •• are; these were prudent and grave men, chosen to assist the Pastor in watching over the lives of the flock; so was that place construed of old to which late in •• preters also agree; therefore I say no more but this: I find that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is used by the Grecians for one that is wise in Council, so it is four times used by the Septuagint in the Proverbs, as Prov. 1. 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a man of understanding shall attain wisdom, Prov. 11. 14. Where no Counsel is, the people fall, where many Counsels are, there is health: that which is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the former part of the proverb in the latter end is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , many counsels, •• Prov. 20. 18. & 24. 6. In all which places the word signifies a prudent or wise way of Governing: Now then comparing the use of the word in the Language of the Grecians with that of the Apostle, may we not from thence conclude, that there was in God's Church a wise or prudent way of Governing, distinct from the Civil Government, of which Officers somewhat heretofore hath been spoken in your second Rule.

As for the Magistracy mentioned, Rom. 13. 1. we agree with you therein; what you would infer from the three last verses of Eph. • . (which you desire all to consider ) that may make for your purpose I know not; and therefore will stay no longer upon it: and so much for your Rules or Essays for agreement.

Now I come to speak of that which seemed to you to be the only hindrance of union in the Assembly, which you mentioned in the latter part of your first Rule; where you speak of two parties who came byased into the Assembly, the one with a Congregational • gagement, the other with a National determination.

Here you only take notice of two parties in the Assembly, and were all the rest Cyphars? In what rank or number do you place yourself? Well, as for the one party upon whom you hang the bias of a Congregational Ingagement: you speak much to their commendation; yet it seems to me that you have dashed, in this ••• sure, all that praise you gave unto them: Can men worthy of • o • e for their graces, of honor for their abilities, be men, whom their bare singular opinion will bias from the truth? Surely if you believe that they would be so easily carried aside, notwithstanding their engagement by Solemn Protestation, you cannot believe (what ever you seem to say) that they are indeed men worthy such praises: but because they are of age and able to speak for themselves, I leave it to their wisdom to Apologize for themselves, and return you an Answer to your unjust challenge of them.

And as for the other party wronged by your Byas, because they are strangers, and came voluntary to assist the furtherance of the great work now in hand (whose modesty will not give them leave to speak in their own just defense) I shall on their behalf add a word.

Sir, You charge the Honorable & Reverend Commissioners of the Church of Scotland, for coming byased into the Assembly, with a National determination, being for the jus Divinum of the Presbyterial Governement: This you say was a hindrance also to union in the Assembly.

That they who have deserved so well, should hear ill, from such as are not acquainted with their learning or moderation, is neither new nor strange: but with what face could you a Member of the Assembly, charge this upon them? Who could not but know how they have always demeaned themselves in the Assembly, and what Honorable mention the Assembly had upon all occasions made them, and what Testimony they gave unto them for their usefulnes in the Assembly, and their moderation in all their debates.

Have you forgotten these expressions in a Letter sent from the Assembly, to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, dated January 6. 1644.

And those expressions in another Letter to the said General Assembly, dated May 6. 1645. speaking of the said Commissioners,

Again in the same Letter, taking notice of a passage in a Letter from the General Assembly.

These things I have expressed in the Assemblies words, that the world may see how you deal both with them and the Assembly▪ And from all these passiages, what is to be inferred let the Re • der judge: The Assembly acknowledge their Zeal, Judgment, wisdom and moderation expressed in their carriage, the great assistance they had from them, in their indesatigable labors, for which the whole Church both in England and Scotland owes much unto them: Nay more, saith not the Assembly, that they did not so hold out their own judgments, as to condemn ours, and they • ought no more to impose anything upon us, then we upon them▪ All which and more r ••• ndis verbis, is affirmed in the Letters▪ Now let the impartial and judicious Reader speak, if a National determination did by as them in their concurrence with the Assembly: You say it did, and the Assembly denies it.

Though this might be sufficient to wipe off that unjust aspersion so unworthily cast upon them by yourself, a Member of the said Assembly, present at all these debates, and assenting to them, or at least not dissenting from them: Yet to make it further appear▪ that this your bold and uncharitable censure, delivered▪ with so much confidence, is notoriously false, let their constant carriage in the Assembly speak, and I am content yourself in your second and more advised thoughts shall be the judge.

I appeal unto you, whether they have not often professed their readiness to Reform themselves • s well as •• , according to the Word of God, and according to the Covenant, not to engage u • • o receive their Disciplin • , be •• use determined already by their Church; but to endeavor the Reformation of Religion in the Church of England and Ir • land, in Doctrine, Worship, Discipline and Government, according to the Word of God, and the Example of the best Reformed Churches, and to bring (not us to them) but all the Churches in the three Kingdoms to the nearest Conjunction and Uniformity.

Besides their frequent expressions this way, let their Paper presented to the Assembly, Novemb. 10. 1643. speak for them in these words;

Secondly, you cannot but know, that as the Assembly always waved the Dispute of the jus Divinum, in those points that are controverted, in most of their Votes rather determining what may be, then what must be: So none were more forward in this then the said Commissioners.

Thirdly, I appeal unto you, whether upon all occasions they did not declare themselves (none more) zealous in the promoting of anything that might tend to Peace and accommodation: For the promoting whereof, their grave and prudent advise, counsel, and their Christian and Brotherly condescension (as occasion was offered) hath made them very useful in the Assembly, and deservedly honored by them.

Fourthly, You cannot deny, but that the Assembly was engaged both according to the Covenant, and to several Orders of the Honorable Houses, to have the Reformed Churches (and surely, the Church of Scotland will be by all, not byased with a prejudicate opinion against them, acknowledged to be one) in their eye; And yet, I again appeal to you, whether the Commissioners in all their debates, did not rather endeavor by their Arguments from Scripture and Reason, which did take hold on their Consciences to confirm the Propositions in debate, then to impose anything upon the Assembly, from the bare Authority of their Church? Nay, did you ever hear them so much as offer to hold forth the Authority or Practice of their Church, as an Argument whereby to persuade to anything?

These things I thought good to offer to your second thoughts to chew upon: And if all this be granted (which I am confident you cannot deny) you have good reason to be sorry (to use your own words in your Epistle) that you should give offense: Yet I can▪ not but tell you, it is but a poor amends to complement with them in your Epistle, and so deeply to charge them in your book▪ in hanging your by as on them, who run so fair to the mark▪

How you have dealt with the Assembly▪ comes now in the last place to be inquired into.

I confess I have heard you say, that you have not in any pass • g • of your Sermon, crossed any of the Votes of the Assembly formeth past, and sent up unto the Parliament; but when I did peruse the Votes, and compare them with divers passages in your Sermon, I could not but wonder at your confidence in this, and know not what to infer from thence, but only this: Surely then either▪ you did not well understand what yourself had written, or else were strangely mistaken in the sense of the Assembly: but let the Re • der judge.

If I understand you aright, you deny Church Government performed by Church Officers, affirming that you see not an institution, nor any one act of Government in the whole Bible performed, ( viz. by any Church Officer) setting up the Christian Magistrate as the only Church Governor, and that jure Divine: And therefore expounding the Governments which Christ hath placed in his Church, 1 Cor. 12. 28. By that of Magistrates, Rom. 13. •• Then you do not only deny the Ruling Elder to be an instituted▪ Officer, but also take away the power of Ruling from the Minister.

I pray you therefore for my satisfaction, and the satisfaction of many others, who are much unsatisfied in this particular, Reconcils these your opinions and the several Votes of the Assembly▪ wherein the cont • ary to all these assertions is plainly assur • ed; as may be observed in the several Votes mentioned before.

You do indeed crave in your Epistle, A latitude for your judgment: It is not denied unto you; but are you bound in Conscience to hold out your difference of judgment unto the Parliament? If so, you cannot be ignorant what course was prescribed to the members of the Assembly, in case of dissent in any point, you should have entered your dissent and brought in your Reasons: And then I doubt not but you should have received abundant satisfaction • What should put you upon this course I see not, except your undervaluing of the Advice and judgment of the Assembly▪ or the over-weening conceit of your own sufficiency, that in a work which yourself acknowledge, doth require the deepest head, and the greatest abilities: you should think yourself more fit to interpose your advice then the whole▪ Assembly.

If your advice had been only additional of something omitted by the Assembly, or in some things of lesser moment, differing from the advice of the Assembly, it might have been the better born: But when you shall as much as in you lies, endeavor to undermine the very foundations, and destroy the whole▪ Fabric of all Ecclesiastical Government, by subverting the Pillars of it▪ this cannot but by sober men be judged a boldness, that none but yourself would have been guilty of.

Or if your advice had been backed with Reasons that might have been convincing, we should have thanked you for your light: But when you take liberty to dissent, not only from the Assembly here, but from all well Reformed Churches, without producing the least sh • dow of proof; And so oppose your own private judgment to the Resolutions and Determinations of the Assembly, and all other Churches both Ancient and Modern: thinking it Confutation enough of their Scripture proofs to tell the world, that they take not h • ld on your Conscience: Who can but blame you for your pride herein, as if 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or ipse dixit, were sufficient to bear out whatsoever so great a Rabbi sai • h?

Sir, Though the advice of the Assembly did not take hold upon your Conscience; yet your Covenant should: Which you did not only take yourself, but encouraged others thereunto in your Sermon, Preached and published by Command of the Honorable House of Commons: You did lift up your hand unto the most high God and Swear, To endeavor the Reformation of Religion in the Kingdoms of England and Ireland, in Doctrine, Worship, Discipline, and Government, according to the Word of God, and example of the best Reformed Churches, and to bring the Churches of God in the three Kingdoms to the nearest Conjunction and Uniformity in Religion, Confession of Faith, Form of Church Government, Directory for Worship and Catechizing, that we and our Posterity after us, may as Brethren live in Faith and Love, and the Lord may delight to dwell in the midst of us, &c. But in this New-Model of Government of yours, you have rather endeavored to hinder this blessed work, and to stir up Authority to suppress it: For according to your advice, Church Government by Ecclesiastical Officers (as it is generally followed in the best Reformed Churches) should not be Reformed but abolished.

Did you not covenan • to endeavor the 〈◊〉 of Schism yet • how you will acquit yourself • • rom one of the greater Schisms and rents from • all the of Christ I do no • yet see, when you would • estroy that Church government, which they do▪ all acknowledge and submit unto and would introduce in the room of it another in the civil Magistrate▪ which Christ's Church did ever yet acknowledge, nor did • ver any Christian Magistrate assume unto himself.

In fine, though you slight our Sister Churches, I dare no • though you at your pleasure •• st off that government which Christ's Church hath • ever embraced, and fasten all the government thereof▪ upon the Magistrate: Give me leave with admiration of 〈◊〉 boldness, and self confidence, to conclude with the judgment of two grave Authors: The first is, Tertullian; what shall▪ w •• follow, or what shall we c • use? we cannot reject that custo • e we cannot condemn▪ it is not strange, seeing it comes not from strangers, but from them with whom we are sinked in piece, and to 〈◊〉 we give the name of Breth ••• : he durst not condemn the •• c • stome, to whom he gave the n • me of Brethren, and the hand of fellowship, yet you dare, I and oppose them: The Author is learned Calvi • , (whose judgment in the Exposition of Scripture •• hath ever by judicious men) who says •• ey are inconsiderate men who give to the Civil Magistrate the power of • ll things.

Now in what rank are you to be placed in, who cut your yourself▪ off from all the Churches with whom you profess an agreement? Shall I say to you as Constantine said to Aresiu • the N • vatian, Provide you a ladd • r by which you may god to heaven 〈◊〉 : Seeing you have no mind to go hand in hand with your sister Church • in government, but put off all that work to the Civil Magistrate, may you not be r • n • ed in the • oule of those • nconsiderate men, who distinguish • o • between that Civil and Ecc • es • asticall function? yet know at length, it is good s • pere ad sobri • ta •• m; this I wish to you • and 〈◊〉 commit you▪ to the Lord.