AMongst many heterodox and unsound opinions, that are started up in these times, there is one concerning the pow­er of the Magistrate, viz. that it reacheth only to the 2. Table, civill affairs, not to the first Table, matters of religion. So that let any hold and practice in reli­gion what they wil, let them vent and publish doc­trins never so horrid and blasphemous, yet according to this Tenet, the Magistrate may not curb nor restrain them, he hath nothing to do to meddle with them. This opinion being most fals and of dangerous conse­quence, is newly broached here in this City, York, Jan. 1646. and o­penly maintained by some, both in disputation and in the Pulpit. And therefore I have thought meet to discuss the Point at this time, that if any of you be ig­norant, you may be instructed; if wavering, you may [Page 2] be resolved if mis-perswaded and possessed with error in this particular, you may be convinced and reclaimed. To this end I shall endeavor by Gods help to manifest the truth unto you, and to clear it from those mists that some cast about it, to obscure it. This premised, I come to the words of the Text, For he is the Minister. &c.

For the coherence of these words, to fetch it no fur­ther then needs must, the Apostle in the beginning of this Chapter begins to treat of the Magistrate, and the dutie which people owe unto the Magistrate. Let every soul be subject to the higher powers. v. 1. Subjest, viz: either actiuely, if the thing commanded be law­full, passively if it be unlawfull. That this subjection is due unto the Magistrate, the Apostle proves by two arguments. 1. for the ordainer of the Magistrate, viz. God; It is God that hath ordained him, and therefore people ought to be subject unto him, and not to resist him; for to resist the Magistrate, being ordained of God, is to resist Gods ordinance, and so to provoke Gods indignation. For there is no power, but of God; the powers that be, are ordained of God. Whosoever there­fore resisteth, resisteth the ordinance of God; and they that resist, receive unto themselves damnation. v. 1. & 2. And then, secondly, he proves it by an argument drawn from the end for which God hath ordained the Magistrate, viz: the great good and benefit of people, to containe and keep them in order, to protect and defend them that do well, and to correct and punish them that do evil. For rulers are not a terrour to good works, but to evil, Wilt thou then not be afraid of the po­wer? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same. For he is the Minister of God. &c. v. 3.4. Then from these premisses he inferrs the con­clusion, [Page 3] therefore you must needs be subject not only for wrath (for fear of punishment) but also for con­science sake. i. e. out of conscience towards God, who hath ordained the Magistrate and hath given him his authority, and that for the preservation and wel­fare of those, who are under his authority. Thus I have brought you to the Text, and somewhat beyond it; and this may suffice to shew the coherence of the words. For the explication of them, much needs not to be spoken, there being no great difficulty in them.

For he [ viz. the Magistrate, called the power, v. 3. Is the minister of God,] that is, ordained of God, and subservient unto God, and that in such an eminent manner that God communicates his own name unto I have said ye are Gods, Psal. 82.6.

To thee [whosoever thou art, that art under his autho­rity for good] i. e. for thy good, that thou mayst do good, and receive good.

But if thou do that which is evil [ viz: the evil of sin: For there is an evil of punishment, which though it be evil, as evil is taken for painfull, yet as evill is taken for sinful, so it is not evil, but good, if it be inflicted on those that do deserve it, and by those that have power and authority to inflict it. In this sense God himself is said to do evil, yea all evil that is done in this kind, is said to be done by him, who yet can do nothing but what is good, that is, just and right. Shall there be evil (any evil, viz: of punishment) in a city, and the LORD hath not done it? Amos, 2.6. Be afraid [ viz. of the power, i.e. the Magistrate] as 'tis expressed v. 3. If thou wilt do the evil of sin, look to suffer the evil of punishment.

For he beareth not the sword in vain. [1. The Ma­gistrate [Page 4] is not in vain armed with power and authority, but to this end, that he may smite and punish such as do evil, for he is the minister of God, a revenger &c.] Private revenge is forbidden, Rom. 12.19. Avenge not your selves. But the Magistrate being a publike per­son, and appointed of God to this end, to take ven­geance on those that do evill, he may and ought to do it. This is not against that, Rom. 12.19. Vengeance is mine, I wil repay, saith the Lord. No, what the Magistrate doth by vertue of his office, to which God hath called, and of his authority, wherewith God hath invested him, that is as done by God himself.

Doct. The words being thus explicated, the doctrin which I observe from them, is this, That Magistrates are ordain­ed of God, for the maintaining and defending of those that do well, and for the restraining and punishing of those that do evill.

This doctrine is clear and evident from the text, and being thus indefinitly propounded, they with whom I have had somewhat to do already in conference and dis­pute, and with whom ( i. with their opinion, I shall still have to do at this time) they, I say, do not deny, but they limit it, and wil have it understood only in things civill, not in matters of religion. This therefore is that which I shall apply my self unto, to prove that the Ma­gistrate hath a just and lawful power, as well in things that concern the first, as in things that concern the 2. Table; as well in matters of religion, as in civil mat­ters. But that none may mistake, let this be known and considered, that we do not ascribe such power to the Magistrate, as the Papists do to the Pope. We do not hold, that the Magistrate may prescribe forms of religion, as he pleaseth: this was Ieroboams sin, 1 [Page 5] King, 12.28. &c. Nor that he may performe those things which belong to the minister, as to preach, bap­tise, &c. This was it for which Vriah was Plagued, be­cause he would needs take upon him to execute the Priests office, 2 Chro. 26.16, &c. But we hold and main­tain, that the Magistrate hath a power to erect, preserve and establish that religion which God in his word hath commanded, and to cause both ministers and others to performe those things (in respect of the outward act) which God doth require of them, and to restrain and punish them, if they transgress; not only in things con­cerning the 2. Table, but also in things concerning the first Table. [And this is all that is meant by that title of supream head, or supream governer, which we give unto the King] which makes me to wonder much atsome (whom otherwise I reverence & esteem for their works sake) who have lately inveighed sore against this Title, alledging the censures of Calvin and the centurists upon it, whereas it is well known, that the English Divines long before these times, have shewed that Calvin and the Centurists did mistake the meaning of the Title, and supposed it to imply such an exorbitant power, as is attributed to the Pope by the Papists; so that the true meaning of it is no more, then what they, and all Orthodox Divines do yeeld unto the Magistrate. This hath been made so clear, that not only Ject. D. No­wel against Dorman, Dr. Rainolds Con­fer. forrain Pro­testants, but even Rivot in Decal. Hart in the Conf. with D. Rain. Papists also, some of them have been Satisfied.]

But to return to the point, and the proof of it, a­gainst those that would so limit the Magistrates power, and restrain it to civil affaires.

1. It is a rule, Non est distinguendum, ubi lex non di­stinguit, Argum. 1 i. we must not distinguish, where the law [Page 6] doth not distinguish. And therefore the Apostle not so limiting the power of the Magistrate, we may not so limit it. The Apostle in the text, and the verse be­fore the text, Speaks of the Magistrate as having power from God to punish evil doers, and to protect those that do well, he doth not limit this to things that concern the 2 Table, neither is there any ground for this limi­tation. See also 1 Pet. 2.14.

Exception 1. Yes, say some, the Apostle in the verses following, v. 6.10. doth limit that which goes before.

Answ. Let that be considered, For, for this cause, &c. verse 6. There the Apostle only shews, that there­fore tribute is payd to Magistrates and Rulers, be­cause they must apply themselves to the execution of that office to which God hath called them, viz. the rul­ing and governing of people, the protecting and prefer­ing of those that do well, and the correcting and punish­ing of those that do evil. And hereupon v. 7. he exhorts people to render unto Magistratrs, and not to them on­ly, but to all, that which is due unto them; Render therefore to all their dues, tribute to whom, &c. And v. 8. proceeding in his exhortation, as it is generall, and concernes the rendering of that which is due unto all, he bids, Owe nothing to any man, but to love one ano­ther: Intimating that love is such a debt, that can ne­ver be so payd, but stil its due. And to shine up to a careful performing of this duty of love, which all con­tinually owe unto al, he sets forth the excellency of love, Saying, for he that loveth another, hath fulfilled the law. And that love is of such an excellent nature, as that the whole law (viz: of the 2. Table, of which he speaks; for he speaks of that love which men owe one to ano­ther) is fulfilled in it, this he proves v. 9.10: for this, Thou [Page 7] shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not steal &c. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour, whence he inferrs, Therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. Thus the whole Series, and Method of the Apostle's discourse be­ing considered, it plainly appears that his mentioning of the duties of the 2. Table, is not to this end, to shew that the Magistrate hath power only in and about things of that nature, but quite to another purpose, viz. to prove that in loving one another is comprehended the sum and substance of that whole law, namely of the 2 Table, which concerns the duty of men towards one another.

Except, 2. Others therefore fetch the ground of their limitation from another place, viz: that Mat. 22.21. Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesars, and to God the things that are Gods.

Answer: But surely that place affoords no ground for it; our Saviour there indeed intimates, that some things belong unto God, which do not belong to Caesar, (of which we make no question; for faith and affiance, re­ligious worship, and obsolute obedience in all things are due unto God, not so to Caesar,) but that it belongs not unto Caesar to intermeddle in matters of religion, this our Saviour there shews not; no, those words, Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesars, and to God, the things that are Gods, were alwaies of force: there were always, some things (viz. those before specified) belonging unto God, and not unto Caesar, yet it is most vident and undeniable, that in some ages Caesar, i. the Prince and Ruler hath had, and exercised this power which we now contend for, and that lawfully and lau­dably. And so I pass to another argument drawn from the just practice of good and Godly Magistrates.

2. Therefore I argue thus; The best of the rulers of Argum. 2 [Page 8] Gods people of old, have put forth their authority in matters of religion, and are commended for it. I will not stand much upon the examples of David and Solo­mon, not because they were types of Christ, as some have answered concerning David, and the same may be said of Solomon also, but because they were Prophets as wel as Kings, and what they did in this kind, for the most part they did not as Kings, but as Prophets, as appears by 1 Chron 9.22. & 28.19. & 2 Chron. 8.14. To let pass therefore these examples, I wil only urge the exam­ples of those who were Kings only, and not Prophets, as of Asa, Jehoshaphat, Ezekiah and Josiah: How Asa put down Idolatry, and caused the people to enter into a strict and solemn covenant to serve the Lord, is re­corded 2 Chron. 15. Of Jehoshaphats care concerning religion, how he took away the high places & the groves out of Iudah, and sent Priests and Levites throughout the land, to teach and instruct the people, we read 2 Chron. 17. How Ezekiah restored religion, opening the doors of the Temple, which Ahaz his Father had shut, caused the Preists and Levites to discharg their of­fices, and the people generally to keep the passover, &c. we find 2 Chron. 29. & 30. & 31. And so of Iosiah, how he destroyed idolatry, repaired the Temple; and kept a most solemn Passover, 2 Chron. 34. & 35. Thus did al these famous Princes, & that not by any peculiar power and authority, but such as is common to all Rulers and Magistrates within the compass of their Iurisdiction. which wil further appear by the next argument.

Argum. 3 3. Therefore I argue from the commendable practice of heathen Magistrates, who having the people of God sometimes under their dominion, have made good laws and decrees concerning religion: which shews that all [Page 9] they ought. See to this purpose Ezr. 6.14. & 22. Ezr. 7.21.23.25.26.27. So whereas Nehemiah caused the chambers belonging to the Preists to be cleansed, and the Sabbath to be observed &c. Neh. 1.3. He had his commission from Artaxerxes, Neh 2. See also what a decree Nebucadnezzar made, Dan. 2.29. and Darius Dan. 6.25, 26.

4. If this power be not granted to the Magistrate, Argum. 4 great evil and mischief wil ensue, the Church wil be most miserably pestered with Sects and Heresies, and all manner of impiety. This is noted as the occasion of Micahs idolatry, that there was no King ( i.e. no Ru­ler, or Magistrate) in Israel, but every one did what seemed good in his own eyes. Judg. 17.6. And so of the Idolatry of the children of Dan, Judg. 18.1. In these two places the want of a Magistrate ( who is to restrain and shame them that do evil, Judg. 18.7.) Is noted as the occasion of that disorder that was in the Church, even as in two other places, viz. Judg. 19, 1. & 21.25. It is noted as the occasion of that disorder that was in the Civil state.

Object. But some may say, that in the Apostles days, and along time after there was no Magistrate to take care of religion, therefore no such necessity of a Magistrate in that respect.

Answ. I answer; that the Apostles were indued with an extraordinary power, which sometimes they did exercise upon haynous transgressors for the admo­nition and terror of others. Thus Peter struck Anani­as and Sapphira with sudden death, Acts 5. And hereby great fear came upon all the Church, and upon all that heard of it. v. 11. So Paul smote Elimas with blind­ness, Acts 13. Whereby the Deputy Sergius Paulus was [Page 10] astonished, and converted. v. 12. So that the extraordinary power of the Apostles might wel then supply the want of a Christian Magistrate. And for the times after the Apostles, until Constantine, besides that the Church was continually under persecution, what a flood of heresies did break in, appears by the writings of Irenaeus and Tertullian, who lived in those times.

5. It is promised, that in the times of the Gospel, Kings shal be nursing fathers, and Queens nursing mothers to the Church. Isa. 49.23. But this they can­not be, except they have power, & put forth their pow­er in matters of religion, which do especially concern the Church, as wel as in Civil matters.

Except. 1. Some answer, that Kings and Queens are promised to be nursing fathers, and nursing mothers to the Church, in that being converted, they shal hold forth the grace of Christ unto others.

Reply, But so may any of the Saints do, though of the meanest rank and poorest condition: its true, the examples of Kings and Queens are more conspicious, and more taken notice of; but to be nursing fathers and nursing mothers, imports a power and a care to cherish and maintain, to protect and defend, which is much more then to hold forth by example. Therefore the Apostle gives this as a reason, why we should pray, as for all, so more especially for Kings, and those that are in authority, that under them, ( i. e. under the wings of their protection) We may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness, and honesty. 1 Tim. 2.1, 2.

Except. 2. Some grant that protection and defence is implyed in the titles of nursing fathers, and nursing mothers; but this protection and defence, they wil have meant only in outward and civil things, not [Page 11] in things belonging to Religion.

Reply. But 1. To be nursing fathers, and nursing mothers to the Church, as the Church; must needs im­ply a protection and defence of the Church in matters of Religion; for it is Religion which gives being to the Church, and by Religion it is that the Church doth differ from the Civil State or Common-wealth. 2. Meer heathens and infidels may have, and usually have this benefit by their Kings and Queens, to be protect­ed and defended in their civil rights and liberties; but the Prophet speaks of a special benefit, which the Church shal have by Kings and Queens above others. 3. The Apostle, 1 Tim. 2.2. requires us to pray for Kings, and those that are in authority, that under them we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life, as wel in all godliness (which concerns Religion) as ho­nesty.

Argum. 6 6. It is Prophesied in respect of the times of theGospel, Zech, 13.3. That if any shal Prophesy falsly to draw away unto Idolatry, his father and his mother that begat him, shal say unto him, thou shalt not live; for thou speakest lies in the name of the Lord; and his father and his mother that begat him, shal thrust him through when he prophesieth. This shews that in the times of the Gos­pel (of which times this is Prophesied, as appears by v. 1.) there shal be a restraining and punishing of false Prophets, false teachers and seducers.

Except. Some answer that all that is here held out unto us, is this, that in the times of the Gospel, false teachers that go about to draw from Christ, shal be most odious unto true beleevers.

Reply. This is not all, but that they shal also be re­strained and punished, as those words plainly import. [Page 10] [...] [Page 11] [...] [Page 12] They shal say unto him, thou shalt not live, and they shal thrust him through.

Object. But it is objected, that the words are not to be taken literally, for that, so parents should kil their own chil­dren, whereas it is unlawful for any private persons to kil others, and most unnatural for parents to kil their children.

Answ. I answer, They are said to do it, because they pro­cure it to be done, viz. by the Magistrate, whom they shal inform against those seducers, that so they may receive condigne punishment. A parallel place to this, and which doth serve fully to illustrate this, there is, Deut. 13.6, 10. If thy brother, the sonne of thy mother &c. entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go serve o­ther Gods &c. Thou shalt not consent &c. neither shalt thou conceal him; but thou shalt surely kil him, thine hand &c. Mark here, Thou shalt surely kil him. viz. Who­soever thou be'st that art inticed unto idolatry. But how is this understood? may any one take upon him to kil such as would draw him away from the true God? No, he must not do it himself, but procure it to be done, by such as have power and authority to do it, as the words before do shew; thou shalt not conceal him. i. thou shalt complain of him to the Magistrate, and shalt inform him against him. So the words fol­lowing shew as much, Thine hand shal be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hands of all the peo­ple; i.e. Thou having witnessed against him, and the Magistrate having condemned him, thou shalt throw the first stone at him. For so the witnesses used to do, as we see Deut. 17.7. And mark also that which follows, v. 11. And all Israel shal hear and fear, and shal do no more any such wickedness as this amongst you. This [Page 13] reason shews the precept to be moral, and to bind in all ages, Q. d. The wickedness is exceeding great, and therefore he that is found guilty of it shal die for it, that so others may fear to do the like.

I wil add no more arguments, these may suffice to prove that Magistrates are ordained of God, for the protecting and preserving of those that do wel, and for the correcting and punishing of those that do evil; and that not in civil matters only, but also in matters of Religion.

Objections. Answered. Some objections are made, which must be answered.

Object. Tit. 3.10. An heretick, after the first and se­cond admonition, reject. Here, say some, the Apostle requires only that an heretick being obstinate be reject­ed. i.e. Excommunicated, cast out of the Church, not re­strained and punished by the Magistrate.

Answ. The Apostle wrote to Titus, and signified what he and the officers of the Church should do; as for the civil Magistrate, the Apostle had no reason to men­tion him, there being as then none but such as were A­liens from Christ and the Gospel. But doth it follow because the Church must reject and excommunicate an Heretick, that therefore the Magistrate hath no power to restrain him from preaching and publishing Heresie, and to punish him for it? Surely no more, then it follows, that the magistrate may not punish for incest, because the Apostle writes to the Church at Corinth to cast out the incestuous person. 1 Cor. 5.

Object. But they object again and say, what punish­ment doth the Gospel appoint for Heretical teachers and maintainers of false opinions in matters of Re­ligion?

Answ. 1. I may demand also, what punishment [Page 14] doth the Gospel appoint for theeves, murtherers, in­cestuous persons, &c. I do not find the Gospel to ex­press any punishment to be inflicted by the Magistrate more upon these then upon the other; expresly nothing, that I know, is prescribed against either, but by conse­quence something is prescribed against both; in that the Gospel doth approve, confirm and ratifie the Ma­gistrate to be a terrour unto evil works, and a revenger to execute wrath upon those that do evil, Rom. 13.3, 4. which (as hath been said) holds as wel in things concer­ning the first as the second Table.

2. As it is in respect of offences against the second Table; so it is also in respect of offences against the first Table; greater or lesser punishment is to be in­flicted, as the offence is more or less heinous; That place, Zech. 13.3. being a Prophecy concerning the times of the Gospel, shews, that in some case, death it self may and ought to be inflicted upon false tea­chers.

Object. But, say some, if the Magistrate be allowed this power to preserve and maintain truth in matter of Religion, and to curb and restrain error; he may either through ignorance or malice, or both, happen to do quite contrary, to restrain truth and maintain error.

Answ. It may so happen indeed, and hath often so happened, otherwise there had not been so many Mar­tyrs. But what then? The power in it self is good, and being rightly used doth work good, and shal it therefore be denyed and disanulled, because it may be abused, and so work evil? By this reason the Magistrate shal have no power at all, not so much as in civil things; for he may abuse and pervert also this power, he may condemn some as being theeves, [Page 15] murtherers, traytors, &c. who are no such men but most innocent persons.

Object. But some object that in the Parable of the tares, Math. 13. where the master would not let the servants pluck up the tares as they would have done, but bid them let them grow till the harvest, and then they should be plucked up. Hence they gather that Hereticks and such as maintain false doctrines, whom they understand by the tares, must not be punished nor restrained, but let alone until the end of the world, which Christ himself shews to be meant by the harvest.

Answ. This Parable makes no more for a toleration of Hereticks then of theeves, murtherers, and all wic­ked ones whatsoever; for if we wil heed our Saviours own explication; by the tares are meant generally the children of the wicked one, v. 38. All things that offend, and they that work iniquity, v. 41. Object. But are all the workers of iniquity to be let alone until the end of the world? Answ. No, that's not our Saviours mea­ning, but the scope of the Parable is to shew, that how­ever some may imagine, yet there wil be a mixture of good and bad here even until the end of the world; and that then, and not before, shal be a full and perfect se­paration of the one from the other; The same is signi­fied by the Parable of a draw-net, Mat. 13.47.— 50. Thus the Doctrine being sufficiently confirmed, and the Objections made against it answered, let us come to the Uses of it.

Ʋse. 1 And 1. It serves to convince and recliam, if it may be, those that are of the contrary opinion, and to teach and admonish all to beware of that opinion: It is an opinion injurious unto God, injurions to his vice­gerent, [Page 16] injurious to his people. 1. Injurious unto God, opposing his ordinance. 2. Injurious to Gods vicegerent, the Magistrate, devesting him of that pow­er wherewith God hath invested him. 3. Injurious unto Gods people, depriving them of that benefit which they might and should have by the Magistrate, and for want thereof exposing them to great and manifold inconveniences.

Ʋse. 2 2. To confute the Papists, who though they seem to give unto the Magistrate this power, yet indeed they withhold it from him: For they make him only a Vassal to the Pope, and those of that Hierarchy; to execute their Canons and Decrees, to punish such as they have pronounced Hereticks, and to cause that doctrine which they propound to be embraced, and those rites which they enjoyn, what ever they be, to be observed. Whereas, if private persons must prove all things and hold fast that which is good, 1 Thes. 5.21. then much more must Magistrates do it; Though they must not do things of themselves, but must advise with godly and able Ministers, and be instructed and di­rected by them out of Gods Word, yet must they not tye themselves to the dictates of men, but must have the book of God, the holy Scripture, continually with them, and exercise themselves diligently therein, and by it try things, Deut. 17.18, 19, 20. before either they receive them themselves, or cause others to submit unto them.

Ʋse. 3 3. To stir us up to pray continually unto God in the behalf of our Magistrates, that they may be enlight­ned by his Spirit to discern of things that differ, that so they may be able to use their power aright to edifi­cation and not to destruction; for the supporting of [Page 17] the truth, not for the suppressing of it; and that they may be incited and stirred up to do it. Thus the Apostle exhorts and requires us to pray and make supplications, as for all, so more especially for Kings and those that are in authority, that under them we may lead a peaceable and a quiet life in all godliness and honesty, 1 Tim. 2.2. We may see, and it is worthy to be observed, that accord­ing as the Kings and Rulers of Gods people were good or bad, so Religion either flourished or decayed; under Asa, Jehosaphat, Hezekiah and Josiah it flourish­ed: Under Rehoboam, Ahas, Manasses, &c. it de­cayed.

Ʋse. 4 4. To stir us up to praise and glorifie God for such Magistrates when any good doth accrew unto the Church by them: As we must honour the Magistrates themselves so much the more, by how much the more they put forth themselves and exercise their authority for the preserving and maintaining of Religion, and for the procuring of the welfare and happiness of the Church, as they did Jehoiada the high Priest, who had been Tutor to King Joash in his non-age, and car­ryed himself worthily in that place of dignity and power; at his death they did him the honour to bury him among the Kings, because he had done good in Israel both towards God and towards his house, 2 Chron. 24.16. So chiefly our care must be to acknowledg the good hand of God upon us in vouchsafing to give us such Magistrates, and to make them so instrumental to our good, and to give him the praise and glory of all; The King granted me (said Nehemiah) according to the good hand of my God upon me, Nehemiah 2.8. So of Ezra, it is said that the King granted him all his re­quest (viz. which he made in the behalf of Ierusalem [Page 18] and the service of God) according to the hand of the Lord his God upon him, Ezra 7.6. And having rehear­sed the decree that the King had made and the com­mission that he had given him concerning the worship of God, and the affairs of the Church, he breaketh out into this doxology, Blessed be the Lord God of our fa­thers, who hath put such a thing as this, in the Kings heart, to beautifie the house of the Lord, which is in Jerusalem: And hath exten­ded mercy unto me before the King and his Counsellors, and before all the Kings mighty Princes, and I was strengthned as the hand of the Lord my God was upon me, Ezra 7.27, 28.

IN the beginning of this Chapter Solo­mon bids, Remember thy Creator in the daies of thy youth; and he shews why every one ought to have this care, viz. because in old age we can neither be so serviceable, neither can our service be so acceptable; this is signified in those words before the evil daies come, and the years draw nigh, wherein thou shalt say, I have no pleasure in them: the daies of old age are evil daies, i. e. full of trouble and sorrow; in which sense Iacob said that his daies were evil, Gen. 47.9. Old age is subject to diseases and distempers; Senectus ipsa mor­bus, it is it self a disease. And therefore also the years of old age are years wherein a man hath no pleasure, see Psal. 90.10. and 2 Sam. 19.35. And are we then in old age fit to do God service? Or is it fit to put off the serving of God until old age? Shal we think that God wil have pleasure in that service which we put off till those years come, wherein we our selves have no plea­sure? Solomon having thus generally set forth in the first verse how unmeet it is and unreasonable to cast off the remembrance of God until old age come, he goes on in the next five verses to describe old age and to set [Page 20] forth the troublesome and uncomfortable condition of it more particularly: the description is very elegant, but allegorical, and therefore obscure; I may not now stand to explain it, but must come to the 7. ver. which I am to insist on, wherein he shews what old age tends to, and what follows upon it, viz. death and judgment, Then shal the dust return &c.

Then] viz. when old age hath worn and weakned the body and dissolved the frame and temperature of it.

Shal the dust] i. e. the body which was made of dust, Gen. 2.7.

Return to the earth as it was,] According to that Gen. 3.19. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return to the ground, (or earth); for out of it wast thou taken; for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou re­turn.

And the Spirit] i. e. the soul, as the word Spirit is taken 1 Cor. 6.20. and so in other places.

Shal return unto God] viz. as the Chaldee Paraphrast dothwel interpret it, [...] i.e. to stand (or ap­pear) in judgment before him, to be judged and senten­ced by him. For it is appointed unto men to dye once, so after this the judgment, Heb. 9.27.

That gave it) that created it, and infused it into the body, see Gen. 2 7.

The words being sufficiently explained, I come to the Observations to be gathered from them.

Observ. 1 And the first is this, That the body is mortal, Then shal the dust, i. e. the body, return to the earth, as it was. The Apostle cals the body, in respect of its condition here, mortal body, Rom. 6.12. and so Rom. 8.11. Its called a Tabernacle, 2 Pet. 1.13, 14. & 2 Cor. 5.1. A Tabernacle hath no foundation as a house hath, on­ly [Page 21] is made fast with cords and stakes, but the cords are soon loosed, and the stakes pluckt up, and so the Ta­bernacle dissolved. Its said Iohn 1.14. that the word was made flesh, and [...], we read it, See Beza. dwelt a­mong us, but the word signifieth, to abide in a Taber­nacle, it imports that Christ had a mortal body.

But how comes it to pass, that the body is mortal? did God make it so at first? No, had man continued such as God first made him, he had never died. His body indeed being compacted of corruptible matter, was naturally apt to be corrupted, but by a supernatu­ral power it should have been preserved from corrup­tion. Augustine speaking of man, as he was at first created of God, saith wel, mortalis erat conditione cor­poris animalis, immortalis beneficio creatoris, i. e. In re­spect of the natural constitution of his body, he was mortal, but through the goodness of his creator he was immortal. It was sin that brought mortallity. What day soever thou dost eate thereof [viz. of the forbid­den fruit] [...] dying thou shalt die, i. thou shalt certainly die; so God threatned Adam, Gen. 2.17. Not that immediatly upon his transgression his soul should part from his body, but immediately he should become mortal, and subject to death, as Symmachus did wel interpret it, [...], i. thou shalt be mortal. In this sense are the very same words used, 1 King. 2.37 It shal be (said Solomon to Shimei) that on the day thou goest over, and passest over the brook Kidron, thou shalt know for certain, that [...] dying thou shalt die, i.e. thou shalt certainly die. Shimei died not that very day but then immediately his life was forfeited, and he made himself liable to death, Whensoever So­lomon should please to inflict it upon him. [Page 22] And thus it was with Adam upon his eating of the for­bidden fruit; presently the sentence of death passed on him, dust thou art, and to dust shal thou return, Gen. 3.19.

Thus Adam by his transgression made himself mor­tal. Yea, and not himself only, but all his posterity also. For all were included in him, and his sin was the sin of all, and so in him all became mortal. In A­dam all die, 1 Cor. 15.22. viz. because in Adam all did sin. By one man (namely Adam) sin entred into the world, and by sin death, and so death went over all &c. Rom. 5.12.

Obser. 2 I pass to a 2. Observation, viz. this, That the soul is immortal; the spirit [doth not go to the earth, as the body, but] doth return to God that gave it.

True it is, there is a death of the soul, a death in sin, Ephes. 2.1.5. And a death for sin, Revel. 20.6. It is there called the second death, because there is another death for sin before it, viz. The death of the body, which death (as hath been shewed) came by sin, and for sin; but after this comes a second death for sin (if sin be not remitted through Christ) viz. The con­demnation of the soul, first, and afterwards both of soul and body. The first death is but temporal, but the second death is eternal.

But this death of the soul, whether in sin, or for sin, is but metaphorically and improperly called death. The soul dies not so as to cease to be that substance which it was before; in this respect it is immortal. The bodie turns to dust, but the soul subsists, and remains for ever. One in these times hath set forth a book pur­posely to prove the soul to be mortal in like manner as the body is mortal, maintaining, that when a man dies, his soul dies as wel as the body. A most gross opinion, [Page 23] and directly contradictory to the Text in hand, and to ma­ny other places of Scripture, which by no art or subtilty can be eluded. He would evade this Text that we have in hand, by saying, that it imports no more then what is said, Psal. 104.29. Thou takest away their breath, they die, and return to their dust. But these places are not so parallel, as he supposeth. For the taking away of the breath, which the Psalmist speaketh of, is a cause of death, and therefore, at least in order of nature before death; for so the cause is ever before the effect: because God takes away from his creatures their breath, therefore they die; but here the spirits going to God is a conse­quent of death; First, a man dies, and then, as his body goes to the earth, so his soul goes to God. This clear­ly argues a subsisting of the soul when a man is dead, and that the soul doth not die together with the body. Test. 2 So elsewhere in the Scripture the Spirit of God is plain, and plentiful in asserting the souls immortality. This day (said Christ to the repenting and beleeving malefactor) shalt thou be with me in Paradise. How should he be that day with Christ in Paradise? Not in respect of the body; for so Christ himself was not that day in Paradise, but in the grave. And in respect of the body, the impenitent theif was as much in Para­dise, as he to whom Christ made this promise. There­fore it was in respect of the soul that he should be that day in Paradise; and consequently the soul dies not with the body, but subsists separated from the bo­dy.

The answer which the adversary gives to this place, is to this effect (for it is somewhat intricate) that therefore Christ told the penitent thief, that he should that day be with him in Paradise, though it [Page 24] should not be until the resurrection (for he grants that the body shal rise again, and then the soul shal be re-u­nited to it, but wil have neither soul nor body to live until the resurrection) because there is but, as it were, a moment betwixt death and the resurrection, for that while a man is dead, be it never so long, he perceives no continuance of time, being altogether without sense and feeling. But what if a man be not sensible of time, is there therefore none for that? The 7 sleepers that are said to have slept from the time of Decius, to the time of Theodosius, about 200 years, by this reason may be said to have waked the same day that they fel asleep. Yea grant this mans opinion of the souls mor­tality to be true, and let the words of our Saviour be expounded, as he would have them; and what singular thing was promised to that penitent malefactor? It might as wel have been said to Adam, that that very day that he dyed he should be with Christ in Paradise (though it should not be of, I know not how many thousand years after) as it was spoken by our Saviour to this Malefactor that was Crucified with him.

Test. 3 Again, 2 Cor. 5.8. We are confident [saith the A­postle] willing rather to be absent from the body, and present with the Lord. How (I wonder) are we pre­sent with the Lord, when we are absent from the body, if the soul do not remain seperated from the body? cer­tainly if the soul die with the body, we are less present with the Lord after death, which is meant by absence from the body, then before. Besides, that very phrase of being absent from the body, implyes that something of us, which can be nothing but the soul, hath a subsi­stance by it self out of the body, and therefore dies not with the body.

[Page 25]To this place he answers, that the Apostle meant nothing else but the estate after the resurrection. But how could the Apostle mean that? For is there then an absence from the body, when as the body riseth again, and the soul and it are again united?

Test. 4 Again, Phil. 1.23. the Apostle saith, That he de­sired to be dissolved and to be with Christ, which was better for him, then to live stil here in this world. And v. 21. that it was gain for him to die. But except the soul be mortal, how could this be? how could death be gain to him? How could he desire to be dissolved that he might be with Christ, and so be in a far better estate then here he could enjoy, if as his body died, so his soul should die also, and should be no more until the re­surrection? Surely then it had been far better for him to live stil, yea (if it were possible) not to die at all, but to remain until Christs 2 coming, as some upon a mi­stake of Christs words supposed John should, Ioh. 21.23

I wil add but one place more, viz. That 2 Cor. 12.2.3. where the Apostle saith, that he knew a man in Christ, (meaning without question himself) who was caught up to paradise, the third heaven, whether in the body, or out of the body, he could not tell. These words, which the Apostle twice repeateth, whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell, to what purpose were they, if the soul could not be separated from the body, and subsist in a state of separation? They necessarily imply thus much, that the soul is a distinct substance from the body, and may subsist out of the body. And consequently it is not mortal, it dies not with the body. But some objections are made which must be answered.

Object. 1 Man is mortal, and therefore the soul being part, yea principal part of man is mortal.

Answ. I answer, it doth not follow, Totus homo moritur non [Page 26] totum hominis, i. the whole man dieth, but not the whole [not every part] of man; it sufficeth that one part, viz. the body dieth. For quod convenit parti, convenit etiam toti secundum illam partem, i. That which agreeth to a part, agreeth also to the whole in respect of that part. Its said Gen. 2.7. that God formed man of the dust of the ground; viz. because God formed the body of man of the dust. As for the soul it was not formed thereof, but infused, as there its said, that God brea­thed into man i. mans body] the breath of life. If mans mortality did prove the mortality of the soul, then be­cause Christ died, not only his soul, but his divine na­ture should die also, which (I think) this Author himself wil abhor to say or think; for as man consi­steth of soul and body, so Christ of the divine and hu­mane nature. And therefore if Christ might die (as he did) and yet his divine nature be immortal; then is there no necessity at all, why, because man dyeth, the soul therefore must die also.

Object. 2 Man became mortal because of sin; but he sinned principally in his soul. Therefore in respect of the soul he ought principally to die.

Answ. The soul through sin becometh liable to such a death as it is capable of viz. an exclusion from God and from all happiness: but it is not capable of such a death, as the body is liable to, viz. a deprivation of all sense and feeling, and a corruption of the very sub­stance of it, for the soul is a spirit [as in the Text, and in other places it is termed) and therefore of an incor­ruptible nature.

Object. 3 In death there is no remembrance of God; in the grave who shal give him thanks, Psal. 6.5.? The grave cannot praise him, death cannot celebrate him, Isa. 38.18.

[Page 27] Answ. The meaning is, that the dead cannot so praise God as the living do, viz. to the instruction and edifica­tion of others. The living, the living, he shal praise thee, as I do this day; the father to the children shal make known thy truth, saith Hezekiah there immediately after, Isaiah 38.19. In this respect the godly have desired to live rather then to die, that they may edifie the Church, and to glorify God, which being dead they could not do. I wil not die, but live (saith David, and why? he adds) and declare the works of the Lord, Psal. 118.17. See also, Phil. 1.23.24.25.

Object. 4 Eccles. 9.4.5. A living dogg is better then a dead Li­on. For the living know that they shal die, but the dead know not any thing. And Eccles. 3.19.20.21. That which befalleth the sonnes of men, befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them; as the one dieth, so dieth the o­ther; yea they have all one breath, so that a man hath no preheminence above a beast; for all is vanity. All go unto one place, all are of the dust, all turn to dust again. Who knoweth the spirit of a man that goeth upward, and the spirit of a beast that goeth downward to the earth?

Answ. This is spoken in the person of carnal Epicures and Atheists, who think there is no other life after this, and therefore had rather live, though never so basely, then die, though never so honorably. Certain it is, that the spirit of God means nothing less, then that the worst alive, are better then the best being dead. For how then are they blessed that die in the Lord, even whiles they are dead? Apoc. 14.13. How is it gain to the godly to die, and far better for them then to live? Phil. [...].21.23. And that very question, who knoweth the spirit of a man that goeth upward, &c. implyeth that in truth, the spirit of a man dies not when the body dies, as the [Page 28] spirit of a beast doth; although the Epicure and Atheist, that lives like a beast, thinks that he shal also die like a beast; that ther's no difference at all betwixt the death of a beast, and the death of a man, but that every way as the one, so the other dieth also, viz. as wel in soul, as in body. I pass to the 3 ^d and last observation.

Observ. 3 The soul immediately after death, is judged of God. In this respect its said, when a man dies, to go to God, viz. to be judged by him; for otherwise it is not true of every soul (not of any soul of the wicked) that it goes to God, viz. so as to live with him, and to love the blessed fruition of him.

Now that the soul immediately after its separation from the body, comes to judgment, appears by those places pre-alledged, which shew that the souls of the godly immediately after death, are in blessed happi­ness; as 2 Cor. 5.8. Phil. 1.23. Apoc. 14.13. This argues, that judgment doth pass immediately upon the soul, and that it is forthwith adjudged either to its reward, or punishment. The same also may be pro­ved by that of the rich man and Lazarus, Luk. 16. Which seemes not to be (as some suppose) a meer pa­rable, but a parabolical history, or a history related somewhat after a parabolical manner. For that 1. Lazarus is there named, whereas in meer parables, the names of persons spoken of are not mentioned, because the persons are but feigned. And 2. parables are ever drawn from things outward and obvious unto men; whereas our Saviour there speaks of things done in the other world.

Object 1 But some may object that, 2 Tim. 4.8. Henceforth is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judg, shal give me at that day, viz. of [Page 29] Christs coming to judgment in the end of the world. So Col. 3.4. When Christ, who is our life, shal appear, then shal we also appear with him in glory. By these, and such like places, it may seem that there is no re­ward received after death until the general judgment. And so divers of the ancients have thought that the souls are until the last judgment in certain receptacles, neither in pain nor pleasure, but only in expectation of that which is to come.

Answ. But the meaning of those Scriptures, which seem to favour that opinion, is only this, that the ful and per­fect reward is not til the last judgment; not but that the reward in some measure, and in great measure too, is obtained before that time, as is evident by those other Scriptures which have been cited. Yea compara­tively just men departed out of this life, are said to be made perfect; Heb. 12.23. viz. in comparison of what they were here in this world, though in comparison of what they shal be after the resurrection, they be stil imperfect.

Object. 2 But again it may be objected, If the soul be judged presently after death, what need is there of a judgment to come in the end of the world?

I answer, yes; 1. In respect of men, because be­fore only one part of them, viz. the soul is judged; but the body having been partner with the soul, either in righteousness, or in sin, meet and requisite it is, that the body also be partner with the soul, either in the reward, or in punishment. We must all appear be­fore the judgment seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in the body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or evil. 2 Cor. 5.10. The things were done in the body, and therefore, as wel the body as the soul must be rewarded, or punished. Now this [Page 30] in respect of the body is not til the last judgment. 2. In respect of God also, besides the particular judg­ment, which is immediately after death, it is behove­ful, that there be a general judgment, as there shal be in the end of the world; viz. that so Gods justice may be made manifest. Hereby reason of the prosperity of the wicked, and the adversity of the godly, the ju­stice of God sometime is questioned, yea denied. Mal. 2.17. & 3.14, 15. Therefore God wil have his ju­stice vindicated and cleared; All shal discern between the righteous and the wicked &c. Mal. 3.18. But the difference betwixt them immediately after death, is not discerned, it appears not; the judgment that then passeth upon the souls of men, is secret, and unknown to us. Therefore meet it is that there be another judg­ment, a general judgment, wherein all shal be judged, and that in the sight of all, that so Gods justice may appear unto all. Therefore the Apostle speaking of the last judgment, calls that day, a day of the revela­tion of the righteous judgment of God, i. a day where­in the righteous judgment of God shal be revealed and made manifest to all the world. See Mal. 3. and the last ver. with Mal. 4. and the two first verses.

To make some Use and application of all.

Ʋse. 1 First, let us learn, and be admonished to prize spi­ritual things above corporal, and to labour for the wel­fare of the soul more then of the body. True it is, things needful for the body are to be looked after, the welfare of the body is not to be neglected. S ^t. John desired earnestly that Gaius his body might prosper and be in health, 3 Joh. 2. And S. Paul exhorted Timothy to have a care of his bodily health, 1 Tim. 5.23. But the things that concern the soul are chiefly to be thought of; the welfare of the soul is principally to be regarded, [Page 31] First seek the Kingdom of God and his righteousness Mat. 6.33. Good reason, seeing the body is mortal, but the soul immortal. The body is but [as the Hebrews call it] [...]; i. e. the clothing or covering of man; the soul is the man indeed: Compare Mat. 10. 25 with Luke 9.25. Expende animam, impende in ani­mam. Consider the worth of the soul, and so take care for the soul. This was the folly of that rich man, Luke 12. when his barns were full, he said Soul take thine ease, eat, drink and be merry, for thou hast much goods laid up for many years. Alas! those goods were for the body; not for the soul; that might starve in the midst of such plenty. This is the misery of the wicked, what ever their outward estates be, yet their inward man, their heart, is little worth; as Solomon tels us, Pro. 10.20. On the other side this was Pauls comfort, that though his outward man (the body) perished, yet his in­ward man (the soul) was renewed day by day, 2 Cor. 4.16 This is the happiness of the godly; that though other­wise they be in adversity yet their soul prospereth, 3 Joh. 2. Though outwardly they be poor, yet inward­ly they are rich, Apoc. 2.9. Thus Lazarus was rich, though otherwise a poor begger, and therefore was infinitely more happy then he that had abundance of the unrighteous Mammon, but wanted the true riches. Labor we therefore for these riches, spiritual riches, let out hearts be set on these which are eternal, not on the other that are but temporal. Labor not for the meat that perisheth, but for that meat that endureth to ever­lasting life, John 6.27.

Ʋse. 2 Secondly, seeing there is a judgment to come after death, and even a particular judgment immediately af­ter the soul is departed from the body; let us think of it and prepare for it; the judgment of man may be [Page 32] evaded, but there's no evading of Gods judgment; Whoremongers and adulterers God wil judg, Heb. 13.4. Though man do not judg them yet God will: He will render to every man according to his deeds, Rom. 2.6. God doth sometimes exact judgments here, but these are but preludia futuri judicii, tokens and fore-runners of the judgment to come; the judgments executed here are temporal, but that hereafter is eternal, Heb. 6.2. The prosperity or adversity of this life is but for a mo­ment, but after death comes either that welfare or that wo, which endures for ever. What can work upon us, what can be of force to make us circumspect and watchful, if not the consideration of the judgment to come? Augustine saith it was metus mortis & futuri judicii, the fear of death and of judgment after death that brought him out of the gulf of sin wherein he was almost swallowed up and drowned. S. Paul also testi­fieth of himself, that knowing that there shal be a resur­rection both of the just and the unjust; he did exercise him­self to have always a conscience voyd of offence, &c. Act. 24.15, 16. See 2 Cor. 5.9, 10, 11. Eccles. 12.13, 14. But if we would be able to stand in iudgment we must not rely on our own righteousness, but renouncing it as insufficient to justifie us before God, we must fly unto Christ and lay hold on him and his righteousness, see Psa. 143.2. Phil. 3.9 Let us be sure that we be in Christ, and then we need neither fear death nor judgment after death; For there's no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus, Rom. 8.1 But let us know and consider, that as there it follows, they only are in Christ Iesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. He that saith that he abideth in him must himself walk even as he walked, 1 Joh. 2.6. As many as walk according to this rule, peace shal be upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God, Gal. 6.16.