IN this weighty undertaking of mine, to vindi­cate the Right, Liberty and Priviledge that Christ Jesus with his own bloud hath purcha­sed unto his Church, although we account it needless to insist upon Principles which our Adversaries and we are agreed upon, yet that we may build upon some grounds, we will lay the following foundations.

In the nature of things there is a Church really existing, which was saved, sanctified and purchased with Christs Bloud and Life; and as this Church hath her Being from the Lord Jesus, so the con­tinuation and preservation of the same is from him: to which effect he hath appointed food in the Word and Sacraments to be distri­buted to the Church, by those who are Pastors and Ministers in it, by way of Office; in which sense our Blessed Saviour hath pro­mised to be with his Spouse unto the end of the world.

And further, as there is no Body, either Natural, Civil, Po­litical or oeconomical, without some Laws and Order, so Christ Jesus hath not left his Church without Law, and in Confusion; there is a certain Government properly belonging to it: For our Saviour hath not left it to mens liberty to invent and forge what Government they please, but he hath himself insti­tuted one, which must not be changed by men, and which is strictly to be observed in the Church. That there is, and ought to be a Government, it is clear from the Nature of the Church, for it is the House of God; wherefore as God is the God of order, so his House must be an House of order, so that in some respect, [Page 2]order is essential to the Church, in that it cannot be the House of God, except in it there be some order. Now since the voice of Christ alone is to be heard in the Church, so the Rule of Christ alone is to be observed in it, in the giving whereof he hath not been wanting; for as soon as he had form'd his Church, as soon he stablished some orderly constitution in it, as the comparison of a natural body (where there is an harmony between all the Mem­bers) used by S ^t Paul, Rom. 12. & 1 Cor. 12. where he speaks of the Gifts and Office; of the Church, do clearly declare it.

The Lord Jesus Christ therefore who is the only Lord and great Shepherd of his Church, having instituted a Government in it, did also appoint those that were to administer and execute it, to the end that all intrusions and usurpations might be avoided: For as the Authour of the Epistle to the Hebrews doth say, Chap. 5. That Christ glorified not himself to be made an High Priest, but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Nay, he doth not so much as send his Disciples without shewing his Commission, As the Father hath sent me, so do I send you: Like­wise none ought to feed the Church or rule the Church, except he be called thereunto; whence this must be concluded, that as there is a Government in the Church, so they that administer it, ought to be named of Christ.

But to find out who these Rulers ought to be, we must have our refuge to holy Scriptures, where Christ hath clearly and fully revealed his will and mind unto us, we must not scorn nor be asha­med to make that our Rule here, which shall be our Judge hereaf­ter: Peace and Mercy will be to as many as walk according to this rule, and upon the Israel of God, Gal. 6. Contrary practises must be left to that Antichrist who exalteth himself above God, and sitteth in the Temple of God, shewing himself that he is God, 2 Thes. 2. But it becometh Christian Kingdoms, such as England, Scotland and Ire­land, wherein the light of the Gospel hath so clearly appeared, to be ruled by the Word. In the daies of Ignorance God winked at mens waies, but now he will not have mens Traditions to make void his Commands, neither will he have will-worship preferred to that which he hath instituted. Since Christ Jesus his Ascention, never a Nation had such knowledge of Heavenly Mysteries, neither did a Land so abound in godly and powerful Preaching as we have en­joyed within these Twenty years last past. We may then justly [Page 3]desire that to be setled which is according to the Will of God, re­valed in his Word, and that Traditions be not preferred above Scriptures, namely, in the point of Church-Government: So that though there may be some Government good of it self, as some would plead for Monarchy and Hierarchy in the Church, yet none is to take the place of that which is set down in the Word; for of all Rules in the Church, that is the best, and the only to be kept, which Christ hath instituted.

And this I press the more, when I consider the abuse in this and other Church-Offices, as it hath provoked God to wrath, so it hath procured Gods judgments: Observe the case of Ely's Children, and their Fathers remisseness to administer the Natural and Eccle­siastical power which he had over them; yea, the neglect of admi­nistring this Discipline, in not restraining his Children, was so great a sin, that God did swear that the iniquity of Elies House should not be purged with Sacrifice nor Offering for ever, 1 Sam. 3.14. And the end is known to all: And under the Law, it was ordi­narily one of the greatest complaints of God, to express the cor­ruption of Church-men in the neglect of their duty, either in gi­ving instruction or bearing rule, when they prophesied falsly, cor­rupted the Law, and when they did not administer judgment in the House of God: So under the Gospel, this is one of the few things Christ hath against the Angel of the Church in Thiatira, that he suffered Jezebel to seduce Gods Servants, and to commit forni­cation. And so it was the blemish of the Angel of Pergamus, that he had them that held the Doctrine of Balaam; when on the o­ther side, it is the great commendation of the Angel of Ephesus, that he could not bear them which were evil, Rev. 2. And indeed remisseness in Church-government hath ordinarily been followed with licentiousness, prophaneness, depravation in doctrine, and at last, with the removing of the Candlestick, and overthrow of the Churches: This some observe to have been the case of those seven famous Churches of Asia. An Army without Discipline, will soon be destroyed, and an House without Order will quickly be undone: Hence I may observe how unjustly Presbyterians are condemned for their strictness in Church-Discipline, and how un­deservedly the Episcopal Party is commended for their remisseness in it: So that I hope it will not seem to be impertinent, if from the Governours of the Church, I have passed to the necessity of [Page 4]the Government it self; for hereby I do convince of the necessity of having Governors, and these to be chosen according to Gods heart and will.

The Prelatical Party will or must hitherto agree with us, and then our work is more than half done; for they will be hard put to it, when we shall desire them to shew out of Scripture their Hie­rarchical way; Let them prove Arch-bishops, Deans, Arch-Dea­cons, Prebends, Canons, Chapters, &c. as we will prove Pa­stors, Teachers, Rulers and Deacons. But perhaps they will have refuge to their humane right, and say, that many things were left to the judgment of the Church; It is true of circumstantial and ac­cidental things and cases as to the Censures, which ought to be pro­portionable to the sins and offences, whether such a man doth de­serve to be suspended from the Sacrament for such a Fact, and whether to be excommunicated, about which yet we have certain several Rules, as that of Charity, Decency and Edification, which we must not trangress: But I do account it is a necessary thing, and not indifferent, who it is that must administer Church-Disci­pline: For it is not an accidental thing, as that it may be exe­cuted or not executed without any prejudice to the Church; nei­ther is it indifferent as that any one may indifferently administer it, but it is thus far necessary, as that every one that doth admini­ster it, must be called thereunto, and every one that is called thereunto, must execute it.

But now we must proceed, and shew how they that are to go­vern the Church, must be chosen out of the Church; here by Church I understand a Body or Assembly distinct and different from the civil or political Body; although somtimes one may be chosen a Ruler in the Church, and be a Civil Magistrate, yet he is elected, not because he is a Member of the Civil, but of the Ec­clesiastical Body: And to speak the truth, every member of the Church is a member of the Civil body, yet in a different respect; and here from the whole and universal Church, we must come to particular Congregations, who must have in themselves all the right which belongs to them, as parts and members of the whole: For when we say that Christ hath instituted a Government in his Church, we must not conclude it not to be instituted and necessary in particular Congregations, because it is not said, he hath institu­ted it in his Churches; for the word Church being collective, doth [Page 5]include all the parts, and if you will Parishes or Congregations belonging to it: For I say that every particular Church hath all that which is essential and necessary to a Church, as it is a Church, as well as the Universal Church, or else it will not be a Church; and therefore as Doctrine and Discipline are necessary to the Church in general, so it is to every Church in particular: Accord­ing to this Maxim of Philosophy, he that saith the whole, doth also say the parts in the whole; hence therefore I do by way of infe­rence conclude, that they who are to administer Church-Govern­ment in particular places, ought to be chosen out of the Church in particular places; and the proof of this will also confirm my for­mer universal indefinite Proposition, how the Rulers of the Church are to be chosen out of the Church.

My first reason to prove this, is drawn from the sufficiency of the Church, whereby the Church hath all things necessary to it, having no need to borrow from others any thing conducing to it: Herein doth the perfection of the Church appear; for as it is a body distinct from other bodies, so it hath within it self from Christ alone her dependency for being and well-being: Nay, it would not be a Church, if it had not within her self all things necessary to it as it is a Church: If therefore the Church be perfect in it self, then she doth receive no perfection from without; this perfection consists in the being and well-being of the same, that is, Doctrine and Discipline; so that if the Church had not her Discipline with­in her self, it would be very defective and unperfect; by perfecti­on, I mean all things necessary: And who could think that Christ Jesus after all that which he had done and suffered for his Church, would have left somthing yet which it needs to borrow from others? What his end was, when he gave himself for his Church, the Apo­stle tels, Eph. 5.26, 27. And in 1 Tim. 2.15. It is called the House of God, the Pillar and Ground of truth. And elsewhere, the Spouse of Christ, with whom Christ hath a conjugal communion, and from him she receiveth Grace for Grace: But I need not to insist upon this perfection and sufficiency of the Church within her self: I will wrap it all in Davids words, Glorious things are spo­ken of thee O City of God; so that I conceive that Government be­ing so necessary to the Church, the Church hath it within her self, and they that are to be Rulers, must be chosen out of it.

The second Proof is from the Right of the Church; I call the [Page 6]Right of the Church, that which Christ hath given to the Church, that which the Apostles and others after have yielded to the Church; this right is the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, as it is, Mat. 16. Where Christ saith that he would build his Church upon Peters confession, and give the Keys to the same; it is then the Churches Priviledge, to chuse her Governours out of her self; but because the right of the Church hath several Branches and Particu­lars, I will name some of them: It doth consist,

I. In chusing their Ministers when they are ordained: Teach­ers must not be forced upon a Church, as that notwithstanding the dissent of the People, they should be maintained in it; no Patron or other may lawfully present a Minister in a Parish, or maintain him in it against the mind of the Congregation.

This Right of the Church in this, is proved by Three Rea­sons.

• 1. Christ who is the Authour of Ministry, hath given this right to the Church alone, as we have shewed afore.
• 2. Because Ministers were given by Christ to the Church, that by an ordinary and certain manner they might be procured by the whole Church.
• 3. If it were not so, then the Church could not voluntarily sub­mit her self to her Pastors, which is as necessary in Ministers, as it is in Marriage, where the consent of both parties is required. And truly this right hath been continued to the Church for the space al­most of a thousand years after Christ, as we have proved by some Instances in our Letters to a person of quality. But here when we say that the people of a Church have a right to call a Minister to themselves, we mean not to ordain him, for Ordination is not made by every Member of the Church, though it belongs to the Church, as it is proved, Acts 1.23, 24, &c. & 16.22. And wit­nessed by Cyprian in his Epistles, Book 1. Epist. 4. But we say that the calling to a certain place those that are ordained, is of the Church.

II. This Right of the Church doth consist in this, that the Church hath power to chuse her Rulers from within her self, this is evident in the case of Deacons, Acts 6. The Twelve called the Multitude, and said to them, look ye out amongst you seven men of ho­nest report. So it is in the case of Elders, which Paul and Barnabas did ordain, not without the votes of the people, Acts 14.23. [Page 7]And indeed since the fundamental right of Government dothly in the whole Congregation, it must be their Prerogative to elect whom they think fit for the Administration of it: It is an Article of the Waldences, written 500 years ago, that amongst other Priviledges which Christ hath granted to his Church this is one, they must chuse their Rulers from among themselves, yet alwayes provided they chuse them according to the will of Christ, revealed in his word, and if it be according to his appointment he will fit them with gifts to rule, and so he will prosper their weak endeavour: besides that as after the Election, the Congregation must obey their Rulers, so afore their Election they must give their vote, and consent to that effect, or else that Obedience which is due to Rulers, Heb. 13.17. will not be very free and voluntary, as it ought to be, for, as we have said afore of Pastors, so we say of this, it is a kinde of Marriage, where consent of both Parties is required.

And, as we have said, That the Church so called in distinction of any Civil body, hath right to chuse her Rulers from among herself, so here by this amongst her self; we speak of the Laity of it, from the Flock, distinguished from the Pastor or Teacher, In the 2 Chron. 19.8. there were chosen, as Priests and Levites, so also, of the chief of the Fathers of Israel, for the Judgment of the Lord: and since it is well known that the Synagogue had a Councell of Secular men, chosen out of the Congregation, to rule it, which was continued in the dayes of our Saviour; for we read often of the Rulers of the Synagogue, which Jewish Church we know to have been as well govern'd as any that ever was: and since our Saviour, although he much condemned their corruption in Doctrine and Conversation, yet he never had a word against this Form of Government, the continuation of which the Lord Jesus foretold his Disciples, when he said, they should be brought and beaten in the Synagogues: in the Christian Church these also are appointed to be Rulers, as in our Letters to a Person of Quality, we have demonstrated out of several Texts of Scripture: This only I add, as the Church did chuse their Messengers, of whow we read, 2 Cor. 8.19, 23. as they chose their Representatives, Acts 15.23. So also they elected their Rulers, called Elders, 1 Tim. 5.17. to whom the relief for the brethren was to be delivered, Acts 11.30.

III. The Right of the Church doth consist in the Administration of Discipline, the power whereof is in the Church, or her Representatives, by vertue of which they may suspend erroneous and [Page 8]scandalons Persons from the publick hearing of the Word, receiving of the Lords Supper, and exclude them from communion with Gods people, 2 Thessal. 3.6.14. untill they repent and give a publick Testimony of it. In the Primitive Church there were several degrees of these Church Censures according to the Nature of their Offences, some were only censured in private, others in a more publick way, others were not permitted to come into the Church, to hear the Word, although they were permitted to stand just at the door, some were suffered to go in untill Sermon was done, and then they went forth, some were permitted to stay till after Prayers, but they were to go out before the blessing was pronounced, and others might tarry till after the Blessing, but not to be admitted to the Lords Supper, when it was to be administred; All those things may be accounted circumstantial, because left to the prudence of the Church, for now adayes we do not follow it altogether, although we know thus much to be necessary, to use Censures against Offenders, but the manner is left to the Discretion of the Church; however they must not be so absurd, and ridiculous, as to give a white sheet (as the Episcopal Custome was.) I cannot but admire at some, who fearing to disoblige men rather than to displease God, do connive at the licentiousnesse and prophanenesse of others, as if in imitation of these unruly persons, they were resolved not to performe their duty, and this upon this account, that such and such men are of such a temper, as that if they were censured, they would altogether forsake the Church; but I must tell them that they will be wiser than God, as if to prevent an evil not in being, but only feared, they were to suffer and comply with a real and actual evil: they to whom Discipline is commited must be carefull to execute it, for saith the Apostle, Rom. 12. He that ruleth let him do it with diligence, as for the success, they must commit it to the hand of God; however let the event be what it will, they have that comfort, to have discharged their duty: The case of the French Church is notable in this, where the Offenders have liberty to forsake the Reformed Religion, and be welcome amongst Papists, the King being that way, yet notwithstand­ing this Consideration they strictly administer Discipline, and such is the Blessing of God, that he overrules mens hearts; for instead of a postatising, they submit to the power and Censures of the Church, and although upon this they would depart from the Church, (of which I cannot bring so much as an Instance, although I have reason to be aquainted with their Affairs) yet they may say, They went [Page 9]from among us, because they were none of us: Rotten Members, if obstinate, must-be cut off, lest they corrupt others, as S. Paul saith of Hymeneus and Philetes, 2 Tim. 2.17.

That this Right is belonging to the Church is clear out of our Blessed Saviours saying, Matth. 15. v. 17, If he will not hear thee, tell it the Church: wherein is implyed, That the Church had Power to procure some satisfaction for the Offence received, which power, if a man will not submit unto, he must be unto us as an Heathen and a Publican. This Right the Church of Corinth made use of, according to S Paul's Exhortation, 1 Cor. 5. which was not committed to a single Person, but to the whole church to which the Apostle writeth this Epistle: and S. Paul, by vertue of this Right, delivered up, that is, excommunicated Hymeneus and Philetes, 1 Tim. 1.20. Yet from hence one must not infer, That this Right is administred by a single person; for 1. It cannot be demonstrated, that Paul alone did it, but it is more then probable, that he had the Advice and Assent of the Church which these two were of, perhaps of the Church of Laodicea, whence that Epistle was written, for this was his practice, 1 Cor. 3. When ye are Assembled, and my Spirit with the power of the Lord, J. ch. 2. Neither must every one draw this Consequence, Whatsoever Paul did I may do, for his Calling was immediate from Christ, and extraordinary in it self; The Sentence of the Church, in the Execution of this Discipline is passed by the Representative of it; and in case the Nature of the thing be such, as that because the power of the Party, or of some other Consiedration, it is not, or cannot be decided, in particular Congregations, by the Pastor and his Elders, it must be referred to a Classis, from it to a SYNOD, according to the Pattern, Acts 15. So that, It is a Sacrilegious usurpation of any particular one, as POPE, or any other that will do it alone without the Church, or her Representatives, in the chusing of which there ought to be such care, as that they be not Idiots, or Ignorant men, but men of Piety, understanding, and of Credit, as much as can be, to meet in a certain place, and alwayes they must remember, that their Authority is not supream, but Ministerial, and therefore, that they are bound onely to the Laws, and Rules given by the Holy Ghost, in the Word and therefore, as in point of Doctrine, so as to Discipline, in all things they must follow the Word; For it doth not belong to the Church now established to make any Lawes different from, or contrary to the Rules of the Word.

The Right of the Church doth (in the 4th place) consist in the power of advising and voting in Synods, Councels, and Ecclesiastical Assemblies, by their Elders, Deputies, and Representatives, not only Arch Bishops, and Bishops, as Papists would have, and not onely Pastors, and those that are professed Divines, as the Prelatical Party desireth, but also other godly and knowing Persons, chosen and sent by the Church, afore called Elders, Deputies, and Representatives, are to be admitted, to vote in the decision of Controversies, this I speak not of my own, neither must it be called a new thing, since for the confirmation of it I will bring, 1. Scripture. 2. Antiquity. 3. Reason. As to the 1. in the Councells, Synods or Assemblies, held by the Apostles, not only the Apostles themselves, but also the Elders and Deputies of the people, who were not professed Divines, were admitted; so in the Councill of HYERUSALEM, of which we read, Acts the 15, out of which place these 2 things do appear; 1. that the Church Deputies were admitted into the Assemblies, v. 22. It pleased the Apostles and Elders, with the whole Church; which is interpreted the next Verse, The Brethren, representing the Church. 2. it doth appear, that they were admitted, not to be simply and meer Spectators, but also to be Judges, and to decide with their Votes, Affairs propounded in the Assembly, for they are named among those whom the Letter came from, who had not been named in the Letter except they had a Vote in the Decree. Wherefore, in these times, except the Prelatical Party do think themselves wiser and greater than the Apostles, they ought not to deprive the Church of this right, as they do, through Usurpation, but rather to restore them to that share which they ought to have in the Government of the Church, which to deny is to commit a heynous Sacriledg, and to be guilty of as great a tyranny as can be usurped over the people of God.

And, as the Apostles yielded to the Church her right, so in the Primitive times the Church was not deprived of it, for in the most famous and Oecumenical Councils this was granted to the Church; 1. In the First Councel of Nice, called by the Emperour Constantine the Great, against Arius, who denyed the Deity of Christ; the Elders of the People and Representative of the Church had their Votes in it. So in the First Council of Constantinople, called by the Emperour Theodosius the first, against Macedonius, who denyed the Deity of the Holy Ghost, in this also the Deputies of the Church voted in the ARTICLES therein debated, as it [Page 11]doth appear, by the Subscriptions of the Acts of these Two Synods.

For further confirmation of this Right of the Church, to my judgement no better reason than this can be given; These Synods and Assemblies do represent the Church; If it be a Provincial Synod, it representeth the Churches of a Province, if National, of a Nation; so, if universall, it representeth the whole Christian Church. Now, If this Church either Provincial, National, &c. represented by these Synods, doth consist not only of Bishops, or Pastors, Doctors, Teachers, and Ministers, but also of Lay, or Secular Persons, (among whom sometimes there happen to be men no way inferiour, in parts and Piety to many of the Clergy;) So it is of good consequence to say, that some of the body of the Church, consisting of Lay men, are to be admitted to these Church-Assemblies, for since they are interessed in the Transactions of such meetings, they must send their Deputies to be present, to the Conclusions taken there, or else all these Assemblies, shall be no better than a Councill of Trent, called, not to debate of, but to confirm Errours, where one of the Parties shall be excluded, and the other shall be the Party, and Judg. These Assemblies cannot be said to be free and Lawfull, when there is so much violence and corruption, as that one shall be admitted as guilty, and accused Persons, when he should be equal to his Adversary in such a meeting; wherefore I say, in case a Synod was called in this Nation, consisting of Episcopal men; for the most, if the businesse was to be decided by plurallity of Votes, it would not be a right and competent Assembly, except things were resolved by strength of Reason, and by an equall number of the different Parties.

But to be brief, This right of the Church (in the 8th place) doth consist in this, That the Church is subject to no power but to the power of Christ; The Church ownes no Authority but his: and it ought to be free from any others Dominion, Christ Jesus is the only Lord and Potentate of his Church, which to signifie, he is called sometimes the King, other times the Lord, Master, Husband, Head, and Shepherd of his Church: If any other Secular or Ecclesiastical Officer doth aspire to this Power, He is a Thief, and a Robber. We must not think that Christ Jesus hath so dearly purchased his Church, to submit her afterwards to the will and lust of men, He hath Redeemed us, saith the Apostle, that we should be a peculiar people unto himself, therefore not addicted to others; One cannot lay any claim to the Church, except he hath purchased [Page 12]it, except he doth protect and preserve it, providing it with all necessary Graces: This is the end of his giving some Apostles, some Prophets, some Evangelists, &c. for the perfecting of the Saints, for the work of the Ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, Eph. 4. This is a Song proper to the Church, to say, I am my beloveds, and my beloved is mine, Cant. 6.3. So that, to find her other Lords, is to make her an Adultresse: I am jealous over you with a godly Jealousie, saith Paul to the Corinthians, for I will present you as a chast Virgin to Christ, for I have spoused you to one Husband, 2 Cor. 11. Let therefore no man, no not the Angels themselves pretend any Power and Superiority over the Church of Christ, for the Lord Jesus hath purchased his Church a Freedom from all other powers but from his own.

And to speak more exactly to this, No man in civil or ecclesiastical Office ought to pretend any Right and Authority over the Church: 1. No civil Magistrate, for, as we render to Caesar the things that are Caesars, so we must render to God the things that are Gods. It is ordinary in Scriptures to make a difference between civil and Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions. Christ's Kingdom is described, Psal. 45. His Government spoken of, Isaiah 9.6, 7. It is seen in a Dream, by the Stone cut out without hands, which broke the Image of all other Dominions, Dan. 2.34. Christ doth profess, His Kingdom is not of this world, and he makes a clear difference between civil powers, and that of his Church, when he said to his Disciples, The Princes of the Gentiles exercise Dominion over them, but it shall not be so among you, Matth. 20.25. In such a case therefore let every one abide in that whereunto he is called: There is indeed a gracious Promise made of God, that Kings should be nursing Fathers to the Church, which began to be fulfilled in the time of Christian Emperors, It is now continued, and I believe, it will be to the end of the world; but there is never a Promise to any Prince (Except to the Prince of Peace, Isaiah 9.6.) to receive any power or Dominion over the Church. It is one of the greatest points of the Popes Usurpation, that he will confound these two Jurisdictions, and assume not only S. Peters Keyes, but also S. Pauls Sword, as they call it, so that which the one cannot open, the other shall cut it: In a word, He will undertake the Ecclesiastical and Civil Government, since he boasteth to have power in spiritual and temporal things: But thus much here is not approved of by the Word of God. As the Pope is a temporal Prince, so let him govern his Subjects; as he is a Bishop, [Page 13]let him use tyranny as he doth, over his Church: But every Christian Reformed Prince ought to be careful not to Administer the Go­verment of State and Church together.

But besides the not preaching of the Word, there are two things specially, which the civil Magistrate may not do: The First, He may not ordain Ministers, because he hath not Commission to that effect, it belongs to those that have already been ordain'd themselves, and this would be to destroy Ministry by way of office in the Church: this was the practise in the Primitive Church, that Bishops or Pastors were chosen by other Bishops; and the people, that is, the Representatives of the people, without any civil Monarch, or any one pretending Monarchy in the Church, as it will at large be found written by Cyprian, who lived 250. in his Epist. 55. and 68. But the Second thing that the Civil Magistrate must abstain from, is, The Administration of Ecclesiastical Discipline; For though his Office be about the Church, yet it is not in the Church: Although some Magistrate may be an Officer and Ruler in the Church, but not as he is a Civil Magistrate, for under that notion it doth not belong to them: It is indeed the Right of Kings to call COUNCELLS, to see the Church Reformed, (for he is the Keeper of both Tables) yet in this they must make use of Church Officers, He also must protect the Church from the power of her Enemies, for to that effect he is called the Servant of God, Rom. 13. So it becometh Princes to protect Ministers from the Power usurped by their Fellow-Servants, as it is Observed of the Duke of Lancaster, who, to his great commendation secured Wickliffe from the malice and power of his enemies, that were Bishops, as is observed by FOX, in his Book of Martyrs, Fol. 413. But we have briefly, yet clearly spoken to this Power of the Civil Magistrate in the Churches affairs, in a Latine EPISTLE, as an Answer to a Letter from a Learned Friend; only I do adde this, If the Civil Magistrate doth not pretend any Power over the Church, this is so far from tending to his Prejudice, dishonour, and discredit, as, that it is the greatest glory to abstain from that which doth belong to him, yet it will be their highest prasie, to submit to the Church Rules, as they are Members of the Church: It is well known, how Ambrosius used this Right with Theodosius, and the words of Chrysostome, shewing the Power of the Church in administring Discpline, in relation to any one, are very notable: If any wicked man (saith he) come to the Table of the Lord, give him not the Body or Blood of Christ; but if he will not [Page 14]desist, tell it me, and I will rather shed my bloud, than to admit such a one.

And as it is the right of the Church not to be subject to the pow­er and dominion of any Civil Magistrate, so Christ hath not purchased this freedom, that it should be subject to any Officers and Ministers in it, but this liberty will be encroached upon, if any Monarchy or Hierarchy be setled in the Church, which do follow one another: For when there is a Prince and a Soveraign, there will be Lords and persons of a quality superiour to the common people. Now I say, any tittle signifying Monarchy in the Church, is tyrannical, such as the Prince of the Church or the Supream head thereof, and it is necessary for any Christian to abstain from such a Title: For,

1. It is known out of Scriptures, that Christ Jesus is the only Head of his Church: One Text will serve for all, it is Eph. 1.22. So that to talk of any other Head under the notion of ministerial or sub­ordinate, it is to form a monstrous body with two heads, for in the same place, v. 23. The Church is said to be the Body: any one that doth aspire to the title of Head of the Church, must have these three qualifications.

1. Excellency above the members in power and dignity.

2. Perfection in himself greater than any of the members have.

3. Infusion of all things which the body hath need of: But these three qualities are to be found in Christ Jesus alone, who being God and man, a King, a Prophet, and a High Priest, and infusing life, motion and being into the Church, is the only head of the Church, exclusively to any other, under what notion soever. It is a notable saying of Gregory the great, who was a Bishop of Rome, because a­bout his daies he saw some of his Predecessors had affected Supremacy over all the rest, yet much different from that abominable abuse that crept in after his times: He lived 600 years after Christ. In his 6th. Book, and Epist. 24. he hath these words; I say confidently, that any one who calleth himself, or desireth to be called Universal Bishop, he is the forerunner of Antichrist: And I do believe that where there is an Archbishop over a whole Kingdom, or the half of it, he is a kind of Monarch and Universal Bishop over that whole Kingdom or part of it, and the Title of Archbishop is as dangerous, and as much to be avoided in such a Kingdom, as the name of Universal Bishop: For I account our controversie with Hierarchy here, to be the same in nature, which we have against Popery, though in not so high a degree; but this usurpation by Archbishops is so palpable (so all the [Page 15]Hierarehical way, which I am confident is not a way of Gods ap­pointment, because in no wise grounded upon Gods Word) as that I will not insist on it, but only upon that which hath a more specious pretence, and to shew few of the grievances of Christs Church against this Hierarchical tyrannical Government.

We call Heaven and Earth to record, that we desire nothing else but to be judged by the Word of God alone, and that no customs, humane inventions and traditions, but Scriptures only are to be lookt upon in this controversie; and therefore we stand not for any waies of our own, but for the waies of God. Wherefore we do ab­hor Bishops by way of superiority, as usurpers over the right of the Church, as being without Scripture and against Scripture; So that God may say in this, as he doth in another case, They set up Church-Governors, but not by me. And to argue the case; I would know from the Adversaries, whether Bishops are different from the Mi­nisters of the Church? that is, whether this be an Office by it self, or what kind of difference this is? To the former, If it be an Of­fice by it self, then they must prove it out of Scriptures, but this cannot be; for in the three places of Scripture where St. Paul doth acquaint us of the Offices in the Church, there is not a word of Bishops, the Texts may be seen, Rom. 12.6, 7, 8. 1 Cor. 12.28. & Eph. 4.11. So that if they assert, that there ought to be Bishops in the Church, then they must acknowledge that the nature of Bishop is comprehended under one or other of the Offices named in these places, or else they must confess that there ought to be no Bishops at all by Divine institution: But the truth is, the nature of Bishop is in the two former places comprehended under the name Teacher, and in the last Text under the word Pastor; For he cannot be cal­led Prophet, Apostle, Miracle, Healings, &c. And this truth Scri­pture doth hold forth in other places, Acts 20.28. St. Paul said to the Elders of Ephesus, Feed the flock, (from the word feeding comes the word Pastor,) over the which God hath made you overseers, or Bishops, so that Pastor and Bishop are one and the same: They that have perused Tit. 1.7. will find that Minister or Elder, and Bi­shop are one and the same: likewise, 1 Tim. 3. Neither are they Lords over the Flock, if St. Peter speaks truth, 1 Pet. 5. Feed the Flock. Here again the word Pastor is implied, so the word Elder whom he exhorteth, so the word Bishop, v. 2. taking the oversight, [...], to whom he saith, v. 3. Not being Lords over the flock. Neither must they be Lords, or affect to be greater than their fellow-Pastors [Page 16]and Ministers, for nothing can be more expresly and clearly set down, than Christ Jesus forbidding his Disciples to use domini­on and authority one over onother, even upon this occasion, when they disputed amongst themselves of superiority, Mat. 20.25.

I think therefore that any man, especially a Minister cannot suffer upon a more righteous account, than in opposition to this Suprema­cy; and I make no question but to bring many to this truth (through grace) when I have shewed how godly people opposed this usurpa­tion when it began to creep into the Church, and how for this same cause some were crowned with Martyrdom: Ambition being the sin of the Devil, who is a murtherer from the beginning, it doth infuse cruel and bloudy dispositions into those that are stained with it: But when pride meets in an Ecclesiastical man, as it is the most detesta­ble, so it produceth most fatal and pernicious effects. Any one that is acquainted with the names of Bonifaces, Leo's John's, &c. who ever heard of Guelphs and Guobellines, may have an illustration of what I say; this furious ambition did formerly rage with more vi­olence than now, that the Light of the Gospel is clearer than afore. Yet although the stump be in Italy, there are some little Branches of the pride of that great Harlot even amongst those that profess the Reformed Religion, and it is to be wished men were now as studi­ous to extirpate these reliques, as some were at first to prevent the growth thereof. That some of the Bishops of Rome were censured by the Bishops of Alexandria or Constantinople and some other places, they that have been acquainted with Eusebius may testifie of it. Bo­nifacius the third of that name, who first publickly assumed the ambitious Title which the Bishops of Rome do retain, did write a Letter to the Bishops of Carthage, which must needs to be interpret­ed of Ministers, for there could not be many Diocesan Bishops, as they call it, requiring them to have their appeal to Rome (being countenanced in it by Phocas that wicked Emperor, but pretending some authority out of the Council of Nice; but the Bishops of Car­thage called a Council (the sixth of Carthage) of 217 Bishops, which must have been Ministers, for how could so many of Bishops in the adversaries sence, be found about Carthage, and they disowned that pretended power of Bonifacius. This Council was called in the daies of Phocas. Bernard in his 2 Book to Eugenius, declareth to him, that he could not challenge any Dominion over the Church or other his Fellow-Pastors: Hearken, saith he, what S. Peter saith, [Page 17]1 Pet. 5. Not bearing rule as Lords over the Clergy, but as examples to the flock, wherefore, if thou wilt be a Lord, thou shalt lose thine Apostleship, if thou wilt be an Apostle, thou shalt lose thy Lord­ship: How fitly doth this here hit our times? And they need not to tell me that this was to Popes, provided I find it to be the same thing which now we condemn in the Prelates of these daies; for I have already said how I look upon this Episcopal supremacy as an Effect of that Cause, and as a Fruit of that Tree, they and we do condemn the same thing, though in different persons, and per­haps in a different degree: Those of Carthage would not make their appeal to Rome, What reason is it for the Pastors of Warwick, Worcester, &c. to make their appeals before the Archbishop of Can­terbury? (observe that Rome and Carthage were then under the same Emperor) Bernard reproveth Eugenius for affecting the Title of Lord; Why shall not also those that are called here Lords, be in the same condemnation?

Wickliff who lived in the year 1379, opposed this usurped Pree­minency and superiority, for which doing, and other things, he was condemned as an Heretick, his bones taken from his Grave, and burnt: against him one Woodfort exhibited a Charge, the 18 ^th Article whereof was this; There be saith Wickliffe, Twelve Disciples of Antichrist, Popes, Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops [by way of Prelacy] Arch-Deacons, Officials, Deans, Canons, &c. And for the testimony of this truth as of others, John Hus, Jerom of Prague, obtained Martyrdom, and had their bloud shed, because they as­serted it: In the Council of Constance, in the year 1414, certain Articles were exhibited against them, specially John Hus; the 4th. Article runs thus, He erreth touching the Church, in that he saith, all Priests are of like power, and therefore he assirmeth that consecration of Bishops was invented only for covetousnesse: Hence doth appear how God did formerly stir up men to oppose this usurpation, which was not known amongst the Waldenses, who professed the true Doctrine since the Apostles times till now, as I have demonstrated in a La­tine Epistle to a Learned man. Howsoever I know that there are some who would not have Bishops altogether so high, as to be Lords, but nevertheless they would have them as Presidents over one or two Counties, and to direct his Presbyters, but this is a Branch of the former, unwarrantable from the word of God, as that such persons should be at all times in all places, and during their life Presidents over all Ministers of so many shires, which cannot be de­nied [Page 18]to be a kind of superiority, which in any kind being introduc'd into the Church, we disclaim against.

The Adversaries being not able to hold this kind of Bishops out of Scripture (which they refuse to be judged by in this case) they are forced to have a refuge to humane Right, saying, it is a benefit and, gratuity from Princes: But alas, Princes may not alter the Government setled by Christ in his Church; for the Church recei­veth no rule in necessary things, as this is, but from Gods Word. It was a Christian saying of the Lord Cobham, strongly persecuted, who as it is quoted by Fox, Book of Martyrs, Fol. 515. said to his Judges, The Precepts of God ought to be obeyed; If any Prelate of the Church doth require more, or else any other kind of obedience to be used, he contemneth Christ, exalting himself above God, and so becometh an open Antichrist: In such a case therefore we say, that in the Church no voice but that of Christ is to be heard, and to any that shall go about to perswade or force us to it, we must with Peter answer to the Pharisees, judge your selves whether it be just to obey men more than God; when it seems it was not much that they were required, not to forsake Christ, or to preach against him, but only not to preach in his name: Herein therefore lies the first grievance of the Church of Christ, that those who are appointed to be her Pastors, do usurp a Dominion over the Flock, and a superi­ority over their Fellow-Ministers.

But a second grievance depending from the former, is from spiri­tual Courts (so called) and the exceeding corruption and irregula­rity of the same, whereby Ministers are made Cyphers as to the ad­ministration of Discipline in their respective Congregations, and the Church is deprived of the right it hath in matter of Govern­ment. Is it not more conformable to the will of God and better in reason, to have every Minister with his Elders to rule in his Parish, (and when things come to be decided in it, to refer it to a Claffis or Synod) than to have a Bishop, Dean and Arch-Deacon to rule all the Parishes of two or three Counties, and not seldom their Ser­vants being bribed, they are earnest Sollicitors with their Masters for Causes howsoever unjust they be; and sure I am that these few persons are more easily bribed than many; these Courts are ground­ed upon humane invention, and contrary to the form of Govern­ment by Christ setled in his Church, whence followeth, that it be­ing not a way of Gods appointment, there are grosse and many a­buses committed therein, which being well known, I will observe [Page 19]only one of the chief, and this is Fines, it is very strange that they should practise that in the Church for which they have no pattern in Scriptures or Primitive Church; it is ridiculous that men should pay money for their offences in the Church, it is sacrilegious to make any trafique in the Church, and it is a great impiety to turn Church-censures into Fines, these practises are good for Rome, where all things are sold, we are not the first that condemn it; Wickliffe lived long ago, and in the 17th. Article exhibited against him, he is charged to have written, that Christs Ministers have no power by any civil (and lesse spiritual coaction,) to exact temporal things by their censures, this godly man as he disclaimed much against the pride, and so the usurped superiority of the Clergy, so he much inveighed against their covetousnesse and their spiritual Courts (which word is odious in the Church) and although the abuse now adaies committed, be not so exceeding as then, yet it is as bad and as much to be con­demned, because of the greater light we have now. And that which makes it the worse, is, that these Fines are exacted from those who do well; if a Minister doth preach within the Diocesse of a Bishop without his license, he shall be fined for it: Is not this to hinder the preaching of the Gospel, and to restrain the liberty of it? We may hear what Wickliffe (whom God extraordinarily raised to op­pose those abuses in his daies,) saith to it; in one of his Articles which in a Convocation held 1382. were condemned as erroneous; this is one; It is lawful for any Priest or Minister to preach the Word of God as without any license from the Apostolick Sea ( or Rome) so of any of her Catholick Bishops.

Further a third grievance is, the pressing of a Canonical Oath, so called, for no man shall be admitted to any place, or have his In­stitution and induction into any Living, except he hath sworn obedi­ence to his Bishop and pretended Superiors, and a conformity to the Canons of the Church, that is, to the Traditions, as they are called in the 39 Articles, a thing very tyrannical: this is not much different from that blind and absolue obedience which Jesuits do promise to their Superiors: Is there any shadow for this in Scripture? Did the Apostles impose any such Oaths upon their fellow-Ministers, the end whereof is to keep up this Diana Prelacy? Can this be confirmed from the practise of the Primitive Church? or is there any good rea­son for it? This, this is the Flag of Faction, and the Colours of self ends and ambition; and although the clause (in lawful things) were added, it would be no lessening of the burden, for the things therein [Page 20]sworn, are accounted lawful, neither will they suffer a man to inquire whether it be so or not, without danger of forfeiting his place, and of being exposed to the displeasure of those Reverend Superiors, whose excellent practises are plainly discovered, in turning out of the Uni­versities, men eminent for Piety and Learning, who cannot in con­science submit to these Oaths, Ceremonies and Hierarchical Govern­ment, and constituting in their places men of corrupt and dange­rous practises and principles, who will infect the Fountains of Learn­ing with errour, heresie, superstition and prophannesse.

From hence doth proceed another grievance, which is, that the subscription of the 39 Articles is forced upon Ministers thus far, as that they shall enjoy no Living unlesse they do it, although they be igno­rant of the meaning of some Articles; for it hath clearly been proved they are ambiguous and defective, and the 36 is absolutely false, where it is said, that the Government of the Church by Arch-Dea­cons, Deans, &c. hath nothing repugnant to the Word of God, this a man cannot in conscience subscribe, for thereby they presumptu­ously do belie Scriptures, this is the cause why some godly men did formerly prefer the loss of all Ecclesiastical preferments to the wounding of their Consciences, and to a submission unto that which is contrary to Gods Word.

It was therefore to reform these and many other abuses, to stop the Floud of Atheism, Popery, errour, superstition and prophanenesse, that the sacred Covenant was taken, it was high time to appear when some men did publickly and unpunished deny the Deity of the Lord that bough us, when they asserted a sound nature without original sin, when they destroyed the grace of Christ, by establishing certain conditional decrees, whose condition was in the power of mans will, when the Sabbaths were highly and ordinarily prophaned, in such sad daies it was need of some restraint, to which end the Covenant was taken, not by few inconsiderable persons, but by the whole Nation represented in Parliament, by a House of Lords and a House of Commons, and this not rashly but after a mature deliberation, and by the advice of as famous an Assembly of Divines as ever England had, or I believe shall, and this warrantable by the practise of the people of Israel, and of the 2 Precept of the Law of God, wherein implicitly is a command of promoting the worship of God in a true manner, and withal this Covenant being taken so solemnly, God be­ing called not only as a witness to the sincerity of the heart of those that took it, but also as an avenger of the perjury in case it should [Page 21]happen, as he hath punished it in those who intended to raise their fortune upon the Ruines of that sacred Engagement, I wish all those that are so forward for the breach of it to remember the Five Kings who had sworn to Ched [...]l [...]mer, Gen. 14. so Hoshea to Salmanasser, 2 Kings 17. Zedechie to Nebuchadnezzar, 2 Kings 25. and Ezechiel 17. and of Saul and the Gibeonites: Let them blush at the History of Regulus, a Roman Heathen, who having given his word to his Enemies that he would come again to them, though he knew that grievous torments were prepared for him, yet he return'd to discharge his Promise; let them take notice of Uladislaus and Amurat, and also tremble at their several Punishments, because they had forsworne; Why do we so much condemn the Council of Constance, because they decreed, that Faith was not to be kept to Hereticks: What shall we say of those who will not have it to be kept to Orthodox men, may not to God himself, to whom the Covenant was sworn: and, Can be that is Faithlesse to God be true to men? Shall be that breaks his Covenant to the Lord, keep his Oath of Allegiance to the King? This holy Oath cannot be made void, except it be proved to be evil in its nature; Neither can it be proved to be evil, except it be reduced under some Precept of the Law, as contrary to it; This the Adversaries have never undertaken to demonstrate, rather we may shew here it is good to the substance, and to the End. Their objection of the KING's not consenting to it is superfluous, for every publick Oath hath a twofold Relation, one, a Civil, and the other a Spiritual: this Covenant is a compleat Law, for the two HOUSES gave it, and his Majesty passed it, and took it: As to the Spititual Account it is the more considerable; and in this respect the consent or dissent of Persons is but circumstantial, for Oaths are a part of Gods Worship, God commanding the Fathers to teach their children to swear by his Name; as if having sworn privately to a man to do such a thing, whether I am not bound in conscience to performe it, because I did not swear before the Magistrate. It is indeed strange that the Lawes of God should be tyed to certain Customes of a Nation, so that the Oath which shall binde my Conscience beyond Seas, as Holland, &c. the same Religious vow shall not binde me here; We know the Ceremonial Law was tyed to times, places, and Persons, but the moral was not so.

Upon this point of the Covenant, a Declaration set forth in the year 1650. dated Dumferlen, is to be taken notice of, as expressing much Zeal and Piety, and they that would dispense men from it became guilty of the Popes usurpation, who undertakes to dispense from Oathes, that is, to create a new Divinity, and to preach another Gospel, but the truth is, they do it under hope of a Miter, or in expectation of some other such Preferment, yet let such peruse Rom. 1.31. where they may finde Covenant Breakers reckoned amongst the worst sort of men, and they who draw back from it do wound their Conscience, give scandal to the Church, and become a scorn even to the Episcopal Party, who know, it is not out of affection, but out of an interest, thereby do triumph in their Inconstancy: and further, thereby they lose their Reputation, (if they have any) for they shew themselves to be men of no Principles: But I must no longer insist upon a matter which hath already been handled by some Learned men.

From the things aforesaid it doth appear how greatly mistaken are those who say, that Presbyterians, and Episcopal men differ only in Indifferent and circumstantial things. For if we consider the debate about Ordination, whereby the Adversaries go about to make the Reformed Churches beyond [Page 22]Seas, to have no true Ministers, because they are not ordained by Bishops: if we finde some of that Party to be Arminians, if surther we take notice that they refuse to be ruled by the Word of God in point of Discipline, not willing to admit to the Government of the Church those whom Christ hath appointed to that end, then we will finde that the controversie is about high and mighty things! It is an amazement to me to behold, how in their practice they are incorrigible under Judgments, and unthankfull under Mercies: they are not wiser for the chastisement of 20 years, they have been smitten, yet they return not to him that hath smitten them, neither do they repent of their evil deeds, Rev. 16. as pride, Ambition, Prophaneness, and Superstition, they do not hearken to the voice of the rod, and who is it that sent it, and for what. Now after that God hath raised them up again from the dust, and even from the dead, they will not forsake their former practices, for the which wrath was poured upon them, but like the Dog they will return to their vomit, and like the Sow to her wallowing in the mire.

We do desire the Settlement of the Church, nor in outward glory, and pomp, which are the expressions of an Adresse from Surrey, presented August last, but in the purity expressed in the Word of God. It was a pious conclusion in the Council of Laodicea, That nothing should be done in the Church, (even as to Discipline) except it were warrantable from the Word of God: yet Hooker in his History doth say, That though there were many more such Articles, he would not be conformable to them. Cyprian speaking of the Apostles, and so applicable to all Ministers, he saith in his Book de Ʋnitate Ecclesiae, They were all equal in honour and dignity: But the Episcopal Party so pertinaciously maintaining their pretended Superiority, do shew how much they differ from him. As to the right of the people in Church-Affairs, it is observable, that Bonifacius, he who obtained the supremacy from Phocas, and who thereby became usurper over the Church, yet he was so knowing, as to the Right of the Church, that in a Synod of above 200 Bishops, by him called, it was decreed, that nothing should be done without the Votes and consents of the people.

I know the Adversaries do bring Examples of their Church-Government, from the Churches in Sweden, Danmark, Saxony, and some few parts of Poland, why? to dazle the eyes of a Reader, in making such an enumeration: they had sooner done, to have said, the Lutheran Church, which they call the Reformed Church. I confesse it is so in some respect, but if we consider their having Images in the Churches, which to defend, they take off the 2 Precept, if we take notice that most of their Service in the Church, as singing of Psalmes, is done in an unknown Tongue, how they confound the property of both Natures in the person of Christ, as to say; that the Deity it self suffered, so their Administering the Sacrament not with Bread, according to the constitution, but with Wafers, and there their Consubstantiation, as absurd as the Popish Transubstantiation; all this being considered, we will finde, that the Lutheran Church is none of the best reformed, and therefore to answer the Adversaries in their way, we say, That Transylvania, part of Hungaria, most of Bohemia, the Palatinate under the Pa [...]lsgrave, the Landgrave of Hessen, and other parts in Germany, the evangelical Cantons of Switzerland, France, the United Provinces, and the Italian Churches, wheresoever they be, the Waldenses, and Scotland. All these have their Church Government different from that which the Episcopal Party is here so much for: However we do not ground our Discipline upon such Examples, as we do upon the Word of God.

But, Because now there are endeavours used by Learned and Godly Persons, to finde out a way of Reconciliation, I pray to the Lord, to open the Eyes of the Adversaries, that they may see the truth, and yield to it, and cease to prefer their own wayes, and interest to the wayes and interest of God, not refusing to be taught by his Word: Whence will proceed a well grounded Peace: Or else, What peace as long as they shall admit of no Moderation, (For I heard some say, They knew not what I mean'd, by it?) What Moderation, as long as they will maintain their Primacy? wherein, if they persist, we may answer them in a way not much different from that of Jehu to Joram, 2 Kings 9.22. only changing the word Whoredomes and Witchcrafts, into Pride and Ambition of Superiority. But if they are still resolved to go on, I will say in the Words of S. John, in the last Chap. of his Revelation, Let him that is filthy be filthy still: Howsoever I make no doubt but that God will, in his due time, assert the Right of his Church, and vindicate it from all humane Inventions and tyrannical usurpations by those means, that shall be the more sutable to the work, and most conformable to his Holy Will, For the Stone cut without hands shall grinde and crush all other Interests, contrary to that of Christ, wherefore we be confident that maugre all humane designes, Force, and Policy, and in spight of all Hellish Conspiracies the Council of the Lord shall stand.