THE SPIRITUAL HOUSE In its Foundation, Materials, Officers, and Discipline DESCRIBED. The Nomothetical & Coercive Power of the KING, in Ecclesiastical Affairs ASSERTED. The Episcopal Office and Dignity, Together with the Liturgy of the Church of England VINDICATED.  
In some Sermons Preached at St. Clement Danes, and St. Gregory's near St. Paul's London.  
By Geo. Masterson.  
Hath the Lord as great delight in  Offerings and Sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than Sacrifice, and to hearken, than the fat of Rams,  1 Sam. 15.22. 
And they answered Josua, saying, All that thou commandest us we will do, according as we harkened unto Moses in all things, so will we hearken unto thee,  Josh. 1.16, 17. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Incerti Ap. Stobaeum.  
Printed for Philemon Stephens, the younger, living at the Golden Lion in St. Paul's Churchyard, 1661.   

To the great Exemplar of PIETY & VIRTUE, Frances, Duchess of Somerset Her Grace.  
THe Gentile Superstition, (Madam) inscribed not the Names or their Deities upon the greatest Donaries which they made them, with a Devotion comparable to that, with which I lay this Little Thing at Your Grace's Feet.  
The Compilement of this Structure is not in a Lofty and Noble Corinthian form, with any Rich or Curious Embroidery of Words; but the whole is cemented together in the plain Tuscan. I could have given it a Franker Light, had I not known that Devotion (for which this Spiritual House was built) requires collected, rather than diffused Spirits.  
I dare not assume the Vanity, to think that it is (as the Italians use to speak of a well built Structure) Fabrica ben raccolta. But if Your Grace (who are so excellent a Judge) be pleased to afford it Your Approbation, for its usefulness or seasonableness, I shall rejoice in my Endeavour: If otherwise, the hand that erected, shall be first upon it, to pull it in pieces, and condemn it to rubbage and ruin.  
But since (Madam) the simple Dedication of an Altar, (though the Materials of it are but Turf or Brick, and the Hand that erected it, unacquainted with Art) hath ever secured it against all, but Sacrilegious Hands; I am ready to overcome my Reason into a Belief, that this (otherwise inconsiderable) Piece, pleading the Cause of His most Sacred majesty's nomothetical and Coercive Power in Matters of Religion, the Prelacy of my Lords, the Reverend Bishops (as Governors sent by him) and of the Pious (though despised) Liturgy of our Church (which three are fairly seated, and ruling in Your Grace's Soul) it shall live under the shadow of Your great Name.  
Thus (Madam) not without deep acknowledgement of Your Graces undeserved Favours to my most unworthy Self, I take the boldness to assure you, that the remaining Thoughts and Actions of my Life, shall zealously aim at the Honour of being,  
My most honoured Lady, Your Grace's most devoted Servant, Geo. Masterson. Decemb. the 20th. 1660.   
1 Epistle of Peter, 2 Chap. 4 & 5 vers. 
To whom coming as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of Men, but chosen of God, and precious,  
Ye also as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God, by Jesus Christ.  
THE first thoughts that the Sons of Men entertain of coming (or drawing nigh) to God, are form in them, by the mediation of his goodness; that is, his profitableness or serviceableness to them, without this, all the beauty that is in the divine nature would never affect the heart of one of the lapsed Sons of Adam, for, though there be infinite charms in the face of God, to attract the souls of all rational Creatures that have eyes to behold the amiableness that is in his face; yet the power and justice of God are more potent to deter the creature, conscious to itself of its own unworthiness and guilt from coming to, or looking toward him.  
The Son of God himself, though he be the brightness of his Father's glory, and the express image of his Person (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the character of his subsistence) would never lead one heart captive, were he not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beneficent and gracious, as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 anointed; so the Spouse, Cantic. 1.3. Because of the savour of thy good ointments, thy name is as ointment poured forth, therefore do the Virgins love thee; and our Apostle (in my Text) mentions not their coming unto God, but upon the hypothesis (or supposition) of their having tasted that the Lord is gracious, verse. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his goodness is the cords of a Man with which he draws us, and we run after him; without a precedent taste of that, we should never come to him; But if ye have tasted, it necessarily and immediately follows, To whom coming as unto a living stone, etc.  
In which words, you have an allusion to, or comparison between the Christian Church, and the Temple under the Law, (of which that was a type or figure) and this allusion stands in four things; the foundation, superstructure, priesthood, and sacrifices.  
1 You have here in answer to the foundation of the Temple, a stone; specified, and illustrated by a peculiar Epithet [a living stone] and described further by two things (for preventing that scandal (or offence) that might be taken at it; because disallowed by men.) that men might not stumble at, or dash their foot against this, it is true (saith our Apostle) this stone was disallowed indeed of men; but first it was chosen of God; though it were reprobated by them, it was elected by him; non temere assumptus. And,  
2 It is precious too: 1 Coram Deo, precious in the sight of God. 2 Apud fideles, precious in the eyes of all believers, who prefer this stone to all pearls and diamonds before the treasures of silver and gold.  
Secondly, You have here in allusion to the Temple, the superstructure upon this foundation [ye also as lively stones are built up a spiritual house.]  
3 The Priesthood, dignified with the honourable title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an holy priesthood.  
4. The sacrifices. 1 distinguished from those of the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 spiritual, the sacrifices under the Law were carnal; but these are spiritual sacrifiees. 2 The means how they become acceptable to God; namely by Jesus Christ.  
The 1. Allusion is the foundation. [A stone] and here 5. th': 1. that Christ is a stone. 2. How he is a stone. 3. How it fared with him (or what entertainment he found) he was disallowed. 4. By whom. And 5tly, their sin in disallowing him, in three respects. 1. Because a living stone. 2. Because chosen of God. And 3dly because precious.  
1. Christ is a stone; thus the holy Prophets Isaiah, Daniel, and Zachary prophesied of him; Therefore thus saith the Lord God, behold I lay in Zion for a foundation, a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation, Isay. 28.16.  
Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the Image, Dan. 2.34. Behold the stone that I have laid before Joshua: upon one stone shall be seven eyes, behold I will engrave the graving thereof saith the Lord of Hosts, Zach. 3.9.  
Thus the holy Apostles Saint Peter and Saint Paul term him. This is the stone which was set at nought of you bvilders, which is become the head of the corner, Acts 4.11. And did all drink of the same spiritual drink (for they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them) and that rock was Christ. 1 Cor. 10.4. He was a stone in his birth; daniel's stone, cut out of the mountain without hands; that is, made of a woman without a man. A stone in his passion: Zacharye's stone, graven and cut full of eyes. A stone in his resurrection; Isaiah's stone, laid in Zion for a foundation. A stone, of which the rock in the wilderness was a type. now as that rock when it was smote by Moses, sent forth streams of water for quenching the Israelites thirst. So he, smitten in his passion, sends forth baptismal water, to wash us from our uncleanness, and eucharistical blood, to be our drink, to nourish us up unto eternal life. Thus Saint John tells you that our two Sacraments flowed from the side of our Saviour, when the Soldier pierced it with a spear. But one of the Soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water, Joh. 19.34. Thus Christ as a stone (or rock) sending forth streams, bespeaks the Jews. In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood, and cried saying, if any man thirst let him come unto me and drink. John. 7.37. Thus he saith likewise of the streams of his grace. Whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him, shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him, shall be in him a well of water, springing up into everlasting life. Joh. 4.14. Thus he is a stone, a stone sending forth streams of living water.  
2 How is Christ a stone; He is a stone, (that is, metaphorically, or in an allegory as a stone) in a threefold respect.  

1 In respect of his humane nature; he was hewn out of the same rock, digged out of the same quarry, as the rest of the Sons of men are; he was a stone of the old rock Adam, he was digged out of Abraham's quarry, made of a woman; he took part of the same flesh and blood that the other children do; he was like unto us in all things sin only excepted; he was of the same rock with us, only without any, the least flaw.  
2 In respect of his passion; Nothing is more subject to contempt to be trod upon, to be spurned out of the way then a stone; The Kingly Prophet (speaking in the Person of Christ) saith, I am a worm and no man, Psal. 22.6. He might have said lapis ac non vir, a stone and no man; a contemptible stone in his passion, rather than a man; never were any sufferings like his sufferings, never any sorrows like his sorrows; and yet behold, never was any Person in the midst of his sorrows and sufferings, so patiented, so still, so stone like; He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth. Isaiah. 53.7.  
3 In respect of his strength and solidity; The chief virtue and propertity of a stone is, that it is firm and sure; Hence it is, that men place it in the foundation, and venture the fabric upon it. Christ is a stone in this respect especially; ye may trust him, ye may confidently build upon him, ye may safely venture all your temporal and eternal concernments upon this foundation; he is the true rock, upon which whosoever builds his house shall stand, though the rain descend, and the floods come, and the winds blow and beat upon it. It is the strength, stability and solidity of Christ especially, that gives him the denomination of a stone here; as in the verse immediately following the Text; Wherefore it is contained in the Scripture, behold I lay in Zion a chief corner stone, etc. And he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. 1 Pet. 2.6.   
As the gates of Hell cannot prevail against the Church, because it is founded upon a Rock, Math. 16.18. no more shall the gates of Hell prevail against the particular soul, that is regularly built upon this stone, this solid and sure foundation; and thus you have an account of the second thing, how Christ is a stone: come we now to see what entertainment he finds, how it fared with him, which is the third thing propounded.  
3. The entertainment of this stone. The Text tells you he was dissallowed, the English expression (in our translation) is too modest. It is in the language that the Apostle wrote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reprobatus (Beza) reprobaverunt (Trem.) it was not a bare simple dissallowing but a down right reprobating of him, and this they did two ways.  

1. In their words; when they styled him a deceiver: That deceiver, with an emphasis, Sir we remember (say the Chief Priests and Pharises unto Pilate) that, that deceiver said. etc. Mat. 27.63. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if he had been the greatest Impostor, the veriest cheat, that ever was in the World. A man gluttonous and a wine bibber, a friend of publicans and sinners, Mat. 11.19. A Samaritan and one that had a Devil, Joh. 8.48. Belzebub the God of flies or prince of Devils, Mat. 12.24. did they not reprobate him when they said we will not have this man to rule over us? Luke 19.14. if this may be construed but a dissallowing of him, that (I am sure) was an avowd reprobation, when they put the highest indignity upon him, in preferring Barrabbas before him, John 18. ult.  
2. They reprobated him by their works, you have seen the generation among whom our Lord Christ lived, with whom he couversed in the days of his flesh, laying him aside as a contemptible, refuse stone, to which they would not afford any room or place in the building: you may behold them now actually reprobating him, in their scourging of him, crowning him with thorns, nailing him to the Cross, and piercing his side. He was not only a man of sorrows & acquainted with grief (as the Prophet Isay c. 53. vers. 3.) but (as the same Prophet vers. 5.) He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: had he been a castaway, a person reprobated of God, they could not have treated him worse than they did, when he thirsted, thyy gave him Vinegar to drink: they powered upon him the utmost that spite and malice could invent when the very pangs of death were upon him, they inflicted upon him a shameful, painful, cursed death, they crucified him, and they crucified him between two thiefs, as the greatest and chiefest malefactor.   
The Apostle saith of him (in a pathetical admiration of his humiliation) that he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross: it may be truly said of those with whom he conversed reprobaverunt ad mortem mortem autem crucis they rejected him to death, the death of reprobates, the death that hath a curse annexed to it, the death of the Cross, they prosecuted him in their rage and fury, till they brought him lapis ad lapidem, into a grave of stone, and then rolled a stone upon him, and so left him dissallowed (or reprobated) with a witness.  
But if he were a stone; that is incapable of disgrace, utterly unacquainted with sorrow, it is neither sensible of what is spoke, nor of what is done to it, the tongue that casts it aside with reproach, the hand that cuts and hews it, doth it not affect it any thing at all.  
It is true, a stone indeed is insensible, but Christ was a living stone a stone endud with life and sense, a person very tender and sensible of the wounds they gave him with their tongues, the reproaches, taunts, and scoffs, they cast upon him, and of those likewise of their hands, he was sensible of the furrows which they made upon his back, the whips, the thorns, the nails and spear, he was sensible of them all, he endured all patiently as a stone, but he felt it sensibly as a living stone. witness two things.  

1. His passionate prayer, Father if it be possible let this cup pass from me, the cup of his passion, it was the cup of red wine, the cup of his Father's displeasure: and this prayer he repeats no less than three times, Mat. 26.44.  
2, The apprehension he had of his ensuing sufferings, which was so great that it cast him into that agony, in which he sweat drops of blood, Luk. 22.44. whereby he made good this compellation of a stone, which use to give or sweat against rain or storms. he could not but be sensible of the Tempest when it fell upon him, who thus sweat in the sense of it before it came. and thus you see (the third thing) what entertainment he found, he was dissallowed or reprobated.   
But by whom was he thus dealt with? That is the,  
4. Saint Peter saith (in the Text) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (of men) of mean men it may be, the multitude who know not the worth or value of a stone. Nay, but they were the bvilders, they who should know what stone is fit for every place: so our Lord Christ, Did you never read in the Scriptures, the stone which the bvilders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner? Mat. 21.42. and so Saint Peter, This is the stone which was set at nought of you bvilders, Acts 4.11. and the bvilders generally, universally; have any of the rulers or of the Pharises believed on him, John 7.48. He among them who thought so well of himself as a chief master builder, that he despised the rest as persons who knew nothing, Caiaphas, was positively, and absolutely for the reprobating of him. One of them named Caiaphas being the highpriest that same year, said unto them, ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man (meaning Christ) should die for the people, John 11.49, 50. Now lay these together, and you have a sad account of the lot that befell Christ, he was refused, (or dissallowed) refused by the bvilders, by the chief of them, yea he was not only dissallowed, that is, not afforded to be the head, but he was reprobated, not allowed any room in the building; to be refused is not so much, it may be more honour (as the Tryers may prove) to be rejected, then approved by them; but to be refused of bvilders, who are presumed to be skilful, and by the chief of them, this is much indeed.  
Again, to be dissallowed, not admitted to the chief place, this is not so much, for there are other places in the building in which he might have been set with some reputation, but to be wholly and absolutely reprobated, not allowed any place but to be cast out among the rubbish, this is hardly to be under gone, and yet this was the lot of Christ, he was dissallowed not by mensimply, but by the bvilders, the supposedly wisest men. and that leads me to the  
5. Particular, the aggration of their sin in dissallowing him.  

1. Because he was a living stone, who hath life in himself, even as the Father hath life in himself. As the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself, John 5.26. a living stone, who gives life to all others, all kinds of life, temporal, spiritual, eternal, the life of nature, grace and glory. In him was life, John 1.4. not in the Scocinians sense, Quia Christus primus vitam aeternam & caelestem annunciavit, & revelavit, (Smalcius.) because he first preached eternal life. or life per meto nimiam pro vitae aeternae clarissimo nuntio (Schlichtingius.) the most eminent Preacher of life; but the meaning of the Text in him was life is originally radically as in the head or heart, from whence it is communicated to all the members; so that the rejecting, disallowing, or refusing of this living stone, is (being interpreted) the refusing of life itself, the choosing of death rather than life.  
2. Because he was chosen of God, the reprobating of that which God hath elected, is an high aggravation of sin: because hereby the foolishness of man exalts itself against the wisdom of the only wise God. Had Christ been a stone accidentally or by chance assumed by men, had he been propounded for the advancement or carrying on of some politic design, he might have been disallowed without any eminent hazard: but when God in infinite wisdom, and upon mature deliberation hath made choice of him, as the only proper foundation of man's happiness, he cannot be reprobated by any, without adding many cubits to the stature of their transgression.  
3. Because he is precious, that is truly and properly precious, cujus exiguum alterius magnum exaequat, a little of which compensats a great deal in other matters, Christ is the pearl of price which the wise Merchantman sells all that he hath to purchase, Christ is so precious that Saint Paul accounted his greatest privileges, his choicest services yea and all things but loss and dung in comparison of him Phil. 3.5, 6, 7, 8. to reject therefore a thing or person so precious as Christ is, is an exceeding high aggravation of their sin, he was a living stone, chosen of God and precious and yet disallowed of men.   
Lay Christ then (to improve this first general in a few words) the foundation of your happiness, as he was designed by the God of Heaven; the Apostle tells you in the 1. to the Corinth. 3. chap. & 11 vers. Other foundation can no man lay, then that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. This is the rock upon which the wise builder erects his fabric; all others are but sandy foundations; the House that is built upon them, the expectation that men raise from them, must fall in the day of the rain or tempest. As for instance.  

1 They who build upon the bare name of Christianity. There is a vast difference between nominals and reals; names will never pass in the account of Heaven for things. The Church of Sardis had a fair name [a name that she lived] but this did not advantage her any thing, because [she was dead] Apoc. 3.1.  
2 They who build upon the shoulders of their religious progenitors, the Grandmother Lois, and the Mother Eunice. It is an happiness too great for Parents to entail their graces together with their estates upon their children; all the holiness they derive to them, is a faederal holiness only; a leprous Father begets a leprous child; the Father takes a potion, and is healed of his leprosy, but if the child use not that remedy, he dies in his uncleanness; if you reflect upon the children of many holy men in Scripture, you may behold Adam's Cain, abraham's Ishmael, isaack's Esau, david's Amnon & Absolom, Aaron's Nadab & Abihu, Elies Hophni & Phineas: too many children are like Manasses; 
Hoc uno patris spectaculum  
Quod ejus imaginem reddidi ex contrario.  (Eman. Thesaur.  
3 They who expect the end without the means; who build upon their predestination. There is a predestination to works as well as to life. For we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them, Ephes. 2.10.  
4 They who rely upon poor, weak, languishing intentions, that never ripen into action; the Poet derides those whose intentions were always blossoming, but never brought forth any ripe fruit, cras te victorum, etc. good intentions fortified, with pious resolutions do fairly introduce one into the paths of virtue, but the best intentions without action will never bring him to his journey's end. The Jews (I believe) intended as they said, when they desired the Prophet to pray for them, and (say they) according to all that the Lord our God shall say, so declare unto us, and we will do it, Jeremiah 42.20. and yet he tells them they dissembled in their hearts, when they sent him unto the Lord; because (saith he) I have declared it to you, but ye have not obeyed the voice of the Lord, nor any thing for which he hath sent me unto you, vers. 21. good intentions are like the Angel that went before Toby to Rages; but the non execuion of them, is like the dog that followed after him.  
5 They who build upon their civil honesty, or negative goodness; they do no man wrong; they are not this or that; the Scribes and Pharises, were (without controversy) unblameable in their conversation towards men; and it is not to be questioned but that the Pharise spoke truth, who said God I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess, Luke 18.11, 12. and yet our Lord Christ saith, except your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharises, ye shall in no case enter into the Kingdom of heaven, Mat 5.20.  
6 They who build upon their religious performances, their own righteousness; Christ became a stone of offence to the Jews, when they would be saved by the works of the Law. Rom. 9.31, 32. and Saint Paul saith, Christ is become of none effect unto you, whosoever of you, are justified by the Law; ye are fallen from grace. Galat. 5.4.   
We may safely say of all these, as Christ did to his Disciples (when they showed him the fabric of the material Temple) there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. Mark. 13.2.  
2 Take heed of disallowing or rejecting Christ. Beza (upon the T.) saith etiam nos hodie vita & moribus reprobamus. Men may, and do at this day reject Christ by their vicious lives, and evil manners; they reject or reprobate him in general who are disobedient to the word. A stone of stumbling and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient. 1 Pet. 2.8. they more particularly, who refuse, neglect or despise his ordinances; the rejecting of them, is the rejecting of Christ in his wisdom and faithfulness.  
Every man that lives in a known sin, prefers Barrabas before him.  
It is this, and this only, that renders it a thing perfectly reasonable that the sufferings of sinners should be eternal, in the place of torment, because by rejecting Christ, they contemn that immortal and eternal life, which God puts into their hands, and upon which they might lay hold, by embracing and entertaining him. Is there any thing more rational and equal then this, that when God sets life and death before men, immortal life by entertaining Christ, and eternal death by rejecting him, they who choose death, should have their portion or part in it? Take heed least while you acknowledge (as you cannot but do) the reasonableness of this, you do not (as the Jews did) condemn yourselves in a their d Person. Mat. 21.41. and so I pass from this to the second general.  
2 The superstructure or fabric, that is built upon this foundation. ye also as lively stones are built up a spiritual house, vers. 5. In which there are three things considerable; the materials, edifice, and the manner how it becometh such.  
1 The materials are 1. in general [ye] 2. more particularly [lively stones] If you would know,  
1 Who these [ye] are, you must have recourse to the beginning of this Epistle; in the first and second verses of the first chapter, they are described by two names, strangers and elect.  
1 Strangers: advenis, inquilinis; in solos Judaeos competit. It appertains to the Jews only (saith Master Calvin upon the place) who are here called strangers, not as the believers are afterwards, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims abstain from fleshly lusts, 1 Pet. 2.11. because heaven is their Country, and they are here from home; but because they were cast out from that Land (the Land of Canaan) which was peculiarly theirs; and were now dispersed and scattered through Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, etc. Or,  
Advenis, strangers; i. e. ijs qui ex gentilismo in rem publicam populi Dei transierant. (Gualt.) who were transplanted from gentilism into the Society of God's people. I undertake not to umpire between Calvin and Gualther whether they were Jews or Gentiles; but take that which they both agree in, the [ye] here, the materials of this spiritual house to be Christians; that is, persons made proselytes to the faith and profession of Christ, whether from the tents of Judaisme or gentilism, it matters not. the [ye] are Christians, they the materials of this spiritual house; but not all we hope (will some say) for the Apostle styles them.  
2 Elect. whence they infer, that none ought to be accounted members of the Church, (the materials of this spiritual house) but the elect only.  
The elect in their sense, are (I acknowledge) the sole Members of the invisible Church, but all that profess the name of Christ, may, and aught to be reputed members of the visible Church. This Saint Paul hath put wholly out of controversy by telling us, that in a great house, there are, not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood, and of earth: and some to honour, and some to dishonour, 2 Tim. 2.20.  
And for the elect (in Saint Peter's Text) the great Patrons of absolute and irrespective election, understand them either of general election to Christianity: electis i. e. defaece hominum segregatis, ad meliorem quandam sortem. (Aret.) elect. that is separated from the dregs and vap of mankind, to a better lot and portion in Christianity.  
Or (at most) elect in the judgement of charity, so Calvin, God's election being a secret laid up in his own bosom, which cannot be known but by the singular and especial revelation of the holy ghost quaeri potest unde hoc compertum habuerit. It may be demanded how the Apostle knew that these Persons were elect? and his answer is, we may not anxiously inquire concerning the election of our Brethren, but make our judgement of it from their vocation, ut pro electis habeantur, quicunque per fidem, in ecclesiam sunt coaptati: that they should be deemed elect who are joined unto the Church by faith: est enim hoc charitatis, non fidei judicium; the utmost judgement that we can make in this case being of charity only, and not assurance: and he sums up his resolution in these words, quatenus ergo prae se ferebant se Dei spiritu regenitos, in electis Dei ipsos numerat. For as much therefore as they professed themselves regenerate by the holy ghost, he reckons them among the elect. This second title then elect doth not (even in the judgement of these men) oppose or gainsay our interpretation of [ye] by Christians, all that profess the faith of Christ. And thus you see in general who are the materials of this house [ye] Christians.  
2 More particularly lively (or living stones) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christians are here called living stones (waving some other respects) by way of antithesis (or opposition) especially, to those inanimate (or dead) stones, that were the materials of the Jewish Temple. Living stones, i. e. such as have a principle of life and motion in themselves. And they are therefore said in the preceding verse to come unto the foundation. (to whom coming.)  
The stones in the material Temple were not active (they did not offer themselves, or come unto the foundation.) but merely passive, they were brought and laid upon it; but here the stones are active, and come; and accordingly the Apostle bespeaks them as living stones 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not only aedificati (as Beza) whom our translation follows) built; but edifice mini (as Tremel. and the Margin in our Bibles,) be ye bvilt; which clearly implies not a little activity in Christians, in building up themselves.  
No doctrine hath ever shed a more malignant influence upon religion, or cast the Professors of it, into so deep a sleep, as that which with an open face and directly, or by consequence and with a glance of its eye, ascribes the whole work of our salvation so to God, as to deny man any activity in the conduct or promoting of it. For, they who are excited with the greatest earnestness to build up themselves, are yet too prone to lie still in the dust, but when men persuade themselves, (or are taught by others to believe) that they cannot contribute any thing towards the building up of themselves, they must unavoidably remain riveted to, or rooted in the earth, without any endeavour of coming to the foundation, making any application of themselves to Christ. As Suetonius observes of Tiberius, religionum negligentiorem fuisse, guippe persuasionis plenum cuncta fato agi; he was the more careless in the things of religion, because he was full of this persuasion, that all things are guided by fate; to prevent this the Apostle tells Christians, that they are living stones; in which expression as the privileges of Christians are couched, so their duty is employed; for as living stones you have a principle of reason and understanding to judge of the foundation, whether it be a rock or sand; as living stones you are endued with wills, to make choice of the rock or sands, as your foundation, to come, or not to come to, to build, or not to build upon the living stone, Christ. And thus you have an account of the 1. particular the materials of this house [ye] and ye as living stones. the next thing to be considered, is,  
The edifice, a spiritual house.  
An House. Thus the Church is frequently styled in Scripture: that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, 1 Tim. 3.15. & Heb. 3.5, 6. and Mases verily was faithful in all his house as a Servant, but Christ as a Son over his own house, whose house are we, etc. the Church is called an house, either metonymically, as the house is put for the family that inhabit it. as Gen. 7.1. and the Lord said unto Noah, come thou and all thy house into the Ark. And now (said Jacob, Gen 30.30.) when shall I provide for mine own house also? or an house by way of allusion principally to the Temple, or unto any other house.  
2. A spiritual house. That is, metaphorically, and allusively, to all intents and purposes in spiritual things, that which an house is in temporal. The estate of Christians (as they are in Society) is set forth to us in Scripture, in divers and sundry terms; sometimes of a flock, ye are his flock frequently in the Psalms; sometimes of husbandry, ye are God's husbandry, 1 Cor. 3.9. sometimes of a building, ye are God's building, 1 Cor. 3.9. and so in the Text, a spiritual house.  
In this spiritual house (without offering violence to the allegory) there are (as in every well built material house) 3. things especially requisite; symmetry, decor, and distribution.  
1 Symmetry, This in a material building is the convenience or proportion that runneth between the parts and the whole; and this reconciles those seemingly opposite things, uniformity and variety.  
Uniformity is so necessary (if not to the being, yet) to the well or comely being of any house, that without this, it is but a confused heap; yet it is not to be imagined that the most uniform building should not admit of variety; for, Art must be acknowledged in its highest pefection, when it may be reduced to some natural principle. (the most judicious Artists being but the mimiques of nature.)  
Now the natural fabric of Man's body is (according to the saying of Protagoras) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the prototype of all exact symmetry; no structure can be (possibly) more uniform than our bodies, in the whole figuration of them, each side agreeing with the other, both in the number, the quality, and in the measure of the parts: and yet there is great variety and diversity; for, some are round as the arms, other flat as the hands; some prominent, and some more retired; thus in the spiritual house (the Church) though there be great variety: some learned, other unlearned; some rich, other poor, some noble and honourable, other mean and vile; some strong men, other babes in Christ; some Fathers, other children.  
Or as, though in an house there be a cellar, pantry, kitchen, and other rooms of meaner office, as well as a parlour, bedchamber, and closet: and great variety between these in respect of form, height and latitude; yet because there is a convenience and proportion running between the parts and the whole; this satisfies for the diversity, and reconciles it (by the force of proportion) to that regularity or symmetry that ought to be in the building, So in the spiritual house (the Church) though the members be various, yet they may be correspondent, if the conveniency or proportion (in which symmetry consists) be held: and it must necessarily be with that Church, in which this symmetry is found, as they say of the material Church of Santa Giustina in Padova (though the materials be but ordinary stone, without any garnishment of sculpture) yet it ravisheth the beholder's eye, by a secret harmony in the proportion.  
2 Decor. This (in a material house) consists in the keeping of a due respect between the habitation and the Inhabitant. It was the saying of a great Artist (Palladius) that no fabric is to be regulated by any certain dimensions, but by the dignity only of the Master. The Gentiles having respect to this were profusely liberal in adorning their Temples (witness that of Ceres Eleusina at Ephesus) upon persuasion that their Gods dwelled in them: and the God of heaven (though he do not dwell in Temples made with hands as Saint Paul tells the Men of Athens, Acts 17.24.) yet (because the Temple at Jerusalem was dedicated to his worship, and appropriated to him) he complains (by the Prophet Haggai) for want of this decor, the not keeping a due respect between the habitation and himself the Inhabitant. Is it time for you, oh ye, to dwell in your cealed houses, and this house lie waste? Hag. 1.4. In the spiritual house, (the Church) in which God hath said he will dwell for ever, the decor is holiness: the Inhabitant is holy, and therefore the habitation should be so.  
It is true of the spiritual house, that David speaks of the material Temple, Holiness becometh thine house oh Lord for ever, Psal. 93. and upon the account of his own holiness, God requires this due respect. It is written be ye holy, for I am holy. 1 Pet. 1.16. and Saint Paul urgeth it likewise upon the same account. Know ye not that ye are the Temple of God, and that the spirit of God dwelleth in you? if any Man defile the Temple of God, him shall God destroy: for the Temple of God is holy, which Temple ye are. 1 Cor. 3.16, 17.  
3 Distribution. The designing of all the rooms to their several and respective offices. In the spiritual house likewise, there must be such a distribution. Thus the Apostle, and he gave some Apostles, and some Prophets, and some Evangelists, and some Pastors, and Teachers. Ephes. 4.11. and more expressly, 1 Cor. 12.28. God hath set some in the Church, first Apostles, secondarily Prophets, thirdly Teachers, etc. for as (in material buildings) some stones do well within doors, that would not serve without, to bear out weather: and others do better without then they would do within: so some Christians are more for use, and less for ornament; others more for ornament and less for use: as therefore God (in his wisdom) hath designed and appointed men, so they ought to keep their station, to continue in that calling or place which ye Mr. Builder hath distributed to them: and thus you have an account of the 2d. thing; the superstructure a spiritual house.  
3 The manner how Christians become such an house: and that is, by being built up or building up themselves: so (if this Text do not bear it) Saint Judas saith expressly But ye beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, vers. 20. for (though it be strange, yet) it is true, we are both stones, and bvilders: to be built, and to build up ourselves. Stones, in respect of them whom God hath set over us, to square and frame us; and bvilders in respect of ourselves first, and then of those who are committed to us, either by the obligation of ditty or charity; every one being to build up those that are committed to his charge, into an house for God to dwell in.  
In respect of ourselves we are to build God an Oratory; in respect of our particular Families, we are to build him a Chapel: and if we have a larger circuit (if we be set in public place) we are to build him a Church.  
This expression of being built up (or building up ourselves) implies 2. things.  
1 To what end, or upon what terms or conditions we ought to come unto Christ; nempe ut in ipso fundemut (Calvin) that we may be built up on him; to whom coming, etc. ye are built up, etc. though Christ the living stone, be a most sure and tried foundation, a rock, and a rock of ages, yet he will bear no more, than God hath designed him as a foundation to bear.  
It is a maxim of (the great Architect) Vitruvius, fundationes fodiantur si queant inveniri ad solidum & in solido, let the foundation be laid if it may be upon a solid rock: by which words, he commends to us (saith a learned English Commentator) not only a diligent, but even a jealous examination, what the foundation will bear.  
Though there be no other foundation but Christ, and though this foundation be infinitely sufficient to beat the utmost weight that can regularly be laid on it; yet this foundation would sink under the burden of the least known sin, unrepented of. They therefore that come to him, (i. e.) who expect salvation by him) upon any other terms or condition, then being built up by obedience and conformity to him, by increasing in virtue and good works, instead of founding, do but confound their own happiness.  
2dly. This expression of building up ourselves (or being built up) implies that union on in affection, that should be between those who are members of the same Church. An house built up, though the materials before the building (timber, stones, mortar and the rest) were divers and sundry, yet are all so united that they become one. So in the spiritual house, though every particular Christian be an house (or Temple) for the holy Ghost to dwell in, yet by being built up all are united into one Basilicon, or Princely fabric.  
An Italian Architect (Leon Batista Alberti) is so curious in the point of union in a material fabric, that he wisheth that all the timber should be cut out of the same forest, and all the stones digged out of the same quarry. This might not (probably) conduce more to the union of the house, then if the timber and stones were cut and digged out of divers forests, and quarries. But (sure I am) it conduceth not a little to the union of the spiritual house, that the timber and stones be cut and hewn out of the same forest and pit. For, when one saith I am of Paul, and another I am of Apollo's, and a third I am of Cephas, this genders to envy, strife and division, as the Apostle, l Cor. 3.3, 4.  
There are two things that tend much to the preservation of this union.  

1. A Spirit of Contentation, with that estate and condition in which God hath placed every Member of the Church. For, as it tends to Schism in the natural body, if the foot shall envy the hand, or the ear the eye, or any of the members the head. If the foot shall say, why should I bear the burden of the whole, and not be supported as well as the head is? or the hand say, why should I be employed as the instrument of action, and not partake with the eye, in its more honourable and easy employment of speculation? So in the spiritual body, if one member emulate or envy another, the Subject the Prince, the Presbyter the Bishop, it must necessarily cause a cloven or schism in the building, which may ruin the whole. For, as in material buildings, all openings are weakenings; and therefore skilful bvilders advise that doors and windows be as few in number, and as moderate in dimension as may be. A spirit of contentation therefore is of a primary necessity to the preservation of union.  
2. A Mutual Communication of particular faculties for the good of the whole. For, as the foot in the natural body can't refuse to walk, the hand to work, or the eye to see, without the apparent prejudice of the whole. No more can any member in the spiritual fabric, withhold his particular ability from the rest, without their detriment, and suffering loss by it. As when the members in the fable conspired to withhold nourishment from the belly, they conspired but their own ruin in weakening it. And as they observe in Architecture, it is a notorious soloecism to weaken that part, which must strengthen all the rest. But when every member communicates its particular faculty (the feet walk, the hands work, the eyes see, the ear hears, the tongue speaks) this tends to the union of the whole, with the advantage of welfare to the particular members. And thus I have considered the Christian Church as a spiritual house. Whence this inference naturally may be drawn, viz.   
There is a Master of this house, by whom the family ought to be ruled and Governed.  
It was an equitable and natural law, that King Ahasuerus made (upon his Queen Vashti's disobedience) That every man should bear Rule in his own house, Hester i. ult. It is much more reasonable, that God (the Master of this Spiritual House) should bear Rule in it. Our very being in God's house, doth necessarily oblige us to Subjection and Obedience to him. When the Holy Ghost saith, such or such persons were in such, or such an house, he intends subjection by it, Numb. 30.3. ult. Thus when the Israelites are said to be in Pharoahs' house, the meaning is, they were subject to him. Did I plainly appear unto the house of thy Father, when they were in Egypt in Pharaohs house? 1 Sam. 2.27. Let us therefore give up ourselves conscionably and sincerely to the Government of our great Lord and Master.  
In things fundamental and essential to be believed and practised, we are to receive our direction from his lips only, as he spoke by the mouths or pens of those holy men, Prophets, and Apostles, who were inspired by the Holy Ghost: Thus the Apostle expressly, Though we, or an Angel from Heaven, Preach any other Gospel unto you, then that which we have Preached unto you, let him he accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man Preach any other Gospel unto you, then that ye have received, let him be accursed, Gal. 1.8, 9 where you have the Divine inviolable authority of the holy Scripture asserted; and a very dreadful sentence thundered against any person (of what rank or quality soever) that shall presume to innovate, or introduce any Doctrine contrary to the Doctrine of those holy Men, who spoke as they were inspired by the Holy Ghost.  
Though we, i. e. Paul himself, and the Brethren that were with him, (in whose name he salutes the Churches of Galatia, ver. 2.) or though we, i. e. (as Vincent. Lirinens.) etiamsi Petrus, etiamsi Andreas, etiamsi Joannes, etiamsi omnis Apostolorum chorus Evangelizet vobis praeterquam quod Evangelizavimus Anathema, sit (l. 1. c. 12. prescript. advers. profan. haeresium novitates) Though Peter, Andrew, John, though the whole company of the Apostles, should Preach to you any other Gospel, then that which we have preached, let him be Anathema. Tremenda districtio, a dreadful sentence (saith he) yet parum est, this is but little in respect of that which follows, Though an Angel from Heaven should Preach any other Gospel unto you, let him be accursed. Audite populi, tribus, linguae, viri, mulieres, pueri, senes, tota gens Christianorum Sancta (as Damas'. Orat. 2. de imagine.) give ear, O ye people, tribes and tongues, men, women, children, all the holy company that is called Christians in all the world, Licet Angelus, licet Rex Evangelizet vobis praeter id quod accepi●●is, aures occludite. Though a King or Angel Preach any other Gospel to you, then that ye have received, you are to stop your ears, and be as deaf unto his Doctrine.  
But here you must take heed of wresting, or misunderstanding the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (praeter id, or praeterquam quod, then that which we have preached) for, this doth not confine the dispensers of the word, to a strict observation of those expressions and syllables only in their Administration, which the Apostles used: they may (notwithstanding this commination) use expressions of their own, (or borrow them from other professions) in explicating, illustrating, or confirming the Truths of the Scripture. But the Apostles [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] is either to be interpreted contra (contrary to) as it is frequently used. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (in Aristot.) praeter, i. e. contra naturam & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praeter, i.e. contra legem (beside, that is, contrary to nature. And beside the Law, that is contrary to it. Thus the preposition praeter is used likewise by Terence (in Andria) praeter civium morem atque legem, beside, (that is contrary to) the Law and Custom of Citizens. So St. August. explicates this Text. Non ait plusquam accepistis, sed praeterquam quod accepistis (Tract. 99 in Joan. he saith not more than you received, but other then, or beside that which you have received: for (saith the Father) had he said, more than you received, he had prejudiced himself, who desired earnestly to see the faces of his Thessalonians, That he might perfect that, which was lacking in their faith, 1 Thes. 3.10.  
Or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (other then that which you have received) quicquid Evangelio quasi ad salutem necessarium additur (Parae.) whatsoever is added to the Gospel, as necessary to salvation. I said therefore we are to receive our direction from the Lips of God only in things Essential and Fundamental.  
A fundamental (in general) is that upon which other things are built. Fundamentals in Religion, are those primitive truths, without the knowledge of which we can neither believe aright, nor yield that obedience which we own to God. In these (I say) we are to dedepend upon God only for direction, to hear no voice but his, for (as they observe in Architecture) the yielding of a stone in the lower part of a Fabric, but an hairs breadth, will make a cleft of more than half a foot aloft. So important are fundamental errors.  
A small error in the beginning, and foundation of all things, proves in the procedure, and end of them a great mischief. And therefore God appointed the Foundation of the Tabernacle to be of massy pieces of silver; intimating thereby the solidity and purity of the Truth, whereupon the Church is founded: And a Rabbi of our own observes, that every man in Israel, from twenty years old and upward, was to give half a shekel towards these foundation-pieces; whereas to other things they were not bound to a set sum, but every man to give as his heart moved him, which might teach them, that to the Fundamentals of Religion they were all bound, but in other things, each one according to the gift given him; gold, or silver, or purple, or scarlet, or fine linen, or goat's hair, (Lightfoot on Exod. 30.) So that thus you see in things fundamental and essential, we are to receive directions from the great Master of the house, God only. But  
In things circumstantial (even in Religion, and the Worship of God) it is the master's pleasure, that we should receive directions in them, from his stewards.  
The High Steward in this house (under God) is the King (or Higher Powers) entrusted by God with a legislative, and coercive (or constraining) power.  
By the Higher Powers I intent the person, not the office. And that by no less authority then St. Paul's, who calls (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) the Higher Powers, Rom. 13.1. at the 3d. verse (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Rulers.  
Now this higher, (or highest Power) is a single person, or company of men, entrusted with Sovereign Power over the people, he, (or they) being subject only to the Empire or power of God himself. I say a single person, or company of men: For though that which commands in chief, or in whom the highest Power is invested, must necessarily be one: yet it is not of necessity, that it be one in or by nature, but it sufficeth, if it be one by institution, so that the highest Power, is not appropriated to Kings, or absolute Monarches only; but in a rightly constituted Aristocracy or Commonwealth, the Optimates, Senat, Estates, (or by what other Title they are Dignified) are the highest Power: And they, or He, (the King) is only subject to the Empire of God himself. For, he is not, cannot (in any propriety of speech) be called the highest Power, but because there is not among men, any higher Power. Super Imperatorem (saith Optatus contra Parmenianum l. 3.) Non est nisi solus Deus qui fecit Imperatorem. There is none superior to the Emperor, but God only who made the Emperor. And so Tertullian (ad Scap.) Colimus Imperatorem sic, quomodo & nobis licet, & ipsi e● pedit, ut hominem a Deo secundum, & solo Deo minorem. We so reverence the Emperor, as it is meet for him, and lawful for us, as a man second unto God, and inferior to God only. You may perceive by this what I mean by the Higher Power; but since the good providence of God hath cast; us under (the best of Governments) Monarchy, I shall speak in the ensuing discourse concerning the single person, the King only. And  
1. He is entrusted by God, with Authority and Power, not only in Civil matters, and affairs of State; but in Ecclesiastical matters, the Affairs of Religion in the Church. There are 3. Arguments that evince this.  
1. St. Paul tells you, Rom. 13.4. He is the Minister of God to thee for good. (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) indefinitely, universally. And explicating himself afterward more distinctly, he tells us that Kings (and persons in eminent, or the highest place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) were instituted and appointed of God to this end and purpose, that we should lead a quiet and peaceable life under them, not only in all honesty, but in all piety, 1 Tim. 2.2. The happiness of a City, Country, or Kingdom, consists in this, ut Dei sit amans, & amata Deo, That it love, and be beloved of God.  illum sibi Regem, se illius populum agnoscat. (August. de Civit. Dei l. 5. c. 14.) That it be in subjection to God, whom it hath over it for its King. And the Father-pronounceth Kings happy, Si suam potestatem ad Dei cultum maxime dilatandum, Majestati ejus famulam faciant. If by promoting his worship as far as they can, they subject their power to the Majesty of God.  
Thus the Emperors Theodosius and Honorius (Epist. ad Marcellinum) tell him, that they designed not any thing in all their Labour of War, and Counsels of Peace, Nisi ut verum Dei cultum, orbis nostri plebs devota custodiat; That the people devoted to their service, might follow the right worship of God.  
Theodosius likewise (in Ep. ad Cyrillum) Caesarei est muneris, ut non solum pacifice, sed pie etiam subditi vivant, The Emperor must take care that his Subjects live under him, not only peaceably, but piously. Thus Isidor Pelusiota propounds the same end to the Prince as to the Priest. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Salvation of their Subjects; to which that of Ammianus Marcellinus agrees fully, Nihil aliud est imperium (ut sapientes definiunt) nisi cura salutis alienae. (l. 39) Empire is nothing else (in the judgement of wise men) but the care of the Welfare and Salvation of others. Since then this is the end which Kings are to propound unto themselves, that their Subjects may live under them, not only honestly, but godly; it necessarily follows, that they must be entrusted with Authority and Power in Ecclesiastical matters. For, the end being admitted, we must admit those things without which the end cannot be attained. And accordingly we find God laying his command upon Kings in Scripture. When the King sitteth upon the Throne of his Kingdom, he shall write him a Copy of this Law in a book, out of that which is before the Priests and the Levites, and it shall be with him, and he shall read therein, all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, Deut. 17.18, 19 and Psal. 2.10, 11. Be wise now therefore Oye Kings; serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling If you will admit St. Augustine to comment upon this Text, he will tell you how Kings, as Kings, serve God. Simo in suo regno bona jubeant, mala prohibeant, non solum quae pertinent ad humanam societatem, verum etiam quae pertinent ad divinam religionem. (contra Crescon. l. 3. c. 51.) when they command those things to be done which are good, and prohibit evil actions, not only in things appertaining to humane society, but in things appertaining to Religion. And yet more fully and expressly, Quomodo ergo Reges Domino serviunt in timore, nisi ea quae contra jussa Domini fiunt, religiosa severitate prohibendo atque pleciendo? (Ep. ad Bonifac.) How do Kings serve the Lord in fear, but by a severe prohibition, and punishment of those things which are contrary to the Command of God? Aliter enim servit, qua homo est, aliter, qua Rexest, etc. For he serves the Lord after a different manner as he is a King, from that in which he serves him as a Man. He serves him as a Man by living faithfully, as a King by enacting Good and Wholesome Laws, for the promoting of Virtue and Piety, and punishment of Vice. So King Hezekias served the Lord, by destroying the Idol-Temples and Groves. So Josias served him likewise. So the King of Nineveh served him, in proclaiming a Fast to be universally observed for appeasing the divine displeasure. King's serve God as Kings, when they do that in order to the service of God, which unless they were Kings they could not do. And herein is that promise of God to his Church; That Kings should be her Nursing Fathers, and their Queens her Nursing Mothers, made good, Isa. 49.23.  
2dly. That Kings are entrusted with the affairs of Religion appears further, because St. Paul tells us, the King is the Minister of God, to execute wrath upon him that doth evil, Rom. 13.4. as the good in the former Argument; So the evil in this, being indefinitely expressed, and having the force of an universal, it must comprehend all evil, even in Ecclesiastical, as well as Civil things. Thus the wisest of Kings (Solomon) tells us, A King that sitteth on the Throne of Judgement scattereth away all evil with his eyes, Prov. 20.8. Thus the people of Israel, engage themselves to Joshua (the chief Magistrate) according as we harkened unto Moses in all things, so will we hearken unto thee. Josh. 1.17. Thus the Fathers argue from those words of St. Paul, Rom. 13.1. Let every soul be subject unto the Higher Powers. If every soul, then Ecclesiastical persons as well as others. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (Theophil.) though he be a Priest, or an Apostle; and so St. Chrysost. though an Evangelist, though an Apostle, though a Prophet, every one ought to be subject. And Bernard (treading in their steps) si omnis, & vestra, quis vos excipit ab universitate? Ep. ad Archiepisc.) if every soul ought to be subject, then yours; for who hath excepted you from the universal, every soul?  
Neither will Reason admit that any person should be exempted. For, he who would be exempted, would either not be subject to any humane power at all, or to some other power besides the Supreme. He who would not be subject to any, doth thereby unavoidably introduce a manifest confusion, of which God is not the Author, 1 Cor. 14.33.  
He who would be subject to some other power besides the Supreme, doth as necessarily introduce two Superior powers, which is a thing unnatural, and inconsistent. Ea enim est summi conditio, ut nihil aliud adaequet, nedum superet (Tertul.) Such is the condition of the Supreme power, that it cannot admit a Superior or Equal. By this Argument the primitive Fathers overthrew the Gentiles Polytheisme: Because, That which is highest can be but one.  
And as in man, there is one will, which commands the motions, and actions of every member; so in the Church, there can be but one which must command. Which will be made evident by reflecting upon the effects of Empire or Government which are obligation to duty, and compulsion to perform. If therefore there should be more Superior powers than one, their commands might be contrary one to another; and so the subject lest without a possibility of yielding obedience to the one, without incurring the displeasure of the other.  
And if any man shall say that the actions being divers (namely Civil, Military, and Ecclesiastical) the chief power may be divided also into sundry persons. It would follow from hence, that the same person, at the same time, might be commanded by one to go unto the Market, by another to the Camp, by a third to Church; and so put under an impossibility of obeying either. Whence all Nations have (by the light of nature) rejected plurality in Government. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (Homer) & omnis potestas impatiens consortis. The Throne can no more brook a Rival then the marriage Bed. This our Lord Christ hath put beyond dispute, when he tells us, No man can serve two Masters, Mat 6.24.  
3dly. Not to multiply Arguments in proof of that, which would stand in need of little, had not that factious proud Spirit which possessed Donatus, entered into some Men, occasioning them to say (as he did in Optatus l. 3.) Quid Imperatori cum ecclesia? What hath the King to do with the Church.  
The Third (and last) Argument shall be drawn from the joint Suffrage and Testimony of all Nations, not only Christian, but Heathen, bearing witness to the Power and Authority of Kings in Ecclesiastical affairs; (whereby it appears to be no other than the dictate of Right Reason, which is common to the humane intellectual Nature. Aristotle (Polit. 7.8.) saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The care of Princes ought to be first of all for the Things of Religion.  
The Twelve Tables (the Fountain of the Roman Law) contain in them many Things concerning Religion.  
Jus triplex, tabulae quod ter sanxere quadratae,  
Sacrum, privatum, & populi commune quod usquam est.  (Anson.) 
You have in these a taste of the Heathens Judgement concerning this. (And one need not drink up the Sea to know whether it be Salt, or not.)  
For the Ancient Primitive Christians, that of Socrates (the Historian) may stand for many. Ex quo Imperatores facti sunt Christiani, res Ecclesiae ab. ipsis dependisse. The affairs of Religion depended upon the Emperors, ever since they became Christian. Which Optatus confirms, when he saith, Non enim respublica est in Ecclesia, sed Ecclesia in republica, i. e. in Romano Imperio. (l. 3.) For the Commonwealth is not in the Church, but the Church in the Commonwealth, that is, in the Roman Empire. Constantine (in an ancient inscription) is styled, Religionis & Fidei Auctor. The Increaser of Faith and Religion. And Basilius the Emperor speaking of the Church as a Ship, Ejus sibi gubernacula ait a Deo concredita. Saith that God hath committed the Steerage (or Government) of it, to him.  
And there is an Ancient Epistle of Elutherius Bishop of Rome, in which he styles the King of England, (vicarium Dei in regno suo, agens de negotio Religionis.) God's vicar for the management of the business of Religion in his Kingdom, and the first Moguntine Council, calls Charles the Great (Vere Religionis Rectorem) the Rector of the True Religion; and as they of old, so the Reformed Churches of late, were of the same persuasion in this particular. As it appears by their respective confessions.  
(Magistratum est, non modo de civili politia esse sollicitos, verum etiam dare operam, ut Sacrum Ministerium conservetur, Christique Regnum propagetur; denique horum est efficere, ut Sacrum Evangelii verbum undique praedicetur: ut singuli purae Deum colere, & venerari ex praescripto verbi ipsius libere possint. Belgica.) It is the Magistrates Duty, not only to be careful for the Civil Polity, but to endeavour likewise that the Sacred Ministry be Preserved, and the Kingdom of Christ Propagated. It is his duty (finally) to see that the Holy Gospel be every where Preached, and that all persons may purely and freely worship, and serve God, according to his word. And so the latter Helvetian Confession. (Teneat ipse Magistratus in manibus verbum Dei, & ne huic contrarium doceatur procuret, bonis legibus ad verbum Dei compositis, moderetur populum sibi a Deo concreditum.) Let the Magistrate take into his hands the World of God, and take care nothing be taught contrary to it: And let him Govern the people committed to him of God, by good and wholesome Laws, according to the word of God.  
And the Confession of Basil (waving some others) Quilibet Christianus Magistratus, omnes vires eo diriget, ut apud fidei suae commissos, nomen Dei sanctificetur, regnum ipsius propagetur, ipsiusque voluntati cum seria extirpatione scelerum vivatur. Hoc officium gentili Magisiratui injunctum fuit, quanto magis Christiano Magistratui commendatum esse debeat, ut vero Dei vicario?) It ought to be the Serious Endeavour of every Christian Magistrate, that the name of God be Hallowed, and his Kingdom Propogated among those who are committed to his Trust: and that they live, denying all ungodliness according to his Will. This was a Duty incumbent on the Heathen Magistrate; how much more ought it to be commended to the Christian Magistrate, as the True Vicar of Christ?  
Or Church of England deems those worthy of Excommunication, who deny unto our Kings, the same Power and Authority in Ecclesiastical Causes, that the Pious Kings of the Hebrews Exercised in the Church of the Jews, (Canon the 2d.)  
And here we must necessarily inquire how far the Authority of the King Extends in matters of Religion: whether we are to obey him in every thing he commands without exception, or but in some things only.  
We do not believe the Authority of the King Extends so far, as Bellarmine stretcheth the Popes, when he saith, Si papa erraret praecipiendo vitia, vel prohibendo virtutes, teneretur Ecclesia credere vitia esse bona, & virtutes malas. (de Rom. pont. l. 4. c. 5.) If the Pope should err in commanding Vice, and forbidding Virtue, the Church is obliged to believe, that Vice is good, and Virtue is evil.  
We extend not the power of the King, as certain Religious Persons, (who left it as a Rule to their confidents at Padova, 1606.) did the Pope's authority. Si quod occulis nostris album apparet, nigrum ille esse definierit, debemus itidem quod nigrum sit pronuntiare. If that which in our eye is white be defined by the Pope to be black, we ought also to say that it is black. But this we say, our obedience is required to all his commands that are not repugnant to the law of nature, or contrary to the Express Word of God. If he command any thing forbidden by the Law of Nature, or by any Positive Law of God (that is now obliging to Christians) or if he forbidden any thing Commanded of God, we are not to yield obedience. For as in nature, inferior causes depending in point of activity upon Superior, have no power of acting contrary to the efficacy of the Superior: So in morality, as St. August. Si aliud Imperator, aliud jubeat Deus, quid judicatur? major pote●tas Deus, da veniam O Imperator. (de verb. Dom: Sec: Mat: Serm: 6:) Where the Emperors, and Gods Commands are one contrary to the other, what Judgement shall I make? the power of God is Supreme, the Emperor therefore must be supplicated to pardon me.  
If the King Command any thing that God forbids, or forbidden any thing that God Commands, in both these cases, we must then fortify ourselves with the saying of St: Peter, and the other Apostles, We ought to obey God rather than men, Acts 5: 29: And God having by nature prohibited the kill of an Innocent person, the Hebrew Midwives are commended for not obeying the King's commandment concerning the kill of the male children: But the Midwives feared God (saith the Text) and did not as the King of Egypt commanded them, Exod: 1: 17.  
Whatever a commandment of God makes necessary, no humane authority can render not necessary or obliging, and therefore it is usually said that the Gospel, Ministry, and Sacraments, are not subject to any humane Authority; that is, in point of changing or altering that in them, which is of Divine Institution. For, what God hath Determined Affirmatively, or Negatively, man cannot determine the contrary. But in things not determined by God, as Time, Place, and manner of performing actions commanded by God, the King by his Authority may determine these. Though the King cannot Prohibit an Holy, Harmless, rightly constituted Ministry, the Preaching of the Word, or Administering the Sacrament, according to the form of Divine Institution: yet he may require them to preach at such times, and in such places only; he may prescribe them the habit in which they shall Officiate, by Virtue of that Apostolical Precept: Let all things be done Decently, and in Order, 1 Cor. 14. ult. This Rule is so equitable, that all men will yield their assent, That all things in the Worship of God ought to be done Decently, and in Order. But what is Decent, and Orderly, is not so soon agreed. For that (saith one) which you call Decent, is, (in my Opinion) the most unseemly thing in the world. And that is most disorderly (in my Judgement) which you account Regularly performed, and in Order. There must therefore be some proper Judge agreed upon to Determine what is Decent, and in Order: Do you then Judge in yourselves, (laying only your Prejudice and Passion aside) whether a Noble Man, or Master of a Great Family, leaving this general Rule for the Government of his house, that all things in it be done Decently and in Order, doth he not intent and expect that his Steward should Determine what is so? For either the Steward, or the rest of the Servants must determine it. If the Servants, confusion and ataxy, instead of Decency and Order, must inavoidable flow in upon them. For one will say this is decent, and another the contrary is decent. It is more decent saith one to put off our shoes then our hats, in Respect and Reverence to our Lord, it is more orderly to sit then to stand in his presence. This must necessarily beget Parties and Sidings, that Animosity, Strife, and Contention, and by consequence the ruin of the Family. For why (will one servant in the Family, or one party, say) should not I, or we, judge of decency as well as you, or your party? So that you cannot but see that there is a necessity that the Steward should Determine. And is it not thus in the Spiritual house? If every Congregation, or Pastor, be left free to judge of what is Decent and in Order, things as unreasonable as the putting off the shoes, and sitting in the Master's presence will be practised by the most: Because the most are not the wisest. And they affect generally like Cattle fallen into a River, to Swim against the Stream.  
In things therefore of this nature (namely such as are not determined by the great Master, God) you own obedience to the Steward's determination, especially since whatsoever is not forbidden by God, hath in that very respect, the force of a permission at least. Because, Where there is no Law, there is no transgression, Rom. 4.15. Now there is no Law against such or such indifferent things and therefore he who conforms, sins not. But there is a Law which requires Every Soul to be subject to the Higher Powers, Rom. 13.1. He therefore that conforms not, sins. You ought therefore to be subject to the Higher Power in matters of Religion for Conscience Sake. But if any man will not be subject for Conscience Sake, he must be subject upon another account, for God hath entrusted the Supreme Magistrate with a Coercive Power. Which is the 2d. thing propounded to be made good.  
In pursuance of this 2. thing,  
1. There aught to be some Coercive Power in Ecclesiastical Things, or Matters of Religion. For, without this every man would be left free, to speak or do what him lift. To introduce any false or blasphemous Opinion, to disturb the Peace of the Church, by enormous Practices. May not one deny the Divine Authority of the Scriptures? Another the Divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ? A third reject, despise and trample under foot the Priestly Office, and all the Ordinances of the Gospel? And (for practice) might not men (with the evil Servant in the Gospel) eat and drink with the drunken, and smite their fellow Servants with the Fist of Violence? Oppressing and Persecuting all that are not of their Opinion, though their Opinion be not at any agreement, or consistency with the truth. If there be not a Coercive Power stated somewhere, who or what shall hinder these, and innumerable other inconveniences and mischiefs?  
Every Fanatic Spirit, if there were no coercive power, might take licence by reviving old Heresies, or broaching worse new invented Opinions, to ruffle the Church, and reduce it to an Heap or Chaos of Confusion. Without a coercive power somewhere stated, all Reins of Government, must necessarily be let lose, and an effectual door set open for Atheism, Heresy, Sedition and Blasphemy to enter in. But this is a thing so contrary, not only to the peace, but even to the essence of all societies, that none but the absolute Sons of Belial, (i. e. without a Yoke) can plead for it. I pass therefore from that (as a thing assented unto by all that pretend to Reason,) That there must be a Coercive Power? and come unto the 2d. thing the subject of this Power, or Person in whom it is. And that is the King.  
2. Him hath God entrusted with coercive Power in Matters of Religion.  
Spiritual Power, (or Power in the Church) is divided generally into Ordinis, and Jurisdictionis. That of Order is referred to the preaching or the Word, Administration of Sacraments, Absolution, Confirmation, and all such Actions, as a person regularly ordained performs by Virtue of his Orders.  
That of Jurisdiction is double, Internal, and Externall.  
1. Internal. Where the Spiritual guides, they who have the conduct of the Souls of men, by Instruction, Persuasion, Ghostly Council, and such like; so convince the inward Consciences of Men, that they become wholly obedient to their directions. As Saint Peter by his Sermon wrought upon the Consciences of those Jews, Who were pricked in their Heart, and said, Men, and Brethren what shall we do? Acts 2.37.  
2. Externall. Where the Person in whom the Power is (in foro exteriori, as they speak) compels the Christians obedience. The King is not entrusted with the first and 2d. of these. He hath no Power of Order, nor Jurisdiction over the Inner Man, but in things that are for the outward Polity of the Church (as that God may be truly served, such as transgress the received lawful constitutions of the Church punished) with this Power the King is entrusted.  
Again, the Actions of Men, are either Internal or Externall.  
Internal Actions abstractedly, and simply considereed in themselves, do not fall under any humane Authority or Power whatsoever. Errat si quis putet servitutem in totum hominem descendere; pars enim melior excepta est. Corpora obnoxia sunt, & adscripta Dominis, mens sui juris est. (Sen. de Benef. l. 3.) It is an Error in any man to think that Servitude descends upon the whole man, for the better part, is always excepted: Our bodies indeed are Obnoxnious to Servitude, and the pleasure of those who are Lords over us, but our minds are free, and at their own dispose.  
And it is a known saying in the Law, Cogitationis paenam nemo patitur: No man suffers any thing for his bare thoughts. For, All Empire (or Power) necessarily supposeth such matter, as is capable of coming under the knowledge of him that commands, but the internal Actions of Men Simply and Abstractedly considered, do not come under the knowledge of any Humane Power, and therefore they fall not under their Authority. No power can impose upon any person that he shall think thus, and not otherwise, concerning any Article of Faith, because he cannot know whether a man thinks so or otherwise. As Lactantius (l. 5. c. 13.) Quis mihi imponat necessitatem vel credendi quod nolim, vel quod velim non credendi? Who can compel me to believe what I will not, or not to believe what I list? For, Religio imperari non potest. Religion cannot be compelled (as Cassidor. l. 3. Ep. 27.) and Fides suadenda, non imperanda el. (Bern. Serm. 66. in Cant.) you may allure, you can't compel any man to believe.  
But, besides these Internal, there are External actions, the words, and works of men: and these fall under Humane Authority, and Power; thus the Emperors, Gratian, Valentinian, and Theodosius, speak concerning a man, that is an Heretic, Sibi tantummodo nocitura sentiat, aeliis obfutura non pandat. If he will think evil things, he shall surmise them to himself only: he shall not publish them to the hurt of others And it was with respect to this, that Constantine styled himself (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) a Bishop in those things, that are without. Though therefore the Prince cannot compel men to believe this, or that, yet he may compel them, not to make Profession of any other Faith, then that which he allows, or approves. Thus the King of Nineveh enjoined his Subject's Sackcloth, Fasting, Prayer, and turning from the Violence in their hands (Jonah 3.8.) and indeed there's nothing, in which the Supreme power consists more, then in determining the Public Exercise of Religion. All, that discourse of Politics, make this Praecipuum inter Majestatis jura, a Principal Jewel of the Crown: to this every man's Reason subscribes. For, if it be demanded, why in the land of our Nativity (this Kingdom) the Roman Religion flourished in the days of Queen Mary, and the Evangelical (or Reformed) in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth? The Proximate cause of it must be acknowledged the will, and pleasure of the respective Queens. Or, if it be asked, why one way of Worship is used by the French, and Spaniard, and another by the Dane, and Swed? you cannot answer any thing, but the will of those, that Rule over them.  
If it be objected against this, that such a Power in the Prince would render the State of Religion unstable, and mutable: Religion being subject to be changed, as oft as the Prince should change his mind. It must be acknowleged true: but,  
First, The Danger is as great in other things, and respects; the Work always answering the Artificer: and qualis Rex, talis lex; such as the King is, such are his Laws. But no person may have his right denied him, for fear lest he should abuse it: for no man whatsoever should (upon this account) have his right in any thing; because it is possible for him to abuse it.  
Secondly, Supposing the right possible to be transferred from the Supreme Magistrate, to some other, the danger and inconvenience would be no less. For, upon whomsoever it be transferred, they, who must Manage this Power, are men, and so fallible, and subject to mutability. Our only hope, & comfort in this case, is in the Divine Providence: the minds of all men being in the power of God to confirm them in the truth, or to suffer them to turn from the truth to a ; but the hearts of Kings more especially, according to that of Solomon, The King's heart is in the hand of the Lord, as the Rivers of water (Prov. 21.1.) God can, and doth, carry on his own work, both by good, and evil Kings, well knowing, that a Tempest is sometimes more necessary, and profitable for his Church, than a Calm. If he, that rules, be a Pious Prince, conversant in the Scripture, frequent in Prayer, alover of the Church, one, that inclines his ear to the Counsels of those, who are truly Pious, and Learned, the Truth prospers and prevails mightily under Him; but, if He be a Person of a perverse spirit, and corrupt judgement, He proves an heavy scourge to those, that are in subjection under Him; Et legibus malis probantur boni, & legibus bonis emendantur mali, (August. advers. Crescentium, l. 3. c. 51.) Evil Laws are for the probation of Good men, as good Laws for the emendation of Evil men. The Jewish Church saw frequent mutations in their Worship: Hezekiah abolished the Idol-Worship of his Father Ahaz, his Grandchild Manasseh restored it again, and Josiah, his Grand-childs', abolished in a second time: and yet the Right of their Kings was never disputed. For, It was never lawful for the People to assume unto themselves the Public Exercise of Religion by force: but, if they cannot conscionably conform to it, they may Pray, and Weep, and Fly: other weapons Christianity allows them not. Thus the Prophet Elijah fled from Ahab, and thus our Lord Christ indulgeth (if he doth not Counsel) his Apostles, saying, When they persecute you in this City, flee ye into another, Matt. 10.23. Thus St. Cyprian, and Athanasius, delivered themselves by flight, in the time of Persecution; and the Christians, who lived under the rage and fury of Julian, knew nothing but the water, that distilled from their own eyes, to quench the fire of that Persecution. Aliud contra Persecutorem non erat remedium: ultra nefas procedere. (Nazian. Orat. in Julianum.) They knew no other remedy against their persecutors: to proceed any further was villainy. Coactus, repugnare non novi, d●lere potero, flere potero, gemere potero; aliter nec debeo, nec possum resistere. (Ambr.) I know not how to resist, being constrained: I can weep, and grieve, and mourn; otherwise I neither can, nor aught to resist. And this they did, not (as some have vainly dreamt) because they were destitute of Power to make resistance: For, (as Tertullian, in his Apology, saith of them) Vrbes, Insulas, etc. Palatium, Senatum, Forum impleverant; the Cities, Islands, Castles, Garrisons, Judgment-Seats, Palace, and Senat were full of them, and yet (as he) Nulli Albiniani, nulli Nigriani, nulli Cassiani, there were no Traitors, or Rebels, much less King-killers among them.  
Eusebius Pius (the Bishop of Samosatia) being banished by the command of Valens the Emperor, the people would have held him in his Episcopal See by force: but he, having learned the Apostle's lesson, Rom. 13.1. taught them also, what Reverence, and Respect, was due to the Emperor's commands; and telling them, that he would not (if he could) secure himself by a multitude, compassing him about (Nec ego me vallabo, inquit, circumfusione populorum) he thereby suppressed an imminent sedition. These (and many more Examples at hand) do abundantly evidence what deep impression the words of Christ to Peter made upon the spirits of Christians heretofore. The words of Christ are, Put up again thy sword into its place: for all they, that take the sword, shall perish with the sword; Matt. 26.52. Arripit autem, qui non a Deo accipit: dedit autem Deus soli summae potestati, aliis, non nisi per illam. (Grot.) He takes the sword, (namely with an hand of violence) who doth not receive it from God: for God hath given it only to the Supreme Power, and to others by him. Thus than you see the determining of the Public exercise of Religion is invested in the Supreme Power. And it is no less the Prince's Duty, to abolish, or punish all false Worship, or Religion. Thus Nabuchadnezzar (in Babylon) being convinced of the Divinity of the God of Israel, made a capital Law against the blasphemers of his Name. Therefore I make a Decree, that every People, Nation, and Language, which speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach, etc. shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill. (Dan. 3.29.) Darius (of the Medes, and Persians) Enacted a Royal Law to the same import. I make a Decree, that in every Dominion of my Kimgdom, men tremble, and fear, before the God of Daniel, for he is the living God. (Dan. 6.26.) In Athens they had a Law against (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Irreligion: upon which three famous Philosophers (Socrates, Theodorus, and Protagoras) suffered. Socrates, (as Laertius reports in his Life) was accused 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) of Irreligion, and the Action Commenced against him in these words, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.) Socrates is a transgressor, in not esteeming those for Gods, whom the City esteems such; but brings in other new Gods of his own. And all this was done only by virtue of the Supreme Power residing in them. For, though every Master of a Family be obliged to remove Idols, and every thing of false Worship, out of his own Private Family: yet the King (or persons delegated by him) may only do it in the Public.  
There is a Text indeed in Deuteronomy, that seems to countenance private persons, in destroying of Idols, and false Worship. Ye shall destroy their Altars, and break down their Images, & cut down their Groves, and burn their Graven Images with fire (Deut. 7.5.) But, if St. August. may be admitted to Comment upon the Text, he tells you, that they might not do it, without Authority from the Higher Powers. Cumacceperitis potestatem, hoc facite: ubi non est data nobis potestas, non facimus. (Serm. 6. de verb. Dom. sec. Mat.) You may do this, when you have received Authority, but without Authority we do it not. Hence Nicephorus reprehends, and condemns Abdas the Bishop, for demolishing the Persians' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Temple, in which they Worshipped the Fire; which proved a matter of much inconvenience, and trouble to the Christians. The Pagan Temples, in the City of Rome, were not shut up by the Christians, till Constantine made a Law against them. And the Elibertine Council (An. 305.) provides by a Canon (Si quis Idolum fregerit, & ibidem occisus fuerit, ne in Martyrum numerum recipiatur) that, if any person be killed for breaking an Idol in pieces, he shall not be enroled among the Martyrs of the Church; because (saith the Council) (Neque in Evangelio scriptum sit, neque ab Apostolis factum reperiatur) we have neither precept in Scripture, nor example of the Apostles to countenance the Fact. And thus you see The Supreme Magistrate is entrusted with a Coercive Power in matters of Religion.  
The Reason why he is entrusted with this Power is, Because, without this, he would bear the Sword in vain. The Apostle St. Paul tells us, that he beareth not the Sword in vain. (Rom. 13.4.) The Sword (saith Theophylact) is the Coercive Power, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) and he bears it not in vain (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) but that he may punish Evil-doers.  
It is a thing to be wished, to be begged of Heaven, with our most Fervent Prayers, that all Christians might be like those in the Acts, of one Mind, and of one Soul: that all, who confess God's Holy Name, should agree in the Truth of his Holy Word (as our Church teacheth us to Pray) but the peevishness of some, the interest, and malice of others, renders this a thing scarcely to be hoped for. Yet must not the Prince for all this abandon the care of Truth, Unity, and Peace: neither of which could possibly be provided for by him, without a Coercive Power. For, nothing hath a greater influence upon the External Happiness, and Peace of a Kingdom, than Religion. And that in a double respect.  
First, In respect of the Divine Providence, which hath promised to reward Piety, or Religion, not only with the great things of Eternity, but with the good things of this present life. Godliness (saith the Apostle, 1 Tim. ●. 8.) is profitable to all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. And thus Livy; Omnia prospera eveniunt colentibus Deos, adversa spernentibus: that is, All things succeed prosperously to those, that Worship the Gods, but nothing well to those, that despise them. And Horace ascribes all the miseries, and calamities, that befell Italy, to their neglect of the Gods; 
Dii multa, neglecti, dederunt  
Hesperiae mala luctuosae.   
And it is no wonder (saith Vat. Max.) that the Gods watch over the Roman Empire with a most indulgent care; seeing the Romans are so scrupulous, in examining, and observing the smallest matters in Religion. (Quod tam scrupulosa cura parvula quaeque momenta religionis examinare videretur.)  
Secondly, In respect of the Nature, the Genuine, and proper Tendency of Religion, which is to render men Peaceable, Obsequious, Lovers of their Country, and Studious of the Common welfare. Now, where men are generally thus spirited, that State, or Kingdom, must needs be flourishing, and happy. Thus Plato makes Religion (Legum, & honestae vitae vinculum) the bond of Laws, and all good life; and Cicero, (Humanae societatis fundamentum) the foundation of all Humane Society. I shall add only to this, that such a Coercive Power is necessary to restrain that curiosity, and itch of Novelty, that is in men.  
All mutation in Religion (though but in the Rites, and Ceremonies of it) if it be without the Authorinty, or consent of the Prince, breeds an Earthquake in the Bowels of the Commonwealth, and brings it many times into utmost danger. Hence the great Council of Nice cried out so Passionately, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let the old Customs take place. But, without a coercive Power in the Prince, this cannot be: for there is in every man a Natural affection of novelty. As they in Ezekiel, who did set their posts by God's posts, and their thresholds by his thresholds. (Ezek. 43.8.) so men will be bringing a Basin, instead of the Font; a new Directory, instead of the old Liturgy: unless their curiosity by the Prince's Edicts be constrained. And thus the Commonwealth, or Kingdom, will be cast into a quotindian Fever, or Palsy-fit. I conclude this with that rational saying of Parisiensis; Licitum est principi, abusum gladii Spiritualis repellere, eo modo quo potest, etiam per gladium materialem: aliter enim gladium sine causa portat. (De pot. Regis, & Papae, c. 21.) It is lawful for the Prince to repel the abuse of the Spiritual Sword, in such a way as he best can, yea by taking into his hand the material Sword: for otherwise he should bear the Sword in vain.  
But in what cases hath the Prince a Coercive Power? and how far doth it extend?  
First, He hath a coercive power, not only in the grand cases of Blasphemy, and Heresy but in those lesser occasions of Error, and Schism: he is entrusted with Power to quench the least spark, as well as the devouring flame, Arius in Alexandria was but a little spark in the beginning, but, because the Christian Emperor did not timely interpose his Authority for the quenching it, (Totum orbem ejus flamma depopulata est) it became a flame, which consumed (almost) the whole Christian World.  
The Prince's Authority may (and ought to) be exercised, in restraining dangerous Disputations concerning Religion. Sozomen (l. 7. c. 12.) tells us, that Constantine enacted a Law against Disputes of the Trinity: (Nemo Clericorum de summa Trinitate disputet) And Marcianus prohibited all Disputes (De fide Christiana) of the Christian Religion. Andronicus the Emperor, when his Bishops were disputing curiously, and subtilely, of those words of Christ, (Pater major me est) My Father is greater than I; threatened to cast them into the River, (Ni tam periculosis sermonibus abstinerent) unless they did forbear such dangerous Discourses. That of Sisinius to Theodosius being most true, (Disputando de sacris accendi tantum contentiones) that Contentions only are fostered by Disputations.  
Secondly, To the second Question, How far the Coercive Power of the Prince extends? It is acknowledged, that his Authority may extend to Imprisonment, Confiscation of Goods, and Banishment of persons sinning against his Commands: but, whether it may extend to Life, is not so manifest; because the Apostle saith only, Haereticum hominem devita (Titus 3.10.) The Gloss upon Gratian turns the Verb into a Substantive; de vita, and adds, supple, Tolle.  
There is not (as a learned Gentleman of our Church, in His Historical Vindication, hath observed) any example in History, of prosecuting an Heretic further, then to avoid him; till after God, having given peace to his people, under Christian Emperors; they finding, that, if the Church were in trouble, the State was seldom otherwise, provided by Laws to punish Heretics. The Council of Nice therefore having, in the year 325, censured the opinion of Arius for Heretical, the Emperor (who had formerly granted certain considerable Privileges to Christians) declared in the year following (Haereticos, atque Schismaticos, h● privilegiis alienos) that no Heretic, or Sch●●smatick, should have any part in those Privileges, but they rarely proceeded to blood unless (perhaps) against some seditious Preacher. And the Holy men of those times used earnest persuasions, to deter men, inclining to that severity, from it; as not esteeming it to agree with that entire Charity, that should be in Christians. St. August. professeth, he had rather be himself slain by them, then, by detecting the Donatists, be any cause they should undergo the punishment of death. (Ep. 127) This was the Temper of the Christians, at least 800. years after Christ. But about the year 1000, the Christian World began to punish Miscreants (as branches not bearing fruit in Christ) by casting them into the fire. But the Devout men of those Times did not approve of this rigour. St. Bernard, explaining those words of Solomon, Take us the Foxes, the little Foxes, that spoil the Vines (Cant. 2.15.) If (saith he) according to the Allegory, by the Vines we understand the Churches, and by the Fox's Heresies, or rather Heretics; the meaning is plain, that Heretics be rather taken, then driven away (Capientur, dico, non armis, sed agrumentis) taken, I say, not by Arms, but Arguments, whereby their Errors may be refuted, and they themselves reconciled (if possible) to the Catholic Church. And that the Holy Ghost intends this, is evident (saith he) because he doth not say simply, Take the Foxes (sed capite nobis) take us the Foxes: sibi ergo, & sponsae suae, id est Catholicae, jubet acquiri has vulpes, cum ait capite eas nobis (In Cantic. Serm. 64.) He commands therefore, that they be taken for himself, and his Spouse, that is the Catholic Church, when he saith, Take us the Foxes, Thus the holy men, in that Age, in which they first stopped men's mouths, not with Arguments, but Arms, judged of it. And indeed we have not many Examples of persons, suffering merely for Conscience, till after the year 1216. in which Pope Innocent the Third laid the foundation of that new Court, called since the Inquisition; who appointed such, as should be convicted of Heresy (ut vivi in conspectu hominum comburentur) to be committed alive to the flames of fire.  
And though such proceed are not at any good agreement with those rules, and examples, which Christ hath left us in holy Scripture: yet the practice hath been long since taken up in this Kingdom, and is in force at this day by the Laws.  
Anno 1166. about thirty Dutch came hither, who detested Baptism, the Eucharist, and other parts of Religion: and being by Scripture convicted in an Episcopal Council (called by the King at Oxford) they were condemned to be Whipped, and burnt in the face, and a command given, that none should either receive, or relieve them, so that they miserably Perished.  
By the Common-Law (that is, the Custom of the Realm) of England, Heretics are to be Punished by Consuming them with Fire: and (accordingly) there is a Writ De Haeretico comburendo.  
An Apostate Deacon, in a Council held at Oxford (by Stephen Langton) was first degraded, and then (by Lay-hands) committed to the Fire. (Bracto, l. 3. de Corona, c. 9)  
In Edward the Third's days (about the Year 1347.) two Franciscans were Burnt, quod de Religione male sentirent: because they thought amiss of Religion. (Pol. Virg. Hist. Ang. l. 19)  
And in the year 1583. Copin and Thacker were hanged (at Saint Edmondsbury) for publishing Brown's Book (Cambd.) which (saith Stow, p. 1174) was written against the Common-Prayer Book. (A Fair warning!) And thus you see, if men will not be Subject to the Higher Powers, in matters of Religion for Conscience sake, they must be subject because of wrath: for the Prince is entrusted with a Coercive Power, and bears not the Sword in vain.  
But because it is a thing Morally impossible, for one man (as the King) to Govern the whole Church in his Kingdom, Personally, by himself: He may substitute, or delegate others under him, to manage all his Power (which is communicable) in the Government of the Church. I say [communicable] because there are some things inseparable from the Supreme Power, as to Correct, Altar, Ratify, Repeal, or Make Null Canons, and Constitutions, made by any persons under him; to reverse, or mitigate a Sentence injustly, or unduly passed; the right of Appeals; of nominating Bishops to their respective Sees; of translating, or deposing them, where he seethe cause. These, and such like, are incommunicable unto any, inseparable from his Crown. But in all other things, that are not of this nature, he may give Power to others to Govern the Church, to whom all persons owe their obedience, by virtue of his Delegation, as much as to the King himself; because it is the King, that requires, or forbids any thing by them. Thus St. Peter requires Christians to pay their obedience unto Governors sent by him, as well as to the King (the Supreme Power) Submit yourselves to every Ordinance of man, for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the King, as Supreme, or unto Governors, as unto them, that are sent by him, for the punishment of evil-doers, and for the praise of them, that do well. (1 Pet. 2.13, 14.)  
The Governors sent by the King in Ecclesiastical Affairs are the Reverend Bishops. I take the word Bishop, not in the Common and General notion; as every Pastor, or Presbyter, is a Bishop: as he doth (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) oversee the particular Flock, committed to his charge. Thus the Municipal Aediles, among the Romans, were styled Bishops: and Cicero (Campanae orae Episcopum se dicit constitutum) was Bishop of the Campanian Territory. But, (in a more proper, and peculiar sense) for persons, who have not only the oversight of the Flock, but even of the Pastors themselves, a distinct Function, and Dignity from Presbyters, as the Fathers, and Counsels generally understand the word Bishop. Now concerning these I affirm,  
First, Episcopacy (that is the Prelacy, or Pre-eminence of one Pastor among the rest) is not repugnant to the Scriptures. If I evince this, that saying of Christ, He, that is not against us, is on our part (Mark 9.40.) will contribute not a little to the confirmation of this Order. And, if any man shall say, that this Order is repugnant to the Scripture (that is, if he presume to condemn the whole Christian Church, for more than 1000 years after Christ, of impiety, or folly) he must necessarily take upon him the heavy (that I say not, intolerable) burden of making it good.  
There is not (that I am conscious of) one Text of Scripture, that affords any countenance to that opinion, unless that in St. Matthew; Jesus called them (the ten Apostles) unto him, and said, Ye know, that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise Dominion over them, and they, that are Great, exercise Authority upon them: But it shall not be so among you: (Mat. 20.25, 26.) And somewhat more to their purpose) in the tenth of St. Mark, 44. Whosoever of you will be chiefest, shall be the servant of all. To these Texts I Answer, 

1. The Anabaptists (of old) and other Fanatic spirits, supposing the Antithesis here to be between the Gentiles, and the Christian State, have extended the Pronoun [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] among you, to the whole Gospel-Church, and all Christians in it. And from thence they conclude, that It is unlawful for Christians to exercise any Rule, or Authority, over their Brethren. So that the same Text, by which some would cast Episcopacy out of the Church, is made use of by others (to as good purpose) to thrust Magistracy out of the Christian World.  
2. Some Learned Interpreters (weighing the expression used by Christ, [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] in eas dominari, they Lord it over them (Id est, cum quadam acerbitate; Beza) with bitterness, and rigour) understand Christ's prohibition of an unjust, and Tyrannical Power only: such as the Princes of the Gentiles generally used over those, that were subject to them. And so Christ doth not dehort his Apostles from exercising Power, and Authority over their Brethren, but only from the Tyrannical abuse of Power.  
3. The Presbyterians themselves (in foreign Parts) do generally acknowledge, that this Text (in St. Matt.) doth not take away the Ecclesiastical Authority of Teaching, Binding and Losing, according to the Gospel, vel gradus Ecclesiasticorum, a Christo institutes, & datos Ecclesiae; no, nor those degrees of Ecclesiastical Persons, that were instituted, and appointed his Church by Christ; Apostles, Prophets, Teachers, etc. (Paraeus) he intends not by that Prohibition (in St. Matt.) to bring a Parity, or Equality into the Church: Nam sic tolleretur omnis ordo, inveheretur confusio (as He) for so all Order would be abolished, and Confusion introduced in the room of it.  
4. The design, and intent of Christ (in the forementioned Text) is not to take away all Pre-eminence, or Primacy among the Apostles, or Pastors of the Church; but to admonish the Apostles (and ensuing Pastors) of the Church; that their High, and Honourable Calling, hath the Ministry, or Service of the Church, annexed to it. Now this is so far from being inconsistent with Pre-eminence, and Authority, that even Kings themselves serve the Church, and Kingdom, in their High Calling. So King Antigonus to his Son; An ignoras, fili mi, nostrum regnum nobilem esse servitutem? Art thou ignorant, O my Son, that our Empire is nothing else, but a more noble servitude. Though therefore the Apostles, and their Successors, are required to be Ministers, and Servants to all; this doth not take away their Pre-eminence any more, than a Shepherd's serving his Flock, or a Tutour's serving his Pupil, or the King's serving his Subjects, takes away the Respective Authority, or Pre-eminence of the Shepherd, Tutor, or King, over those, whom they serve.  
5. This Text is so far from abolishing Prelacy, and Pre-eminence, among the Apostles, and Pastors, that it confirms, and establisheth it. For, when St. Matthew, and St. Mark say, He that will be greatest among you; St. Luke saith, [he that is greatest] and [he that is chief] Luk. 22.26. and you may observe, that our Lord Christ propounds his own example, as a pattern to them, Whosoever will be Chief among you, let him be your Servant; even as the Son of Man came not to be Ministered unto, but to Minister. (Mat. 20.27, 28.) The Duty therefore of Ministering to, or serving others, doth not hinder; but that he, who Ministers, or serves, may be Greater, than those, to whom he Ministers: unless, by urging this Text for a Parity among Pastors, they intent to levelly (the great Apostle) Christ himself, to be no more, then equal to the other Apostles. And one would wonder (did not Prejudice, and Interest draw a Film over the eye of men's Reason) how any man could entertain a thought, that ever Christ intended a Parity among Ecclesiastical Persons, when, by his own finger from Heaven, he hath so evidently pointed out a disparity among them. He gave some Apostles, and some Prophets; and some Evangelists; and some Pastors, and Teachers: (Ephes. 4.11.) which are not only distinct Functions in the Church, but distinct Degrees; as is evident by the Apostle, in the first to the Corinthians, 12.28. And God hath set some in the Church, first Apostles, secondarily Prophets, thirdly Teachers, after that Miracles, than Gifts of Healings, etc.    
The Evangelists themselves are (as Hienom. ad Fabiol.) Secundi ordinis, & minoris gradus; but of a second Order, and inferior degree, (Dignitate minores Apostolis, as Calvin) inferior to the Apostles in Dignity. The first Assertion then (namely, That Episcopacy, that is the Prelacy, or Pre-eminence of one Pastor among the rest, is not repugnant to the Scriptures,) is undeniably true.  
Secondly, The Church Catholic (that is, the Congregation of Christians in all the World,) hath received, and embraced the Episcopacy we contend for. To this all the Fathers (without exception of any one) bear witness. He among them, who ascribes least to Episcopacy, St. Jerom, who was not a Bishop, but a Presbyter of an inferior Order (whose Testimony therefore may stand in stead of many) saith, In toto orbe decretum est, ut unus, de Presbyteris electus, caeteris superponeretur: ad quem omnis cura Ecclesiae pertineret. It is universally decreed, that one, chosen from among the Presbyters, should be set over the rest, to whom the whole care of the Church should appertain. And that this was the universal Custom of the Church, appears by this, because those Heretics, who made a separation from the Church Catholic, did yet retain this Order among them. Thus the Author of the Homilies upon St. Matthew. Heretics, in their Schism, have all those things among them, which are proper to the true Church. (Similiter Ecclesias, similiter Scripturas, similiter Episcopos, caeterosque Clericorum ordines.) They have their Congregations, Scriptures, Bishops, and other Orders of the Clergy, as the Church hath. Aerius indeed (in a Pang of indignation, because he miss a Bishopric, which he stood for) would have made himself equal to the Reverend Bishops, by broaching this Doctrine (Presbyterum ab Episcopo nulla differentia discerni debere.) That a Presbyter ought not to be distinguished by any difference from a Bishop; but this error of his was condemned by the whole Church. When one wrote to St. Jerom, (Nihil interest inter Episcopum & Presbyterum.) There is no difference between a Bishop, and a Presbyter: he reproved him sharply in the Answer, which he returned (Hoc satis imperite) This was not said for want of ignorance (In portu, ut dicitur, naufragium) you make shipwreck (as they say Proverbially) in the Haven.  
Thirdly, The Episcopacy under our present consideration, is of venerable Antiquity in the Church: having its rise in the Apostles time. In proof of which, we can have no better Evidence, than the Catalogue of Bishops in Irenaeus, Eusebius, Socrates, and Theodoret; who begin from the Age, in which the Apostles lived. Now no man can deny his assent to such Grave Authority, so unanimously conspiring in matter of fact, without incurring the guilt of singular irreverence, and pertinacy. It is, as if one should deny (that, which all the Roman Histories affirm) that the Consulship of Rome began from the Banishment of the Tarquins.  
Will you hear St. Jerom? Alexandria, a Marco Evangelista, Presbyteri unum semper, ex se electum, in celsiori gradu collocatum, Episcopum nominabant. (Ep. 85.) The Presbyters of Alexandria, ever since St. Mark the Evangelist, having chosen one from among themselves, and exalting him to an higher place, styled him Bishop.  
St. Mark died in the eighth year of Nero, about the year of our Lord 62. whose Successor (St. John the Apostle yet living) was Amianus; to him succeeded Abilius; to Abilius, Cerdo. After the Death of St. James, Simon succeeded him, in the Bishopric of Jerusalem. After St. Peter's departure Linus, Anacletus, and Clement; or (as some) St. Peter yet living, sat in the Episcopal Chair at Rome: as Evodius, and Ignatius did at Antioch. A Record of such Antiquity, confirmed by Ignatius, the Disciple of St. John, cannot be rejected by any, save such only, who have no Faith for any thing, that themselves saw not. Who may as well deny, that ever there was a Philip of Spain, or Lewis of France, or Henry King of England; as that the persons, before mentioned, were Bishops of their respective Sees.  
Fourthly, The Episcopacy we intent, is approved by Divine Right, or (as Bucer expresseth it) Visum Spiritui Sancto, utinter Presbyteros unus cur am singularem gereret. It seemed good unto the Holy Ghost, that one among the Presbyters should have the especial care of the Church. Of this we have an undeniable Argument, in the book of the Revelations: where we find Christ from Heaven commanding St. John to write unto the seven Angels of the Churches of Asia.  
The Title of Angel may, I acknowledge, be applied (in a general signification) to every particular Pastor, or Presbyter. But here it is manifest Christ intends one, in each Church only: whom he styles the Angel, in a proper, and peculiar sense. For, It is no ways probable, that Churches so large, of such vast extent, as Ephesus, Smyrna, and the rest were, had but one Pastor, or Presbyter, in each of them. Nay, it is certain, and evident, concerning Ephesus, that in the days of St Paul, there were many Presbyters ordained, or constituted to feed the Church of God. Acts 20.17. And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the Elders of the Church, and said unto them (verse 28.) Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, etc. to feed the Church of God. And we may as rationally conclude, concerning the rest, that there were many Pastors in each Church. Why then should Christ direct his Epistle to one, [the Angel] if there had not been one among them of a Superior Function, and more eminent Dignity? Sub Angeli nomine (saith St. Augustine, Epist. 162.) laudatur praepositus Ecclesiae; Under the name of the Angel he commends the Perfect of the Church. Angelos, Ecclesiis Praesidentes dixit: (Hierom) By Angels, he understands the Precedents of the Churches. And for Smyrna, Polycarpus was (without controversy) Bishop of it, ordained by St. John (as Bullinger himself acknowledgeth) and Irenaeus saith of him (l. 3. c. 3.) Polycarpus non solum ab Apostolis eruditus, etc. Polycarp was not only instructed by the Apostles, and conversant with divers of those persons, who saw our Lord in the flesh; but in Asia he was constituted, by the Apostles, Bishop of the Church of Smyrna, whom I saw (saith the Father) while I was a young man. I wholly wave many other Evidences, and descend to a late Protestant Writer, Marlorat (in locum) St. John, saith he, mentions first the Church of Ephesus, in respect of the dignity of the place; Nec populum aggreditur, sed Principem Cleri, utique Episcopum. And he doth not apply himself to the people, but to the Principal of the Clergy, to wit, the Bishop. And because the Authority of Mr. Beza, and Doctor Reinolds, may possibly go furthest with those, who have no great friendship for the Episcopal Dignity, let us (in the Point in hand) hear them. To the Angel (saith Beza) id est, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Quem nimirum oportuit inprimis de his rebus admoneri, ac per eum caeteros collegas, totamque adeo Ecclesiam. That is the Precedent, who first ought to be admonished, and by him his Colleagues, and so the whole Church.  
Reinolds, in his Conference with Hart (c. 8. Sect. 3.) saith. Though there were in the Church of Ephesus many Presbyters, and Pastors, to Administer to that Church, yet there was one ever those many, whom our Saviour styles the Angel of the Church, to whom he directs those things, which he would have the rest to learn from him.  
Again, the most ancient Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament, in the concluson of the second Epistle to Timothy, have these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. The second Epistle to Timothy, erdained the first Bishop of the Church of the Ephesians, etc. And in the end of the Epistle to Titus, we translate from the same Manuscripts, It was written to Titus, ordained the first Bishop of the Church of the Cretians. And St. Ignatius tells us, that Evedius (his Predecessor) was ordained Bishop of the Ephesians, by the Apostles (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.)  
I will add only to this, that God himself (who gave Laws in mediately to the people of the Jews) constituted, and appointed an Highpriest, upon whom he conferred Prelacy, and Pre-eminence, over the rest of the Priests. And if any man object, that the Highpriest was a Type of Christ, I acknowledge it is true. But the entire Institution of his Office was not for that end only, his Eminence was conferred upon him for Order sake in the Church. As Kingly Government, was (in a sort) Typical of Christ; but because it was not only Typical of Christ, but Instituted likewise for the great ends of Government, it may, and aught to be retained: and so Prelacy among Pastors, conducing so much, as it doth, to Order in the Church, ought not to be abolished, though it were Typical in the Highpriest.  
Thus you have an account of these Governors in the Church (the Reverend Bishops) sent by the King; I mean, in respect of the External, and Accidental things of Religion: they have another Mission, even from the Holy Ghost, in respect of the Internal Preaching, and Administering Sacraments, Ordaining, Binding and Losing, and such like. Since than Prelacy is not contrary to the Scriptures, since the Church Catholic hath received, and embraced it, since it is of very Reverend Antiquity, and approved of by Divine Right; this one would think, should be enough to prepare a room for it in the heart of any pious, and sober Christian; enough to beget in us a reverend esteem of the calling of Bishops, to work in us a cheerful submission to, and ready compliance with the Rites, and Ceremonies in the Worship of God, commended to, and required of us, by such persons, delegated to that end by the Prince, whose Authority, in matters of Religion, hath sufficiently been asserted.  
I will yet add (for the better reconciling this Order to the affections of some men) two words.  
I. The Conveniency, and Expediency (that, I say not, Necessity) of Conformity, and Agreement, between the Ecclesiastical, and Civil Government. There is such an affinity between these two, that in Commonwealths, where the Government is by many, they always commend the Affairs of the Church to the Clergy, or Presbytery, and not to a Bishop: but where the Government is Monarchical in the State, Episcopacy in the Church is only conformable to it; Presbytery no way comporting with Monarthy. Hence that Preverbial saying, No Bishop, No King. A saying that may be easily derided, but not so easily refuted. Our late sad Experiences have engraven it in such Capital Characters upon the understandings of all sober, and unprejudiced persons, than it will not easily be defaced.  
II. The Utility, and Advantages, that redound to the Church by Episcopacy. I might entertain you (upon this Head) with the unanimous consent of all Historians, but I select his Testimony only, who, of all the Ancients, had the least affection for Bishops. St. Jerom (ad Tit. c. 1.) Toto orbe decretum est, ut ad tollenda schismata, & dissidia, unus, de Presbyteris electus, superponeretur caeteris. It is universally decreed, that, for the prevention of Schisms, and differences, one chosen out of the Presbyters, be set over the rest. And again; Ecclesiae salus in summi sacerdotis, id est, Episcopi, dignitate consistit; The safety of the Church consists in the Dignity of the Highpriest, that is, the Bishop: to whom, if there be not a Peculiar Power, distinct from all others, annexed; Tot in Ecclesia efficientur schismata, quot sacerdotes (advers. Lucif.) There will be as many Schisms, as Priests in the Church.  
Our own Chronicles tell us, that King Edward the Elder, by Constituting five new Bishops, stopped an Inundation of Paganism, ready to break in on the West, for want of Pastors.  
If any man question, or doubt of the Utility of this Reverend Order, let him look back upon the Torrent of Confusion, Heresy, and Blasphemy, that broke in upon us, while these Banks were by violent hands thrown down. Hoc Ithacus velit, etc. The Extirpation of Episcopacy in these Kingdoms is the firstborn of the Pope's desires; That, which his Soul longs for, as for the first-ripe fruit; you know the Apologue, how the Wolves would make peace with the Sheep, upon the condition, they would hang up all their dogs. Let but Episcopacy, and the Liturgy, be abolished, and the Papists, assure you, shall promise you peace upon any terms.  
There is nothing (that I know of) objected against this Order, but (that great ) the Covenant. Have we not lifted up our hands to the God of Heaven, and sworn the Extirpation of Prelacy? How then can we admit of Bishops, or submit to them, being restored?  
To this I Answer; An unlawful Oath obligeth to nothing, but repentance. An unjust Oath, voluntarily taken, or imposed by an unlawful Authority, is not binding to any man's Conscience.  
You have Covenanted, and sworn the Extirpation of Prelacy: so did Herod bind himself with an oath to Herodias Daughter, that he would give her whatsoever she should ask; Matthew xiv. 7. so did certain Jews bind themselves with an Oath of Execration, that they would neither eat, nor drink, till they had killed Paul; Acts xxiii. 12. Had those men done well in killing Paul; because they had bound themselves by a curse? or did Herod well, in giving John Baprist's Head to the Damsel, for his Oath's sake? you will (I presume) say, No. Why No? would you not have them keep their Oath? I; but it was an unjust Oath. So was yours, and will be found defective in the Properties, required in a just Oath, Truth, Judgement, and Righteousness (Jer. iv. 2.) And we may soberly suppose, that many men Covenanted against the Bishops, for their Land's sake only. As the Earl of Kildare, being Arraigned for burning a Church in Ireland, said, He would never have set fire to the Church, if he had not thought the Bishop had been in it. By'r, if any man can say, He took the Covenant, in Truth, Judgement, and Righteousness, he might lie under some temptation or keeping it, had it not wanted (that, which is essentially necessary to render an Oath obliging) a lawful Authority to impose it. But, seeing it wanted this, (which it were Treason to deny) no man's Conscience is obliged by it: and he, who will persist in it because he hath taken it, justifies his doing of evil, by doing of worse. Since therefore through the goodness of God, and his Majestie's undaunted Resolution) the Reverend Bishops are restored to the Church, and sent as Governors by the King: if you be Members of this Spiritual House, you must submit to their Directions, and Injunctions, in all Rites, Ceremonies, and Circumstances of Religion. Which fairly leads me to (the last thing intended) the Consideration, and Vindication of the Liturgy of our Church.  
The Calves of our lips (our Prayers) are a service more acceptable to the God of Heaven, than Hecatombs of Oxen, Thousands of Rams, or ten Thousand Rivers of Oil. An Heathen could say, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prayers are a more acceptable Sacrifice to God, than Oxen. That part of our lives, which we spend in Prayer, is the most celestial, and Divine. Prayer is a Duty so absolutely necessary for every person, who acknowledgeth a Deity, that Nature hath dictated it to those, who were strangers to the Scriptures, and Aliens to the Commonwealth of Israel. The Mariners (in Jonah) when the Storm was upon on them, cried, every man, unto his God; (Chap. i. verse 5.) and the Mr. of the Ship rebuked the Prophet himself sharply for neglecting this Duty, with What meanest thou, O Sleeper? Arise, call upin thy God; verse 6. The Sun hath never yet beheld a person so impudent (provided he did not say in his heart with David's Fool, There is no God) as plainly, and directly, to condemn this Duty. In the exercise, or performance of which we are diversely concerned: after one manner, as we are men, private persons: and after another, as we are Christians, and members of (this Spiritual house, on family) the Church.  
As Private persons, we are left free, to make choice of such Time, Place, and Form, as the Exigence of our present occasions require.  
Firs, For Time: either the Sixth hour (as St. Peter, in Acts x. 9) or the Ninth hour (as the Centurion, verse 3) either thrice a day, as David) at Evening, Morning, and Noon (Psal. lv. 17.) Or Seven times a Day, as He, Psal. cxix. 164.  
Secondly, For Place: either in Closet, Vpper-Room, Garden, Fields, or elsewhere, with conveniency.  
Thirdly, For the Manner: either taking unto ourselves words, and expressions of our own, or making use of apt, and pertinent Forms invented by others. In all these Circumstances we are free, and at our own election, as private persons. But, as we are in Family, Members of the house, a public body, we are not left free, but are under the direction on of our Spiritual guides, or Governors, in all these respects of time, place, and form. In then two first of these, time, and place, all (who are called Christians) agree, that the King, (or Governors under him) may prescribe, that public Prayers shall be made at such times, and in such places only. But the third, the prescribing a Form, will by no means be allowed by some to the Spiritual Governors, or any others. And others (who allow the King, and those, who are under him, authority to prescribe a form of public Prayer) will not admit of that, which we call The Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments. I shall endeavour therefore, first, to vindicate set Forms of Prayer in General; and, secondly, the Liturgy of our Church in Particular.  
First, For the lawfulness, and expediency of set Forms of Prayer, I offer four Arguments.  
First, The Example of God himself, and of some Holy men, who were inspired by the Holy Ghost. In the sixth Chapter of the Book of Numbers, verse 22, and forward, you have a form of Blessing the people prescribed, by God himself, to Aaron, and his sons. The Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron, and his sons, saying, On this wise ye shall bless the Children of Israel, saying unto them, The Lord bless thee, and keep thee; the Lord make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: the Lord lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace. And, as God prescribed the Priests a Form to Bless the people, so he prescribes the People a Form, in these words; And thou shalt go unto the Priest, that shall be in those days, and say unto him, I profess this day unto the Lord thy God, that I am come unto the Country, which the Lord swore unto our Fathers for to give us (Deut: xxvi. 3) and (verse 5.) Thou shalt speak, and say before the Lord thy God, A Syrian ready to perish was my Father, etc.  
When they went to Battle, a Form was prescribed (Deut: xx. 3.) a form of Thanksgiving for victory, and deliverance. Then sang Moses, and the Children of Israel, this Song unto the Lord, and spoke, saying, I will sing unto the Lord: for he hath triumphed gloriously, the Horse, and his Rider hath He thrown into the Sea, etc. (Exod. xx. 1.) This Song was composed by Moses, and learned by all the People, and repeated again, in the same words, by Miriam, (verse 21.) And Miriam answered them, Sing ye unto the Lord: for etc. King Hezekiah, delivered from Death, did not only compose a Set-Form of Thanksgiving; but used it all the Days of his Life. The Lord was ready to save me: therefore we will sing my Songs to the stringed Instruments, all the days of our Life in the House of the Lord. (Isa. xxxviii. 20.) And the same Hezekiah commanded the Levites to sing praises to God, with the words of David, and Asaph. (2 Chron. xxix. 30.) With the Words of David, and Asaph; that is, with Forms, composed by those Sacred Penmen.  
Secondly, The Practice, and Precept of our Lord Christ in the New Testament is a second Argument.  
1. This Practice (Matth. xxvi. 44.) And he left them, and he went again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words. And again upon the Cross (Matth. xxvii. 46.) My God, my God, Why hast thou forsaken me? The express words ' of David (Psal. xxii. 1.)  
2. We have his Precept likewise, in prescribing the Pater Nester, not only as a Pattern, but Form of Prayer. For, though he say in St. Matthew, After this manner therefore pray ye, Our Father, etc. (Matt. vi. 9) yet he saith in St. Luke, When ye pray, say, Our Father, etc. (Luke xi. 2.) Since therefore Christ (in whom all the Treasures of Wisdom, and Knowledge, were hid, in whom the fullness of the Godhead dwelled bodily, to whom the Spirit was not given by measure prescribes, and practisech a Form of Prayer; the Sons of men may, without disparagement to their Parts, or Gifts, lawfully make use of a Set-Form.  
Thirdly, The Example of St. John Baptist; who taught his Disciples to Pray, by prescribing them a Form (which occasioned the Disciples of Christ to desire, and him to answer their reqnest, in giving them a Form) Luke xi. 1. To which (that excellent Person, whose loss the Church could hardly have sustained, had not God, by his Providence, in taking him from us, near the time of His majesty's happy Restauration, swallowed up our Sorrows in victory of that Joy) the ever-to-be-Honoured Doctor Hammond adds an Apostolical Example, from that saying of Saint Paul, in the first to the Corinthians, xiv. 26. How is it then Brethren? When you come together, every one of you hath a Psalm. Which (saith he) refers to some of the Psalms of David, or Asaph; which were then ordinarily used in their devotion: and, because every one had his several Psalm, it is therefore reproved by the Apostle; as a thing tending to confusion.  
Fourthly, The Practice of the Universal Church. He, who lists, need not glean after the Reapers; but may fill his Bosom with sheaves of Testimonies, collected by the diligent hand of Cassander: and since by the late Writers concerning Liturgies.  
The Greek Church hath Records of Liturgies, or set Forms of Prayer, made by St. James, contracted by St. Basil, and again abbreviated by St. Chrysostom. And Histories mention a short Form of St. Peter's; which alone (they say) was used in the Roman Church for a great while. And we have mention likewise of St. Mark's Liturgy. But (though these may admit some scruple, or doubt) St. Augustine (I am sure) speaks of some Forms, retained in the Church, (and still to be found in our Liturgy) particularly that (in the Administration of the Lord's Supper) of Sursum corda, etc. Lift up your hearts. Of which he saith, that they are (Verba ab ipsis Apostolorum temporibus petita) expressions borrowed from the very times of the Apostles.  
And for many other particular Forms (used by us) we find them in Cyril of Jerusalem his Catechism. Ignatius is clear, and express for a Form; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (Ep. ad Magnes.) Let all meet together to the same action (or, place) in Prayer, Let there be one Common Prayer, one mind. And (waving plenteous Instances) take one Grand Testimony of Set-Forms, in stead of many. The Milevitan Council, c. 12. Plaevit, ut preces, quae probatae fuerint in Concilio, ab omnibus celebrentur, nec aliae omnino dicantur in Ecclesia, nisi quae a prudentioribus tractantur, vel comprobatae in Synodo fuerint; ne forte aliquid contra fidem, aut per ignorantiam, aut per minus studium, sit compositum. The Council thought good, that the Prayers, which were approved in the Council, should be used by all, and that no other should be said in the Church, but those, that had been weighed by the more prudent, or approved in a Synod; lest any thing through ignorance, or neglect, should be done against the Faith. These are some Arguments (among others) for the vindication of Liturgies, or Set-Forms of Prayer in General. I proceed to consider,  
Secondly, The Composition of our Liturgy (the Liturgy of the Church England) and in pursuance of this, I shall advance by three steps.  
I. The Derision, Scorn, and Reproach, which is cast upon our Liturgy, by many, is so far from being a stumbling-block, or stone of offence, to scandalise any discerning Christian, that it is rather an Argument, evincing the dignity, and excellency of it. For  
First, The best things when they are set up as a mark to shoot at, by persons possessed with disdain, or dislike of them, may be cavilled at, and faulted, easily scorned, and derided. Some Critics have been so bold, as to find fault with the Frame, and order of the great Fabric of the World, and called it (Blasphemously) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, confusion, or Confused mixture, and it is reported of Alphenso (Surnamed The Wise) one of the Kings of Castille, that he used many times to say, That, if he had stod at God's elbow when he made the World, many things should have been ordered better, than they were in die first Creation.  
Secondly, We ought not to be Scandalised at our Liturgy in respect of the scoffs & jeers of its adversaries, because it is no more than the Holy Ghost hath foretold concerning these times, by the Apostles, St Peter, and St. Judas. There shall come in the last days scoffers, 2 Pet. 3. There shall be Mockers in the last time; (Judas 18.) Though therefore men style it, in derision, The English Mass-Book, and The Starve-us-Book, and what not that is ugly; these may argue the Unchristianness of the persons, that belch them forth, but they do not evince the Anti-Christianity of our Liturgy.  
Thirdly, As when one goes forth to encounter his Adversary, with a Rush, or Reed only in his hand, we rationally conclude, that he hath not a Sword, or Spear in his Armoury: So, when men bring railing Accusations only against our Liturgy, we may safely conclude, That it is because they are destitute of every thing, that is solid, or substantial to charge it with. Vtatur motu animi, qui uti ratione non potest. We may indulge them the liberty, of their Passion, who know not how to make use of Reason.  
II. Though some persons have (through ignorance or malice) bitterly reproached our Liturgy, yet God hath raised up others, who have fairly blessed, and put a Crown upon the head of it. Mr. Calvin himself hath afforded it such a fair Testimony under his Hand, that one would think, his Disciples (for their Master's reputation at least) should forbear to blaspheme it. Quod ad formulam precum, & Rituum Ecclesiasticorum, valde probo, ut certa illa extet, a qua Pastoribus discedere in functione sua non liceat. Tam ut ccnsulatur quorundam simplicitati, & imperitiae, quam ut certius ita constet omnium inter se Ecclesiarum consensus. Postremo etiam, ut obviam eatur desultoriae quorundam levitati, qui novationes quasdam affectant. (Ep. 87. wrote to the Duke of Somerset the Protector, 22 Octob. Anno 1548.)  
Concerning your Form of Prayer, and Ecclesiatical Rites, I do much approve of a certain Set-Form; from which it shall not be lawful for the Pastors, in their Ministration, to recede; as well for their sakes, who are ignorant, and unlearned; as that the Consent of the whole Church may thereby the better appear. And lastly, to prevent the Desultory Levity of some, who affect Novelties.  
Archbishop Cranmer, having Translated King Edward's Common-Prayer-Book into Latin, sent it to Mr. Bucer, and required his Judgement of it: who answered, That there was nothing in it, but what was taken out of the Word of God: or which was not against it (commode exceptum) being taken in a good sense. There are some things indeed (quae nisi quis, etc.) which unless they be interpreted with candour, may seem not so agreeable unto the Word of God, and which unquiet men may wrest unto matter of Contention. Upon which occasion, that Book was surveyed; and, in those particulars, subject to such Cavils, corrected. I shall add only to these two Foreign Testimonies, an equal number of our own Countrymen, (both Martyrs.)  
Mr. John Hullyer, (Fellow of King's College in Cambridg) who suffered Martyrdom in Queen Mary's days, Anno 1557.) being at the Stake, among many other Books, that were thrown into the fire to him, it happened, that a Common-Prayer-Book fell between his hands, which he joyfully received, opened, and read, till the flame and smoke suffered him not to see any more: and then he fell to Prayer, holding his hands up to Heaven, and the Book between his Arms, next his Heart, thanking God for that mercy in sending him it (Acts, & Men. pag. 18 18.)  
Doctor Taylor (in the Conference between him, and Gardiner, Jan. 22. Anno 1555.) There was (saith he) set forth by the most innocent King Edward (for whom God be praised everlastingly) the whole Church-Service, with great deliberation, and Advice of the Learned Men of the Realm, and authorized by the whole Parliament. Which Book was never Reform, but once; and yet by that one Reformation, it was so fully perfected, according to the Rules of our Religion, in every behalf, That no Christian Conscience can be offended with any thing therein contained, (Acts, & Mon, fol. 1521.) Mind the words of this Holy Martyr [No Christian Conscience can be offended with any thing therein contained) and yet what Swarms of Exceptions fly in the Face of it? A plenteous shower of Rain, seldom brings forth more Mushrooms, (or Toad-Stools) than the late Luxuriant Age hath produced Exceptions against this Book. Concerning which, take the Judgement of Mr. Hooker; Whosoever doth measure them by number, must needs be out of love with a thing that hath so many faults: Whosoever by weight, cannot choose but esteem very highly of that, wherein the wit of so scrupulous Adversaries hath not hitherto observed any defect, which themselves can seriously think to be of moment, (Eccles. Pol. B. 5. Sect. 27.) The examination of these Exceptions, will be our third Step.  
III. The Exceptions commonly brought against our Liturgy, are either general, or more particular.  
First, In general, two things are chief laid to its charge.  
1. It is a Superstitious Worship.  
In answer to this,  
First, I presume, that (as they say Proverbially) Every man, that talks of Robin Hood never shot in his Bow: So every one, that cries out Superstition, doth not well understand what Superstition is, for Superstition (in the proper, and strict Notion, and signification of the Word) is the Worship of Idols, or Dead Men, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Superstites. Thus St. Paul tells the Athenians, I perceive that in all things you are too superstitious; (Act. xvii. 22.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Thus I suppose no man hath the Forehead to charge our Liturgy with Superstition.  
Superstition (in an improper, and more generally-received Notion) is, when things are either abhorred, or observed, with a zealous, or fearful, but erroneous relation to God: By means of which, the Superstitious serve, either the true God, with needless Offices, or defraud Him of Necessary Duties, or bestow such honour, and service upon others, as is proper for, and should be peculiar to him only.  
That our Liturgy confers any Honour, or Service, proper, and peculiar to God, upon others, no man hath yet affirmed; That it requires needless Offices, to be performed to the true God, no man can say, who believes that God (who made oar Bodies, as well as our Souls) requires the external Worship of our Bodies, as well as the inward Service of our Mind. A man cannot express too much in the outside, provided the invisible part come not short of it; and (I must-say) I know not how the stifness of the Knee, can be 〈…〉 from defect of Humility at least, if not of true Piety also.  
Secondly, There may be as much Superstition, in rejecting of our Liturgy, as in retaining it: as much Superstition, in opposing as in asserting Ceremonies. A Negative. Touch not, Taste not, Kneel not, Bow not, may be Superstitious, as well as the Affirmative. An ignorant fear of displeasing God. 〈◊〉 such a Form, or Circumstance of Worship, ●ay, be Superstitious as well, as a Blind Ze●● or Fear is of all Affections (Anger excepted) the unaptest to admit any Conference with Reason. While a man Superstitiously fears, lest he should offend, in doing this, or that, he sins against God, and his own Soul, in leaving that undone, which his Reason (if he harkened to the Voice of it) would tell him he might, and aught to do. This is the first, and great, but (you see) groundless, Exception, against our Liturgy. The second is like unto it; namely, that, Our Liturgy is Popish: or too near Popery, being taken out of the Mass-Book To this I answer,  
First, (In the words of Learned Mr. Hocker) It were violent, and extreme, to say, that in nothing they may be followed, who are of the Church of Rome. (They acknowledge the Scriptures, of the Old and New Testament, to be the Word of God: They make Profession of all the Articles of the Faith; one God, one Saviour, one Baptism: it will not (I hope) be deemed Popery in Us to do so, because they do it.) Some things they do as men, some things as wise men, some things as Christian men; in these we may follow them: Some things they do as misled, and blinded with Error; As far, as they follow Reason, and Truth, we fear not to tread the same steps, in which they have gone, and to be their followers. While Rome keeps that, which is ancienter, and better, others, whom we much more affect, leaving it for newer, and changing it for worse, we had rather follow the perfection of them whom we like not, then in their defects resemble them, whom we love; (Eccles. pol. B. 5. Sect. 28.) We are sorry (saith Learned Doctor Covel) that their weakness taketh offence at that, which we hold as an honour, and a virtue in the Church of England; namely, that we have so sparingly, and as it were unwillingly, dissented from the Church of Rome; with whom, if the Corruptions of that Church would have given us leave, we would have willingly consented in their whole Service: which being unsafe, and unlawful, we follow them, notwithstanding, in all, wherein they follow those Holy and Ancient Fathers, which first planted the Truth among them. (Modest Exam. pag. 185.)  
Secondly, It is no ways probable, were our Liturgy Popish, that the Papists would be such violent Opposers of it. We are assured by an Argument of Christ's own making, that it is not Popish: for (saith our Saviour, Every Kingdom, divided against itself, is brought to desolation; and an house divided against an house falleth; (Luke. xi. 17.) John Ould (in Queen Mary's days) wrote against the Papists, in Defence of the Common-Prayer-Book. And Cranmer made a Challenge, That, if he might be permitted by the Queen, to take to him P. Martyr, and four, or five more, they would enter the Lists with any Papists living, and defend the Common-Prayer-Book, to be perfectly agreeable to the Word of God, and the same, in effect, which had been for fifteen hundred years in the Church of Christ.  
Thirdly, It is a known truth, that our Reformers retained not any part of the Popish Service, but reform their Breviary, Processional, and Mass-Book (as they did their Doctrine) retaining nothing, but what the Papists had received from purer Antiquity: which argues only a fair compliance in us with the Ancient Church, and not at all with them. And if it be said, that some Papists have boasted, that our Service is but their Mass in English. It is (certainly) a most unreasonable thing, that they who will not believe the Papist in any thing else, should believe them in their vain boast against us, and think it an accusation sufficiently proved, because some Papists have impudently said it.  
Fourthly, The truth is, the Papists condemn our Book as much of Schism, as the Consistorian do of compliance; they accuse it as much of departing from, the Church of Rome, as the others of remaining with it. Now there cannot be a surer evidence of the innocency of our Liturgy, than the contrary Censures, which it hath undergon between these two Persecutors in the extreme: it being the dictate of natural Reason, that Virtue is infallibly known by this, that is it accused by both the Extremes, at guilty of either; as (for instance) the true Liberality of mind is by this exemplifyed, that it is defamed by the Prodigal for Parsimony, and by the Niggard for Prodigality. Thus you have some thing in Reply to the Objections in general, whereby it appears that our Liturgy is neither) Superstitious, nor Popish.  
The particular Objections are exceeding many; but (as Mr. Hooker in his Ep. Dedicatory to his fifth Book:) for the greatest part, such silly things, that the easiness renders them hard to be Disputed of in a serious manner. I shall briefly consider the most principal of them.  
First, For the Litany (against which a Cloud of Darts are cast) Mr. Hooker (a Person, of whom it is hard to say, whether his Sobriety, or Learning may challenge the greatest admiration) tells us, that the absolute perfection of this piece, upbraids with Error, or something worse, them, whom in all points it doth not satisfy. (Eccles. Pol. B. § 41. (Of the rare effects of which, he gives us (there) two famous Instances: the one of Mamercus Bishop of Vienna (about 450. years after Christ) the other of Sidonius Bishop of Averna, who by the frequent and fervent use of the Rogation, or Litany, obtained of God the aversion of portended Calamities, and the removing of Famine, and a Potent Enemy, which besieged them.  
This part of our Service (the Litany) was Called by the Ancients 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 earnest, or intense Prayer: and in the Greek Liturgy, simply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intense, or earnest. And therefore the Courch requires the Congregation (or, People) to be more exercised in it, then in any other part of the Service, Concerning which three things have been offered to be justified against any Gainsayers; (but no man hath yet entered the Lists.)  

1. That there is not any where extant a more particular excellent enumeration of all the private, or common wants of Christians, so far as it is likely to come to the cognisance of a Congregation.  
2. Not a move innocent, blameless Form, against which there lies no just Objection; and most of the unjust ones, that have been made, are reproachful to Scripture itself, from which the Passages excepted against are fetched. As (for instance) That it may please thee to have mercy upon all men, from 1. Tim. two. 1. I exhort therefore that first of all. Supplications, Prayers, Intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men.   
Not a more artificial composure, for the raising of our zeal, and keeping it up, than this so defamed part of our Liturgy. For which (and other Excellencies, undoubtedly it is (and not for any conjuring or swearing in it (as some Blasphemously have said) that the Devil hath took such care, that it should drink depeest of the bitter cup of calumny, and reviling.  
Secondly, For the Responser, and following the Presbyter, or Priest, in the Confession of Sins, and Profession of Faith. They were designed by the Church, (from the example of pure Antiquity) to very profitable uses: as 

1. By way of mutual Charity, the people returning a prayer for the Priest, who gins one peculiarly for them. The Lord be with you, saith the Priest: And with thy Spirit, Answer the people  
2. To quicken devotion which is but to prone to dull and slacken by continual heairng.  
3. To engage every one present, to be no idle, or unprofitable spectator, or auditor of the Service only.    
Thirdly, For the three Creeds (the Apostles, Nicene, and Athanasius his Creed) they have been (of old) a badge of the Church, a mark to discern Christians, from Infidels, and Jews. I have not yet heard of any thing objected against the matter of any of them. The Apostles Creed (whether delivered by the Apostles to the Church by Oral Tradition, that famous Tradition so much mentioned by the Fathers: or gathered out of the Writings of the Holy Apostles) is the sum of the whole Catholic Faith, the Key of the Christian Faith.  
That of the Council of Nice was made in that famous Assembly of 318. Bishops, against the Heresy of Arrius, who denied the Coeternity, and Coequality of the Son with the Father  
Athanasius his Creed, composed by that Father. (who alone opposed himself to that Torrent of Arrianism, which had over flowed the whole world) was, both in the East, and Western-Church, accounted as a Treasure of great price. There is not any imaginable ground of rejecting either of these, unless is be to gratify the Separatists, who are professed deniers, of one Article [the Holy Catholic Church.]  
Fourthly, For the Doxology (or, Glory be to the Father, etc.) it is a very ancient Piece; the former Versicle of it, being (according to good Authors) composed by the first Council of Nice: and appointed by those Fathers to be used in the Church, as a lesser Creed, or Confession of the Trinity, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Consubstantiality of the Son, and the Holy Ghost, with the Father. At which it hath therefore been the Custom anciently to stand up: Confession of God being a praising of Him; to which that Posture is most due, and proper. And for the other Versicle [As it was in the Beginning, etc.] when the Macedonian Heretics excepted against the Divinity of the Holy Ghost, as a Novel Doctrine, Saint Jerom, Opposition to them, added that unto the former Versicle.  
Fifthly, For the reading of the Commandments and the Responses after them: It must be acknowledged, that it is not anciently to be found in the Church, as a part of the Service, no not till King Edward's second Liturgy, (by which yet we have this Advantage, That Popery cannot be charged upon it) yet it will appear to be a profitable Part of Devotion. For the Priest, after a Prayer for Grace to love God, and keep His Commandments, [Almighty God, unto whom all Hearts be open, etc.] is appointed to stand, and read the Commandments distinctly to the People: and they to receive them in an humble Affection of Heart, and convenient Posture of Body, as means to try, & examine themselves, to humble themselves in a Sense of their several Failings, & thereupon to implore, every one for himself, and for others (even for the whole Kingdom) First, God's Mercy for Pardon, for every thing, in which we have violated his Holy Commandments [Lord have Mercy upon us] Secondly, Grace for the time to come, to perform that, which is acceptable to God [And incline our Hearts to keep this Law.]  
Lastly, For the Communion of the Sick. It is of long standing in the Church, we have an undeniable Evidence of it, in the Canons of the Counsels about the Lapsi, & excommunicati, (the Fallen into some scandalous Sin, and Excommunicate) which take Care, that they should have the Peace of the Church at their Departure out of the World (in extremis) and (if with Expressions of Penitence they, desire it) the Holy Sacrament. No Person can be dissatistied with this, who hath, or shall, read the famous Story of the dying Serapion, in Eusebius, lib. 6. cap. 36.  
And thus there is enough (I suppose) said, to reconcile any sober Person (who hath a better Esteem of Antiquity, than Novelty) to the Liturgy of our Church, and to confirm those (who are persuaded, according to Saint Peter's Doctrine) that they owe Obedience to the Reverend Bishops, as Governors sent by the King) in their Religious Observation of it, and that strictly, and precisely, according to the Rubric, in every thing contained in, and required by it at least till the same Authority, that Established, & hath so often Confirmed it, shall think fit in their great Wisdoms to reform it, I mean, with Soap to wash, & cleanse it from any pollutions, that it may possibly have contracted, not by Nitre, to tear out the Bowels of it.  
The Inconveniences of altering any thing in the Public Established Liturgy of a Church are so visible and notorious, that no Wise men will, without Cogent Necessity, rush upon it, because (as Cicero saith from Socrates,) Mutata Musica, mutantur & Mores: A Change of Manners is consequent to a Change of Music.  
It is a thing justly to be feared, if the Prince shall consent to the taking one, or a few Bricks out of the Wall, because they are not (as is pretended) well burnt, that the Persons of that Persuasion and Importunity, will take leave to pluck them out one by one, till they leave no Wall at all. But I hope, the persons in Authority over us have learned (by a dear bought Experience) to take heed of Root, and Branch men; and not to consent to pull down the whole Fabric, because a Window, or Chimney, it may be a Tile only, is misplaced.  
It is an unpardonable Error in any, to think, that the Act of Reformation, consists in the taking away things, together with the abuse of them (if any be) for, that cannot be said to be Reform, which is made New Reformation is (properly) Repetitio vel restitutio facti antique, The Repetition or Restitution of an ancient Custom. Thus, let our Liturgy, (if it stand in any need) be reform; but God of his Mercy grant, that neither our Liturgy, nor the Administratours of it, fall again under a Gunpowder-Reformation.  
It is said of Rome, that she never understood what Cato was aright, till she had lost him (Catonem non intellexit civitas, nisi cum perdidit) the loss we sustained through the abolishing our Liturgy (by that Ordinance, which was discharged against it) will have (I hope) such an impression upon the Spirits of all those, that have good will for the Church of England, that it will not (for the time to come) be an easy matter for those, that rise up against it, to cast it down a second time. To prevent which, 

1. Do not provoke God through your want of Diligence, in assembling yourselves together, to deliver up the Liturgy into the hands of violent men, skilful to destroy. If the God of Heaven once perceive (by your negligence in frequenting it) that it is a matter of Indifferency to you whether you enjoy it, or enjoy it not, he will have a just occasion Administered, to take that from you, upon which you set so little value.  
2 Let your Ardour and Fervency in performing this prescribed Service testify to God, Angels, and Men, that your Souls are delighted with it: that it is not the labour of your Lips only, but the devout breathe of your pious Souls. If you do thus, God will delight to establish it, and make it appear, that it is a Plant of your Heavenly Father's Planting, which no mortal hand shall be able to pluck up.    
And, if any person (to conclude) be offended at it, because it is ancient, or solemn, or sober or charitable; you may be sorry for their weakness, and labour to inform them: but be sure you choose rather, to displease one, or a few peevish Servants in the Family; then to offend the whole Household, and incur the displeasure of the great Master of the House, God himself.  
FINIS