THE CASTING DOWN of the last and strongest hold of Satan. OR, A TREATISE Against Toleration And pretended Liberty of Conscience:  
Wherein by Scripture, sound Reason, Fathers, Schoolmen, Casuists. Protestant Divines of all Nations, Confessions of Faith of the Reformed Churches, Ecclesiastical Histories, and constant practice of the most pious and wisest Emperors, Princes, States, the best Writers of Politics, the experience of all Ages; yea, by divers Principles, Testimonies and Proceedings of Sectaries themselves, as Donatists, Anabaptists, Brownists, Independents, the unlawfulness and mischief in Christian Commonwealths and Kingdoms both of a Universal Toleration of all Religions and Consciences, and of a limited and bounded of some Sects only, are clearly proved and demonstrated, with all the material Grounds and Reasons brought for such Tolerations fully answered.  
By THOMAS EDWARD'S Minister of the Gospel.  
The First Part.  2 Chron 34. 32, 33. And Josiah took away all the abominations out of all the Con 〈…〉 that pertained to the childre● of Israel, and made all that were present in Israel to serve, even to s●ve the Lord their God. And caused all that were present in Jerusalem and Benjamin instant to it. 
London, Printed by T. R. and E. M. for George Calvert, and are to be sold at the golden Fleece in the Old-Change. 1647.   

To the Christian Reader.  
GOod Reader, I fully intended, and accordingly had provided that this first Part of Anti-Toleration should have come into thy hands more complete and perfect than it does for the present: I prepared an Epistle Dedicatory to the Honourable Houses of Parliament suitable to the nature of Toleration and the Times, as also a Preface and Introduction to that Argument and Subject wherein laying down the Prolegomena & Praecognita of this Noble and famous Question of Liberty of Conscience, as certain Distinctions about Magistrates and their Power, of Errors and Opinions, of Persons holding them, of Toleration and Liberty, as some Concessa, some Negata, certain mistakes and misrepresentations of the state of the Question, with divers other Particulars, I drew up the true state of the Question both Theologically and Politically (it being a mixed question) besides I purposed to have added to this Part further proofs out of the New Testament against Toleration, and for the Magistrates power: But these Preparatives and Additionals amounting to about some ●en sheets, (the reviewing, perfecting, and printing whereof would take up at least twenty days) and not knowing what a Day might bring forth, the Storm coming on so fast, I thought it best, for fear this Book might be suppressed at the Press and never see the Sun, to send it forth as it was, that the Church of God at home and abroad might have the benefit of it, and to reserve the rest for a second Part (if God spare life and liberty.) In this present Tractate is handled the scriptural part of Anti-Toleration (the best foundation and only groundwork to build on) wherein there are not only the Scriptures produced for proof, but made good by several reasons from the text and context, with all the evasions to elude and put them off, fully answered. The subject matter of this Book is the great Controversy of the times, Toleration being that very thing for which God hath a controversy with the Parliament and Land, having most justly, (however 'tis most unjust on their part) raised up that Generation not to suffer them, because they have against the council of God, yea against all sense and reason, let them alone and suffered them to grow to this Head. I remember what God said to his people Israel, 
Numb. 33. 52, 5.  that if they did not drive out the Canaanites and destroy their pictures etc. they should be pricks in their eyes and thorns in their sides, and should vex them with their wiles, 
● King 20. 42.  What of the King of Israel, because that he let go out of his hand a man appointed to destruction, therefore his life should go for his life, and his people for that people; as also what of the Angel of Thyatira, that Christ had a quarrel with him for suffering that woman Jezabel to teach and to seduce his servants. 
Revel. 2. 20.  And we may see how God hath now fulfilled this upon the Parliament, Ministry, City, Kingdom, vexing us and threatening heavy things against us by the Sectaries, punishing us wherein we have offended. In all ages and histories of the Church we shall find that Heretics and Sectaries, however whilst weak and few, have pleaded for Toleration and Liberty, yet when they have come to grow strong and to have power in their hands, they never would suffer the Orthodox, but have been the greatest tyrants and persecutors, as the Arrians, Donatists, Anabaptists, Arminians. It was the observation of 
* Aug. contra Petil. l. 2. c. 83. Noli dicere, inquit Petiliano Augustinus, Absit, absit à conscientia nostra ut ad nostram fidem aliquem compellamus: facitis enim ubi potestis; ubi autem non facitis non pot●stis, sive legum sive invidiae tim●re, sive resistentium multitudine.  Augustine many hundred years ago, and his answer to Petilian, That the Donatists (however they pleaded far be it from them to compel any one to their Tenets) where they had power, used to force the Orthodox violently; and where they did not, it was not for want of will, but because they could not for fear of the laws or the multitude of refusers; yea if any of their own party left them and came to the Orthodox, they would fall upon them and beat them, yea kill them; and that Sect of the Donatists which was strongest, would implore the help of the Magistrate against their Schismatics the Maximinianistae and Rogatistae: all which Austin shows. But for a conclusion, I shall turn my prayers unto God, that he would give us to see and know our sin in our punishment, and to give him glory in saying. Righteous art thou O Lord, and just are thy judgements; And for the time to come to give Magistrates, Ministers, and his People more zeal and wisdom then to tolerate and suffer Errors, Heresies, and Schisms. And so commending these labours to the blessing of Christ, who yet lives and reigns, (as 
* Luther epist. ad Wences. Lin cum. Christus meus vivit & regnat, & ego vivam & regnabo.  Luther speaks) and will reign till he hath made all his enemies his footstool.  
I remain, Yours in Christ, THOMAS EDWARDS.   

The TABLE containing some of the principal Heads of this Book.  

AVniversall Toleration is against the whole current, scope and sense of all Scripture, and sets up the polluted defiled consciences of men above the Scriptures. p. 4, 5  
What God commands Persons for themselves and their own Practice, he commands to them being in Power and Authority for all under them. p. 6, 7  
There can be no reason given why all other persons in Authority, as Father's Masters, &c should be bound to have a care in matters of Religion over children, Servants, and Magistrates should have none. p. 7, 8  
The godly Magistrates spoken of in Scripture did the facto make use of their Power to suppress false Doctrine, Seducers. &c 8, 9, 10, 11  
They did not only do it de facto, but de jure, were approved of and rewarded by God for so doing. p. 11, 12  
Those Magistrates who were good that out of any carnal respects, forbore to use their power, were sharply reproved and punished by God for it. p. 12, 13  
Magistrates and Judges before Moses time, before the Judicial Laws or Levitical Priesthood, did punish for matters of Religion, and command men under their power to worship God. p. 13, 14  
Other Kings besides those of Israel and judah used their Power for the worship of God against Idolaters, Blasphemers, &c p. 14, 15, 16  
That objection against the Kings of Israel and judah's power in matters of Religion that they were tips of Christ, and that Land typical answered at large in eight distinct Answers, where divers things are opened concerning Types, and of those Kings being Types and how actions may be Typical, and yet moral, from p. 16, to 27  
Idolatry and Idolaters not the adequate object of the Magistrates coercive power under the old Testament, but the whole worship and truth of God. from p. 27, to 34  
The 17. of Deut. 18. 19 opened and proved to give Magistrates the care of Religion. p. 34, 35, 36, 37  
Under the Father in the fourth commandment, and under sanctifying the Sabbath, the Magistrates duty to see the public worship of God observed by his subjects, proved, p. 34, 40. 41  
The Magistrates duty qua Magistrate in matters of Religion proved, and yet with a difference of the Christian and Heathen Magistrates power in such matters. p. 42, 43, 44  
The commands in the Old Testament for Magistrates punishing in matters of the first Table, as Exod. 22. 13. Deut. 13. 1, 2, 5. Deut. 17. 1. 2, 3, 4, 5. Levit. 24. 16. Deut, 18, 20. 22. with divers others laid down, p. 44, 45, 46  
Reasons laid down to prove these commands for punishing Idolaters false Prophets etc. Moral, of common reason and equity given to all Nations, and for all Ages, from p. 46. to 53.  
Of Judicial laws under the Old Testament being in force under the New, how far and in what respects, with the reasons thereof, from p. 53. to 58.  
The Magistrates punishing of sins immediately against God, as Blasphemy, Apostasy, etc. is of the light of nature, p. 58, 59, 60, 61, 72, 73  
The Magistrates coercive power in matters of Religion, as necessary under the Gospel for the glory of God, salvation of men's souls, peace of Church and State, as under the Old; yea more reasons for it under the Gospel then under the Law, p. 62, 63, 64  
The Magistrates punishing false Prophets, etc. is an act of our love to God and our Brethren, p. 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71  
The reasons of those commands in 13. and 17. chap. of Deut. concerning putting to death false Prophets, Apostates have been, were, and are still the same, of a like nature and force both before the commands given by Moses, in Moses time, and now under the Gospel p. 76 77, 78  
An Answer to that objection, that if Moses laws bind now, then Moses is alive under the new Testament. p. 79, 80  
A full Answer to that objection, If the Law in Deut. 13. be in force now, 'tis in force in all the particulars for the manner of the punishment for a whole City not only all the Inhabitants, but the cattle also etc. in which answer many things are opened and cleared, what's moral in that Deut. 13. and what ceremonial; and that the law concerning the destroying of a city, cattle etc. is no part of the command spoken of in the first part of the 13. chap, of Deut. p. 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87. 173, 174, 175. 195, 196  
An answer to that objection, If Moses laws bind under the New Testament, than every person in an idolatrous State is bound to seek the death one of another, yea the Magistrate bound to sentence to death all his subjects practising idolatry without exception, p. 90, 91, 92, 93  
A full answer to that Evasion of Hagiomastix against the Old Testament laws, that the reason why the Magistrates did then punish false Prophets, Blasphemers etc. was because the Jews to whom these laws were given, in all difficult cases about matters of Religion had the opportunity of immediate consultation with God, who did infallibly declare his mind to them; in which answer many questions are discussed and cleared, several texts opened, as whether God gave answers by Vrim and Thummim in difficulties arising about moral transgressions against the first Table, or rather whether those answers were not concerning the events of future things, as about the success of war etc. as whether Infallibility or Fallibility be the proper grounds and reasons of punishing or not punishing in matters of faith and moral transgressions; as whether there be not, and how far, and by what means an infallibility and certainty in matters of Religion now as well as under the Law? as whether that Deut. 17. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. be any proof for God giving answers by Vrim and Thummim, or only a ground in difficult cases to go from lower Courts to higher, and the highest of all, who by reason of their number and abilities were more able from the law of God to resolve difficult cases than the inferior Courts? with divers other particulars useful to be known in these times, from p. 95, to 165  
A full answer to that Evasion brought by Hagiomastix and other Patrons of Toleration, that the punishments under the Law were more bodily and afflictive to the outward man then under the Gospel, and consequently were typical, Cutting off, of Casting out, now; and typical of eternal damnation, and therefore by the coming of Christ ceased. p. 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170  
A full answer to that objection, That supposing all those laws in Deut. 13. etc. were moral and in force, yet they could not reach to Heretics and false Teachers among us, as not being those false Prophets, Idolaters, Blasphemers spoken of in those laws, from p. 171, to 190  
An answer to that objection, That the Sadduces, Herodians, pharisees were tolerated by the Jews, and that Christ did never charge that Church and State with sin for not punishing them, p. 29, 30, compared with 190, 191, 192, 193, 194  
Several Reasons laid down to prove, that if there were no commands nor examples in the New Testament to prove the Magistrate's power of punishing Heretics, false Teachers, yet the proofs of the Old Testament were binding, p. 199, to 211  
Besides all the Old Testament proofs, some places of Scripture speaking of the days under the New Testament brought for Magistrates power in Religion and punishing false Teachers, p. 212, 213, 214, 215  
Seven grounds from places of Scripture recorded in the New Testament, proving Magistrates coercive power against false Teachers and Heretics, laid down and cleared, p 215, 216, 217, 218.   
Published by Authority.   

A TREATISE against the Magistrate's Toleration And Permission of a Promiscuous use and Profession of all Religions, Sects and Heresies, and a partial limited Toleration of some few Sects, or of any one Sect, way of Worship, Church Government different from the true Religion established and settled.  
HAving in my Preface and Prolegomena both stated the question of Toleration and Liberty of Conscience, and laid down many, Particulars useful and necessary to be known, as giving understanding and light into the nature of this Controversy: I now come as to the proving of a Toleration in itself, of Blasphemies, Heresies, Errors, Schisms unlawful; so of showing the Christian Magistrates Power and Warrant, yea necessity that is laid upon him of hindering and suppressing all false ways and worships, and of promoting and commanding by his Authority with all his subjects the true Religion and Faith; and this I shall do by laying down divers Theses and Positions one following upon another, and each going further and rising higher than the other; and the method I propound to follow in this Tractate shall be that of the Title page of this Book: First, by Scripture: Secondly, by sound Reasons: Thirdly, by Fathers: Fourthly, Counsels; and so as it there follows, setting down upon all those Heads by way of Theses, the proofs of the points in hand, though upon some more, some fewer, as the nature of the things may require, and I shall judge needful and convenient.  

CHAP. I.  
The Theses grounded on express Scriptures, proving the sinfulness and wickedness of Tolerations, and the Magistrates duty with●● his Territories to suppress Blasphemies, Errors, Heresies, Schisms.  

1. THESIS'.  
AS there is but one God, one Lord Christ, one Spirit, one Heaven, so there is but one Faith, and that once delivered to the Saints, one Truth, one Gospel, and one Way; the Scripture every where speaking of these in the ●ingular number as of one, not as of many, never calling them Faiths, Truths, Gospels, Ways, but the Faith, she Gospel, the Truth, the way of Truth, the good old way, one way, the right way, the way of righteousness, and such like; whereas falsehood and error is manifold, the Scripture speaking of false ways 〈…〉, of Antichrists as many; Falsum est multiplex, verum autem 〈…〉 & sibi per 〈◊〉 conform est.   

2. THESIS'.  
The Scriptures of the Old and New Testament in many placeth old forth and command to ask for, follow after, walk in that one good way, to strive and contend earnestly for that one Faith, to hold fast the truth, to serve God only; and on the contrary reproves, prohibits, condemns turning afide to the right hand or to the left, or halting between two or more Religions and Worships; hence those complaints, 1 Kin. 18. 21. of the people halting between two opinions, between God and Baal, of fearing the Lord, and serving their own Gods after the manner of the Nations, 2 King. 17. vers. 33. 41. of worshipping and swearing by the Lord and by Malcham, Zeph. 1. 5. and those prohibitions of not letting cattle gender with a divers kind, of not sowing fields with mingled seed, of not wearing garments mingled of linned and woollen, of not sowing of Vineyards of divers seeds, and of not ploughing with an Ox and an Ass together. Levit. 19 19 Deut. 22. 9, 10.   

3. THESIS'.  
God both foretells and promises in his word, and that more particularly of the days of the Gospel, to give one heart and one way to his people; and as there shall be one Lord, so his name shall be one, and that they shall all call upon the name of the Lord, to serve him with one consent, Jer. 32. 39 Ezek. 11. 19 Zeph. 3. 9 Zach. 14. 9 Christ prays earnestly to his Father for believers that they all may be one and that they may be perfect in one, John 17: 21, 22, 23. and there are many exhortations to Christians to be of one mind, and of the same mind in the Lord, to be of one accord, of one mind, all to speak the same thing, that there be no Schisms among them, but that they be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement, and that they keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, 2 Cor. 13. 11. Philip. 2. 2. Philip. 4. 2. 1 Cor. 1. 10. Ephes. 4. 3. Now what God hath promised and foretold, what Christ hath prayed for in a special manner, what the Apostles in their Epistles have so pathetically entreated and exhorted to, that Christians should especially labour after, and all the mean tending thereunto; which the desiring and granting of a Toleration of all ways, or many ways, must needs be contrary unto.   

4. THESIS'.  
A Toleration and sufferance but of any one or two false ways and worships fights directly against these and many such like places of Scripture, For we can do nothing against the truth but for the truth, 2 Cor. 13. 8. Buy the truth and sell it not, Prov. 23. 23. be valiant for the truth, strive for the faith of the Gospel, Be zealous, beware of false Prophets, beware of dogs beware of evil workers, beware of the Coucision, A man that is an Heretic after the first and second admonition reject. They that keep the Law contend with the wicked, Paul's not giving place to false brethren, no not for an hour that the truth of the Gospel might continue. Paul and Barnabas having no small dissension and disputation with those who taught Circumcision, If there come any unto you and bring not this Doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed, the Angel of Ephesus his commendation for that he could not bear them which are evil, and which say they are Apostles, and are not, and for hating the deeds of the Nicolaitans, the Angels of the Churches of Pergamus and Thyatira being threatened by Christ for suffering them that held the Doctrine of Balaam, the Doctrine of the Nicolaitans, and that woman Jez abel which called herself a Prophetess, to teach and to seduce his servants.   

5. THESIS'.  
Whereas a particular partial Toleration offends against many particular places of Scripture, a Universal Toleration is against all Scripture, goes against the whole current, scope and sense of Scripture both in the Old and New Testament, both in matters of Faith and Manners, both in the general rules and commands, and the particular, and that both in personal actions, and in all Relations to others: The sum of the Scriptures is Faith and good life, and the end of the several states appointed by God, both Political, Ecclesiastical and Economical, are to maintain and continue these: Now a general Toleration of all Religions and consciences is diametically opposite to all these, against the whole will of God overthrowing all that God in the Scripture expresses of sins, duties and relations. I would have any thing in the Scripture named in point of faith, holiness, in the relations of Magistrates, Ministers, Governors of Families, which this Toleration some way or other does not make void. Other Errors and Heresies, as arianism, Anabaptism, etc. do not offend against all Scripture, but against such and such places; but this general Toleration throws down all at once, it overthrows the Scriptures, in that it allows a Liberty of denying the Scriptures to be the Word of God, in that it sets up the conscience above the Scriptures, 
☞  making every man's conscience, even the polluted defiled seared consciences the rule of faith and holiness, before the pure and unerring Word of God, crying out that men must do according to their consciences, but never speaking of going according to the Word of God; yea setting up men's fancies, humours, factions, lusts, under the name of conscience, above the Word of God, which is to set up the creature, yea the corrupted defiled creature above God, and to make man's conscience greater than God, whereas God is greater than men's consciences, 1 John 3. 20.   

6. THESIS'.  
The complaints, prohibitions, comminations, with the commands, directions, cautions against giving way unto, tolerating of and following many ways in religion, and for contending for the Faith, buying the truth, etc. though delivered, and run in general, they bind (as other Scriptures do) all the several sorts of men, every one pro cujusque officii ratione, 
☞  the Minister in his way according to his office, and the Magistrate in his way, and the Master of a family in his place, and every private Christian in his way to suppress Error, and promote the Truth; yea the commands and precepts which in the letter and primarily belong to men of such a particular relation, the Father, Master, Minister as being directed by name to them, do also concern Magistrates, by the common rules of Interpretation of Scripture, given by Divi●es, of a Synecdoche, of Analogy and proportion, of common equity, and by the way of the Scripture itself in applying what's spoken at first hand to particular persons in such a special relation to all Christians, Joshua 1. 5. compared with Heb. 13. 5. what to Magistrates, to Church Governors, Deu. 13. 11. Deut. 17. 6. compared with 1 Tim. 5. 19, 20. with many other such instances that might be given, the commands of God being exceeding broad, as David speaks, Psal. 119. The fifth Commandment which in the letter mentions the natural parents, as is evident by many other Scriptures, particularly that of Ephes. 6. 1, 2, 3, 4. commands the duties of Magistrates to their subjects, of Ministers to their people, as all Divines upon that commandment grant. The fourth Commandment that in the letter is directed to the Father of the family, for his family to keep the Sabbath, comprehends also the Magistrate: The Father of the family is a Synecdoche including the Magistrate; and therein the holy Ghost lays down not only what lies upon the Master of every family, but also what is the Magistrates duty, as 
* Zanch. in quartum praceptum. Chemnitii loci Commun. De lege Dei in quartum precept.  Zanchius, Chemnitius, and many other learned Divines show in their Expositions upon this fourth Commandment, all of them upon this Commandment writing of the public worship of God, and the Magistrates duty to see it preserved, and the profanation of it punished, and all under the name of the Father of the family.   

7. THESIS'.  
What God in his Word commands or forbids private single persons for themselves and their own practice as considered personally, viz. to learn to know God, fear the Lord, follow him only, and not follow not serve any strange God, to have no fellowship with Idols, not the unfruitful works of darkness, and such like, unto all persons whom he hath set over others, and in any Relation given them power and authority over them, as Ministers, Parents, Masters, Husbands, be commands and forbids the same not only for themselves in their own persons (that's not all, that will not discharge them) but to them for all under their command, they must see to it and use their interest, power and authority to cause all under them to do so likewise, and not suffer them to go on in false ways, as these Scriptures among many other prove, 〈◊〉. 18. verse 19 Ezadus 20. verse 28. Deut, 6. 45. 6, 7. Ephes. 6. 4. Every private servant of God must keep the ways of God; but Abraham who is set over others must command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord, every Israelite must keep the Sabbath day holy, but the Governor of the family must besides his own keeping it, see to it that all in his family sanctify the Sabbath, 'tis the duty of all the Israel of God to love the Lord their God with all their heart, and to fear the Lord only, but parents must besides their personal loving and fearing God, whet upon their children diligently and talk to them of the commands of God, and bring them up in the 〈◊〉 and fear of the Lord; each person should work out his own salvation, but a Minister must save others besides himself, and watch for other men's souls, use authority for edification; hence in many places we shall find it written in Scripture of persons in relations of authority to others, that they both undertake for their families, and that their families walked as they walked; so Joshu●, I and my household will serve the Lord; thus David, Psal. 101. verse 4, 6, 7. So the Centurion, a devout man and one that feared God with all his house; and in Timothy there was unfeigned faith which dwelled first in his Grandmother Loit, and in his mother E●●ice, and then in him.   

8. THESIS'.  
There can be no reason in the world given, that all other persons in relations who have authority over others, as Masters, Fathers, Mothers, Tutors, Husbands, Ministers, should be bound to have a care in matters of Religion over their children, servants, etc. and a power of commanding and making them outwardly to worship God and keep his way (So 'tis said of Abraham, he will command his children, 
* Vide Master Cheynels sermon before the House of Commons on that text of Abraham's commanding his children pag. 11.  make his children and servants know that he is their Father and their Master; so speaks the fourth Commandment to the Father of the family, Thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, etc. 'tis not said, do thou remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day, but thou shalt admonish thy son and thy daughter that they also sanctify it; God doth not say so, but thus, remember that thou sanctify it, and that all others that are thine, sanctify it) and that Princes and Magistrates who are the highest pow-powers, and have the greatest authority on earth (who externally and politically have a power over Ministers, Parents, Masters, to rectify their male administration (as is evident by many instances in Scripture) who can also help and remedy evils in cases where Parents, Masters, Ministers cannot, and have many advantages to bring men to good above others) should not have a power over their subjects to command them to the worship of God and restrain them from Idolatry and Heresy. Hence 'tis a good saying of Zanchie on the fourth Commandment 
* Zanch. in quartum precept. pag. 659, 660. Non enim ait tu mementout sanctifices, monebis autem filium filiamve tuam, ut & ipsi sanctificent; non sic ait, sed memento ut sanctifices, & ut alii etiam tui sanctificent. Adigere quisque Pater familias potest & debet suos domesticos ad externum cultum; cur non etiam Mag●stratus suos subditos?  Every Father of a family can and aught to force his family to the outward worship of God; why should not the Magistrate also his subjects? I desire some reason may be shown why the talents of Authority and Power in all other hands must be made use of for God in reference to the souls of men, and not in the hands of the Magistrate; and why Parents, Masters offend in not caring for their families in matters of Religion, and the Magistrate not.   

9 THESIS'.  
The holy Patriarches, good Judges, godly Kings, and other pious Magistrates spoken of in Scripture, did the facto make use of their power and authority over others to suppress false Doctrine, false Worship, false Prophets, Seducers, and to bring those under them to the true fear and Worship of God; they thought it their duty not only in their own persons to keep to the Word of God and to serve him, and to bring their children to it, but to command all under their Government to the true worship of God, forbidding and suppressing all other. It would fill a Book to relate and open all the particulars concerning Religion, in commanding the true, destroying the false, and punishing false Prophets, Idolaters, Apostates, recorded in the Scriptures of Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Joshua, Gedeon, Jehosaphat, Asa, Hezekiah, Josiah, Manasseh after his conversion, Nehemiah, with many others. I shall set down some particulars of some of them.  
Abraham the Patriarch was a Magistrate, a great Prince, that had three hundred and eighteen servants armed trained men borne in his house, he had not only the Covenant in his own flesh, but he made all that were borne in his house, and all that were bought with his money to be circumcised Genes. 17. he cast also out of his Family, Hagar the bondwoman, and scoffing persecuting Ishmael, born after the flesh, Genes. 21. compared with Galath. 4. 29, 30. and Genes. 18. God saith of him, I know that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord; upon which place Master 
* A Sermon before the house of Commons called A Plot for the good of Posterity.  Cheynel a learned Divine of the Assembly writes thus: Abraham did not leave his children and servauts to their own genius, their own Counsels, their own lusts, though 'tis certain that divers of them would have thanked him for such a Liberty; for they had been nursed up in Superstition and Idolatry as Abraham was, and might have pretended that they were not satisfied in point of Conscience; 
☞  but Abraham knew how to distinguish between Liberty of Conscience and liberty of lust, and therefore would not allow them such a Liberty as would have enticed them into the worst kind of bondage. * Pareus also, 
Pareus in Gen. 18. 19  God uses the word command, that Parents and Superiors may understand that they are not overly and slightly, but diligently, and with authority to do their duty to bring their inferiors to the fear and obedience of God. Jacob the Patriarch, Genes. 35. 2, 3, 4. said to his household, and to all that were with him (all under his power protection) put away the strange Gods that are among you, and be clean, and change your garments. And they gave unto Jacob all the strange gods which were in their Land, and all their earrings which were in their ears, and Jacob hid them under the Oak which was by Shechem. Pareus upon the place shows that they that were with Jacob made distinct from his household, were those Sichemits that were taken captive by the sons and servants of Jacob who had brought their Idols with them, and observes that as 'tis the office of a good Master of a family in his house, so of a Magistrate in the Commonwealth to take away Idols and instruments of Idolatry, and other lets of true conversion to God.  
Jehosaphat, Asa, Hezekiah, Josiah, those excellent Princes made use of their power and the authority of their places in their Kingdoms and Territories, to put down and suppress false worships and ways, to punish false Prophets, Idolatrous Priests, and the people who went after them, to establish the true faith and worship of God, and to command and cause all their people by Laws and their Authority to stand to their Reformations; yea Manasseh who had been so wicked, presently upon his conversion, 2 Chron. 33. 15, 16. rested not in his own repentance that he knew that the Lord was God, but he took away the strange Gods, all the Altars, and cast them out of the City, and repaired the Altar of the Lord, and commanded Judah to serve the Lord God of Israel: as before he had made them to err by his place, and power, verse 9 so now he made them to serve the Lord God of Israel. Asa that good King, 2 Chron. 14. and 15. chap. by his kingly power took away all Idolatry and false worship, and that not only out of the Land of Judah and Benjamin, but out of the Cities which he had taken from Mount Ephraim, the strangers of Ephraim, Manasseh, and out of Simeon, all under his power and jurisdiction, though of the ten Tribe●, and accounted strangers after the revoult; yea, he destroyed the Idol of his Queen Mother. Secondly, he settled and renewed the true worship of God renewing the Altar of the Lord, and entering into a Covenant to seek the Lord God. Thirdly, he commanded Judah to seek the Lord God, and to do the Law and the commandment, and to enter into a Covenant to bind themselves more to the right seeking of God. Fourthly, he punished those under his government who went contrary, viz. they should be put to death who would not enter into this Covenant, or having entered into it, should fall from it, and his Queen Mother he removed from being Queen, because she had made an Idol in a Grove, that is, he deprived his mother of all dignity and authority which she had by custom. Jehosophat used his Authority when he came to be King to take away the high places and Groves out of Judah, and from 
* Vide Junium in 2 Chron. 19 4. and the late Annotations of the English Divines on that place.  Beersheba to Mount Ephraim from South to North, from one end of his Kingdom to another he brought his people unto God from whom they had fallen, (for the Kingdom of Judah from the days of Asa was extended to Mount Ephraim.) Hezekiah when he came to the Kingdom removed the high places and Images, cut down the Groves, broke in pieces the brazen Serpent; he and his Princes gave out a commandment, and established a Decree for the keeping of the Passeover, and for the turning of the people unto God, and he restored the true worship of God, and commanded the Priests and the people to do their duties in their several places. Josiah that godly Prince, First, he removed and destroyed the high places, Groves, carved Images, molten Images, the Altars of Baalim and all the Idols out of all the Land, he took away the horses given to the Sun, he defiled Topheth, broke down the houses of the Sodomites, and purged the Land of all the abominations. Secondly, he put down all the idolatrous Priests, and all other Priests that had burnt Incense upon the high places, and slew all the Priests of the high places upon the Altars. Thirdly, he restored the true worship of God, made a Covenant with God to that end, and commanded the people to keep the Passeover, and to perform the Covenant. Fourthly, he caused all that were present in Jerusalem and Benjamin to stand to the Covenant, and made all that were present in Israel to serve, even to serve the Lord their God, 2 Chron. 34. 32, 33. 
* Vide late Annot. on 2 Cron. 34. 32, 33. Regia sua auctoritate obstrinxit & quamvis propensos Judaeorū animos compescuit ne ipso vivo ab externo Dei cultu deficerent; tantam adhibuit severitatem disciplinae. Tremellius & Junius in locum.  that is all that were under his jurisdiction he kept them in such awe by his regal authority and penal laws, as they durst not but stand to the Covenant.   

10. THESIS'.  
As de facto 'tis evident in the examples related (besides divers others recorded in Scripture) that good Magistrates did always meddle for God and his truth, against false worship and seducers, so that they did it de jure, and aught to do so is as clear from the approbations, special testimonies, promises, rewards and blessings given by God of them, made to them, and bestowed by God on them for so doing. There's hardly any place mentioning what the Patriarches, Judges, Kings, Magistrates did in this kind, but there's some commendation, some blessing, some special testimony from God for so doing recorded in those places, 2 Chron. 14. 2, 3, 4. Asa did that which was good and right in the eyes of the Lord his God, For he took away the Altars of the strange gods and the high places, etc. So 'tis said of Jehosophat, Hezekiah, Josiah, they did that which was right in the fight of the Lord, are highly commended, have many blessings upon themselves and their Kingdoms, and all for commanding by their Princely power their subjects to good, and removing all false worship and the means of it. God will not hide from Abraham the thing that he was doing concerning Sodom, and the reason is given, because he will command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord. jacob took away the strange Gods from his household and all that were with him, and God manifests his approbation of it, the terror of God was upon the Cities round about jacob, and they did not pursue after the sons of jacob; yea God gives such testimony to Princes and Magistrates suppressing false Prophets and false worships, that he hath rewarded with temporal blessings wicked Kings for so doing, as is evident in jehu, who for destroying Baal out of Israel, though he departed not from the fins of jeroboam, yet his children of the fourth generation should sit on the throne of Israel, 2 Kings 10. 28, 29, 30.   

11. THESIS'.  
Those Magistrates, Judges and Princes, even the dear servants of God, who being in place of authority and power, that out of carnal respects to wives, children and other interests, have suffered and tolerated Idolatry and other evils (though they in their own persons never practised, much less commanded any such things, nay dissuaded from them) and not used their power to restrain and hinder them, have been both sharply reproved and severely punished by God for it: King Solomon having power to hinder his wives from Idolatry, and not doing it, but suffering them, God is provoked to bring wrath upon him and his family, 1 King. 11. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 10, 11, 12. to rend the Kingdom from him, to stir up an adversary unto Solomon, Hadad the Edomite. 'tis the opinion of many good 
* Meisnerus Sect. 2. Contro. quaest. Politic. de Magist. pag. 841. Vituperatur autem Solomon idololatrica sacra permittens. Ames. Animad. in Remonstrate▪ Synod Script. super 5. Artic. de Perseverant. cap. 7. de Solomone. Certum est Solomonem non introduxisse aut admississe idola in domum Dei, neque adegisse populum ut vel Dei verum cultum desererent vel colerent Idola; neque probari potest eum in sua propria persona coluisse idola. Hoc tantum certum est de ejus idololatria quod infatuatus a mulieribus idololatricis permiserit eas construere, aut ipsemet jussit cons●rui fana & erigi altaria.  Divines, and that upon the first of Kings, ch. 11. and in answer to the Arminians upon that Article of falling from Grace, that Solomon did not bring or admit Idols into the house of God, neither did he command the people, that either they should forsake the true worship of God, or worship Idols, neither can it be proved that he did in his own person worship Idols. This is only certain that being bewitched by his Idolatrous wives, he suffered them to build Altars and high places, or at most commanded them to be built, and this the word in the Hebrew vers. 11. with thee, not of thee, implies as much, for as much as this is done with thee, implying done in his Kingdom, and near jerusalem, though not by Solomon himself. Eli being a Judge, because when his sons made themselves vile, he restrained them not, redressed not their corruptions and abuses about the Sacrifices, though he reproved and dissuaded them from their ways by many strong arguments, therefore God brought fearful ruin upon him and his house, cutting off his arm, and the arm of his father's house, etc. as in 1 Sam. 2, 3, 4. chap. 'tis laid down at large.   

12. THESIS'.  
Whereas the Patrons of Toleration except against the instances of the Judges, Magistrates and Kings of judah and Israel as no sufficient proof for Magistrate's power in suppressing falsehood, and commanding men to receive the truth, because they were typical Kings, types of Christ as King of his Church, and the Land of Canaan a typical Land, which no other Magistrates or Land beside ever were or are; I desire that it may be remembered that other Magistrates, Judges, and Princes who were before the common wealth of Israel was erected and the judicial laws given, and of other Commonwealths and Kingdoms did take away and punish Idolatry, Blasphemy, and command men under their power to worship God, and some such examples are not only barely related in the Scripture, but approved of. Abraham, Jacob and Job were before the time of Moses and Aaron, before the judicial Laws or the levitical Priesthood for the Government and worship of the Jewish Church and Commonwealth were given. For Abraham and Jacob that's evident by the Book of Genesis, and for Job, that he lived in the time between Abraham and Moses is the judgement of many good Divines and Interpreters upon Job, and that upon several reasons given by them, of which the Reader may read more in Bucolcerus, Pineda, Junius and Tremellius, 
* Mercer Praefat. in Job: sane diligentius omnia consideranti mihi, videtur Job antiquissimus fuisse ac sub Patriarcharum tempus vixisse.  Mercerus, Master Carylls' Expositions on Job, and divers others. Now of Abraham and Jacob's commanding their children, servants, and all that were with them to keep the way of the Lord, I have spoken of in the tenth Thesis. And that in jobs time, and that out of the Land of Canam in the Land of Us (no typical Land) Idolatry and false worship were to be punished by the Magistrates, is apparent by job 31 26, 27, 28. where job speaks of himself, If I beheld the Sun when it shined, or the Moon walking in brightness, And my heart hath been secretly enticed or my mouth hath kissed my band: This also were an iniquity to be punished by the judge: for I should have denied the God that is above, the meaning of which place according to the judgement of the best Interpreters, Mercer, Merlinus, junius, Pineda and others is that Idolatry and worshipping the creatures, as Sun, Moon, and the Heavens (a worship much in use in the East where job lived) was an iniquity worthy to be taken notice of and punished by the Judges: so Mercer reads it, digna est, it deserves and aught to be punished by the Judges; and then observe the reason, for I should have denied the Lord that is above: So that all false worship and false doctrine that denies God that is above, is worthy to be punished by the Judges; and this is further proved and illustrated that Idolatry is to be punished by Judges corporally, by the 9, 10, 11. verses of this chapter, where he speaks the same of adultery, that 'tis an iniquity to be punished by the judges, so that the spirit of God here in job makes Adultery and Idolatry of the same cognizance, and as Adultery is to be punished by the Civil Magistrate, so Idolatry and all false ways whereby men deny the God that is above, are by this Scripture to be punished also. And that it may further appear the Kings of judah and Israel did not qua Kings of judah and qua dwelling in such a Land, as Kings over such a typical people, bearing visibly, and executing typically the kingly office of Christ in his Church, meddle in matters of Religion, but as Kings in places of authority and power, I shall show that other Kings, not of the Tribe of judah, ruling over other Kingdoms and Countries, when by any of the great works of God done before them, or upon any instinct of the Spirit of God upon them by any message from God by his Prophets and servants, they came to be touched in heart and sensible of themselves, they used their power in making Laws and Edicts for the worship of God against Blasphemy and Idolatry, and for punishing of those who were Idolaters and Blasphemers. Thus Artaxerxes the King of Persia, Ezra 7. makes a Decree that whosoever will not do the Law of God, judgement shoule be executed speedily upon him, whether it be unto death, or unto banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to imprisonment; and Ezra blesseth God for it, which shows it was well done of Art●xerxes. Now whereas 
* Hagio mastix. pag. 55. sect. 43.  Master Goodwin would evade this by saying Ezra blesses God for Artaxerzes' beautifying the house of God only, not for the Decree of punishing those that would not do the Law of God, I answer, that's a part indeed of that he blesses God for, but not all, as is evident by the 28. verse, his blessing God having relation to that also as may appear by that copulative and hath extended mercy unto me before the King, and I was strengthened as the hand of the Lord my God was upon me: and I gathered together out of Israel chief men to go up with me; now let the 23. verse that speaks of Artaxerxes Decree to Ezra to set Magistrates and Judges to judge all the people, and thereupon who will not do the Law of God to have judgement executed upon them whether it be unto death, etc. be laid to the 28. verse, wherein he blesses God for his hand upon him to gather chief men out of Israel to go up with him (which was to make Magistrates and Judges) and 'tis evident the Decree for punishing is included; besides, if this Decree of Artaxerx●s had been according to Master Goodwin, the Bloody Tenet, and other Libertines opinion such a wicked and bloody doctrine, Ezra the Priest the Scribe of the Law of the God of hea●en had been bound to have instructed Artaxerxes better, and humbly entreated him to have reversed that part of the Decree in the 26. verse, and certainly would never have built up Artaxerxes in such a great sin by blessing God for his Decree, and by taking care to set up Magistrates and judges to execute it, but would have dealt clearly with the King, blessing God for the Decree of the building of the Temple, and showing him his mistake in the other part about punishing; and to put it past question, Ezra 10. verse 7, 8. relates, this Decree of the King was accordingly put in execution by Ezra and the Princes and Elders, Proclamations being made throughout judah and jerusalem, unto all the Children of the captivity that they should gather themselves together unto jerusalem; And that whosoever would not come within three days according to the Council of the Princes and the Elders, all his substance should be forfeited, which was one of the penalties of Artaxerxes Decree, viz. confiscation of goods. Nebuchadnezar, Dan. 3. 28, 29, 30. as soon as he knew God upon that great work of God's power in delivering the three children out of the fiery furnace, made a Decree that whosoever should speak any thing amiss against him, should be cut in pieces and their houses made a dunghill. Darius, Dan. 6. 25, 26. upon God's great work in delivering Daniel out of the Lion's den, made a Decree that in every Dominion of his Kingdom men tremble and fear before the God of Daniel. Lastly, the King of Niniveh upon jenabs' preaching, yet forty days and Niniveh shall be destroyed, did not only in his own person arise from his Throne and cover himself with sackcloth, and sit in ashes, but caused it to be proclaimed and published by his Decree that all his subjects should do the like, cry mightily unto God, and turn from their evil ways; and this turning of Niniveh upon the command and edict of the King is blessed by Gods repenting of the evil that he said he would do unto them, and so Gods own seal of approbation set to the King of Ninivebs' Edict for commanding in matters of Religion. Augus●ine in his 
* Aug. 50. Epist. ad Bonifac. Sicut servivit Rex Ninivitarum universam civitatem ad placandum Dominum compellendo; sicut servivit Nabuchadonazar omnes in Regno suo positos, a blasphemando Deo lege terribili revocande.  50. Epistle ad Bonifacium, makes use of the examples of the King of Niniveh, Darius and Nebuchadonezar to show how a King must serve God as a King by commanding good things, and forbidding the contrary, as the King of Niniveh served God by compelling the whole City to please God, as Nebuchadnezar served him by recalling all in his Kingdom from blaspheming God by a severe Law.   

13. THESIS'.  
As for that which is commonly said by the Patrons of Toleration, that what the judges, Magistrates, Kings of Israel and judah, did in a coercive way in matters of Religion in Israel and judah, they did it not by virtue of their office as ordinary Kings and Magistrates towards their subjects, but as Kings in a peculiar and extraordinary notion, as typical Kings, types of Christ the King of the Church, executing typically his kingly office, the people also and the very Land over which they ruled, being typical, which no Kings not people under heaven at this day are, and that therefore their practices cannot be drawn into example by any Christian Magistrates now. I desire the Reader well to observe these following answers, and the rather because the main strength of the Sectaries discourse upon this subject hangs by this string, and this thread runs all along throughout their works. M. S. the Bloody Tenet, The Ancient bounds or Liberty of Conscience stated, The Storming of Antichrist with many others place all their confidence here, and this is their Shield and buckler, making much use of this typicalness under the Old Testament to evade all the instances of Kings and Magistrates brought from thence.  
First, to make this good, there are some things supposed or asserted for proof very uncertain, doubtful, other things absurd and untrue; As first, that to be a Type of Christ is a sufficient ground of a Political Civil power over the Church, and that typicalness, qua, typicalness gives those perso●s a power, who otherwise have none; 
Secondly, because it ha●● no influence upon civil authority; of which see a●or● there.  the contrary unto which is in several Reasons proved by Doctor 
* First then the Priests & some Prophets as jonah should have had this power: yea Adam, Isaac, etc. for they were all types of Christ.  Stewart in the second part of his Duply to M. S. page 22. and never yet answered by M. S. or any other, though M. S. and many of his Brethren have written upon that argument since.  
Secondly, 
z The 〈◊〉 bounds or Liberty of constine stated. p. ●●  that he who was Head of the State was Head also of the Church in a typical way, whereas many great Divines are of another judgement, and show that the Kings of Judah and the civil judicatures were formally distinct from the Ecclesiastical, and that he who was chief in the State over civil matters, was not chief judge and Officer in the Church in an Ecclesiastical and Spiritual notion, of which point Master R●●herford and Master Gil●espie having written so fully lately, I shall spare to speak any thing, and refer the Reader to their learned Books entitled 
* There ●e●e ●●●o Supreme, two Highest powers, both supreme in their own kind & sphere, one Civil, another Ecclesiastical: Moses above ●Aaron● as the supreme Judge in the power of the sword, 〈◊〉 above Moses In sacrificing, in burning 〈◊〉, in judging between the clean and unclean. Mr. cap●●34 ●34. 〈◊〉 ●quaest. 〈◊〉. 38● 387, 388, 389, 390 cap. 15 quaest. 11. cap. 16. quaest. 12. p. 418. Mr. Gillespies: Book cap. 3. that the Jews had an Ecclesiastical Government distinct from the Civil.  The Divine Right of Church Government, Aaron's Rod Blossoming.  
Thirdly, that the people of the jews were interchangeably a Church and a Nation, so that whoever was a member of the Church was a member of the Commonwealth, and vice versa, of which see the Book entitled The Ancient Bounds or Liberty of Conscience seated, page 60. Now Master Gillespie in his Aaron's Rod blossoming, Book 1. chap. 2. proves strongly that the jewish Church was formally distinct from the jewish State, and that in seven particulars, as in respect of distinct Laws, distinct Acts, distinct Officers, so in respect of distinct Members, there being Members of the Church among them, who had the name of▪ Proselyti justitiae, and were initiated into the jewish Religion by Circumcision, Sacrifice, etc. that nevertheless were restrained and secluded from Dignities, Government and Preferment in the jewish Commonwealth, and from divers matriages which were free to the Israelites. Master SELDEN also in that learned. Book of his, De Jure Natur. & Gentium, lib. 2. cap. 4. lib. 5. cap. 20. speaks as much of those Proselytes. Proselytus justitiae utcunque novato patriae nomine Iudaeu● diceretur, non tam quidem, ci● is judaicus simpliciter censendus esset quam peregrinus sempe●, cui jura quamplurima inter cives. Secondly, how do they prove that jehu, joash, Manasseh, Asa, Hezekiah, jebosophat, josiah, were Types of Christ, and did execute typically the kingly office of Christ in his Church, were Kings in an Ecclesiastical notion an, extraordinary way, not ruling only for the Church, but in the Church, and over it, as 
* The Ancient Bounds or Liberty of Conscience stated. pag. 59, 60.  they say. Moses, joshua, David, Solomon, were in their persons, places and actions, express types of jesus Christ (as 'tis evident in the New Testament) Penmen also of Scripture, besides Prophets as well as Magistrates, and so were extraordinary men, that every thing they did in Religion is not a binding example to Magistrates now as many 
* Trigland. de potest. Civil. & Eccles. pag. 233, 234. Walaei T●actat. de manere Ministr. Eccles. & Inspectione Ma●istratus circa illud. from p. 21. to p. 35. Apollon. Ius Majestat. circa sacra part. pri. 67, 68  Reformed Divines have shown against the Arminians and Erastians', but that Asa, josiah, Hezekiah, jehosaphat were, is gratis dictum, not yet proved, neither were these Penmen of holy▪ Scripture, or Prophets extraordinarily inspired, but these four great Reformers as Kings were stirred up, enquiring after, and directed by Prophets, as the Reader may find clearly in the stories of them in the Chronicles and Kings. Besides I find not among 
* See Dr. Tailor's Treatisse of the Types and shadows of Christ contained in the Scriptures.  Divines who have written of the Types of Christ, or 
* Triglandus de potestat. Civil. & Ecclesiastica Jehosaphat, Hiskia, Josiah, & similes nil nisi reges fuere non Proph●tae. p. 237. A great difference is made by learned Divines for Types and Prophets between Moses, David, Solomon Joshua, and Josiah, Hezekiah, etc.  who grant Moses, David, Solomon to be express Types that they make Asa, josiah, etc. to be Types. Again of Types of Christ (as Divines distinguish) there are particular persons types of him as Adam, Noah, Isaac, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, Samson, David, Solomon, Jonah, and there are such ranks and orders of men, as the Firstborn, Kings, Prophets, etc. Now though all of the first sort are special particular Types of him, so that the special things done by them do typify and set forth Christ in many particulars of his person, actions and sufferings: yet the ranks and orders of men as the Firstborn, Kings, Prophets, may not be typical in all the particular persons of those ranks and orders, at least to the particular acts they do in those ranks and orders: but 'tis enough for many in those orders to agree in common, as in being Kings and Prophets, as Christ was, there being some in all those orders and ranks appointed of God especially and peculiarly to be the Types, which others are not, and for whose sakes in those orders and ranks, such orders of men were instituted by God to be Types, of which many instances might be given with the Reasons thereof in some of the Firstborn, Kings, etc. but I shall reserve the further handling of that to a second part upon this Subject. Lastly, supposing Asa, Josiah, and those godly Kings to be Types of Christ, may it not be doubted whether Jehu, jeboash, Ammon, jeroboam, etc. were Types of Christ, and did execute his kingly office, who yet were commended, viz. the two fir●t, for destroying false worship, and reproved for not doing it constantly; besides could those Kings of Israel and judah (who yet were lawful Kings) that apostatised from all the whole worship of God, the Ceremonial Law that ordained the Types, that destroyed God's service and the Priesthood, made Priests of the lowest of the people, be Types of Christ? and I desire to be resolved or M. S. the Author of the Ancient bounds of Liberty of Conscience stated, whether any wicked men were special Types of Christ, and whether all persons who were Types of Christ were not saved. Thirdly suppose these Kings of judah were Types of Christ in setting on the Throne of David, and ruling over judah, in Christ the King of his Church coming out of their loins, yet they were temporal Kings, had Civil authority: Now how does it appear that what they did in punishing idolatrous Priests, comm●nding their subjects to the true worship of God, they did only as. Types by virtue of that Notion, and not as they were temporal Kings, which must be proved before their examples can be made null; and I am sure the Scripture no where faith that the Kings of judah and Israel in what they commanded in matters of Religion, they did as Types of Christ, and not as Civil Magistrates: 'Tis one thing to be a Type, and another thing to do such things merely qua Types; and what if Christian Magistrates leaning upon this broken staff, suffering all heresies, Blasphemies and Idolatries in their Kingdoms, Christ at the last day when they stand before the judgement feat, they objecting for themselves the Kings of Israel and judah were Types of Christ and all they did was by virtue of their typical notion, shall tell them no, but as Magistrates entrusted by God with a power and authority, how will they be then confounded? will this distinction and notion found out by Libertines deliver from the wrath to come? had not Princes need be on better grounds then Apocryphal notions, such distinctions of which God in his. Word never gave any foundation? but besides the Apocryphalnesse of this notion, that these King's reformed Religion not merely quae Types, but as Kings and Princes over subjects, may be proved thus.  
First, because Magistrates before them, and Magistrates of other Commonwealths did so, as is largely shown in the twelfth Thesis.  
Secondly, Types were not ordained by the Political or Moral Law, as Magistrates and their authority, but by the Ceremonial Law.  
Thirdly, for that which they say the Kings of Israel, the jews and their Land were Types of, and that which by their Kings punishing Idolaters and Seducers was typified, 
The Bloody Tenet. page 179  namely spiritual censures under the Gospel of Excommunication and casting out of the wicked from the Churches of the Gospel, 'tis denied they were Types of the Christian Church in respect of the Civil State, but of the Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Government by Church Officers; so the Land of Canaan was a Type of heaven, not as it contained the Civil State, but the Church; it being a Type of Heaven before they had possession of it, or their Civil State and Government set up, and yet no Type of Heaven till the people of God had a promise of it, 〈◊〉 is evident by laying the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament together. And as for those punishments inflicted by King's typifying the censures under the Gospel, we must know that all the Spiritual Censures of Admonition, Suspension, Excommunication, were under the Old Testament in the time of the Kings of judah, and that not only for Ceremonial uncleannesses, but for moral and scandalous fin●, all which is fully proved by Master Gillaspie at large in his A●rous Rod blossoming, 2 Book 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. 12. chapters.  
Fourthly, granting what these Libertines say that the Kings of Judah were Types of Christ, and in what they did they aypified Christ's kingly Office, yet this cannot enervate the examples of these Kings, unless doing things as a Type, and as a Moral example, could not stand in one and the same person, which is not so: Some particular persons may be intended by God Types of Christ (the highest kind of Type) and their action intended to typify special works of Christ, 
☞  and yet those very action's may be Moral and binding all in such relations whose persons nor actions can in no kind be judged typical, and the reason of it is, because God may serve himself of a person or office doing things commanded in the Moral law to make a type of, ●nd though God intends such a man by such and such actions to make him a Type, yet the man may not know so much, nor intent any such thing in such actions, but do all by virtue of a Moral command; and for the better understanding of this, let the Reader consider that in some persons the same actions may be both Typical and Moral, 
☞  extraordinary in regard of the ma●●er and some circumstances, and ordinary in regard of the matter and substance, typical as typifying Christ and what he should do, and yet Moral duties which he ought to do, and all others also in such relations: so that though some persons be Types, and the things they do typical, yet they may be Moral too, and so binding, which though as they were typical they may be taken away, yet as they were Moral may be in full force; As for example, Christ was figured in Joseph, joseph was an eminent Type of Christ 
* See Dr. Tailor's Treatise of Types, c. 6. p. 33 34, 35, 36.  in the first ●ank of Types as a singular person typifying him, not as a rank or order of men by office only as those kings of judah spoken of, and among other things he was a Type in feeding his Father and his Brethren, that when advanced in the kingdom he provided for, and nourished his Father's house, which typified jesus Christ feeding the Family of God, and preserving the Church alive. Now though joseph in this action was a Type of Christ, and did it typically, yet not only typically, but did this morally and naturally too by virtue of the fifth Commandment, and sixth Commandment, of children's duty to their Parents, and of preserving life; and by virtue of this example of joseph every man in high place and rich, is bound to send for and provide for Father and Brethren in a necessitous condition; 
☜  and suppose now a man in Joseph's condition should have Father and Brethren in want, whom he should neglect, and being pressed by Joseph's example to provide for them, he should answer Joseph's practice was nothing to him, for he was a Type of Christ, and typified Christ's feeding of his Church not with temporal food only, but with the Manna from Heaven, the word and Sacraments, I ask of those who plead this Argument of typicalness, whether this were a good Answer? and if not, neither is theirs against the practice of the kings of judah from being Types of Christ; and I wish the Pleaders for Toleration would serious consider of, and resolve this Question, though joseph was a special Type of Christ, and in this action of preserving his Father and Brethren a Type of Christ's preserving his Church, yet whether this action of his to his Father, Brethren and their children, do not bind now in the days of the Gospel children to their Fathers etc. or whether the typicalness of it hath caused it to cease? and in the resolution of this case, the ingenuous Reader may see what to judge of the typicalness of the kings of judah, and that typicalness of persons and actions does not presently make all such persons and actions that they cannot be examples or rules to others who are not typical. 
☜  The Prophets and Prophetical office were Types of Christ as well as the kings of judah; and yet actions they did that were some way typical and extraordinary, bind Christians under the Gospel for the substance and matter, and are set before them for example, as Eli●● a Type, and in his Prayer a Type, yea somewhat in it extraordinary, is by james propounded in prayer as a pattern and a proof of effectual servant prayer to righteous men under the Gospel, james 5. 16, 17, 18. In Hebrews 11. many are named who in their persons were undoubted Types of Christ, as Noah, Isaac, Joseph, Moses, Samson, David, and others, who if not Types in their persons, yet were in an extraordinary way, as Abraham, jacob, Gideon, jephtah, etc. Now in the point of faith and patience (though Types or extraordinary persons) are set down for examples and patterns to Christians under the New Testament, Hebrews 12. verse 1, 2. I could give many more instances of Types and extraordinary persons, whom in Moral practical things, matters of faith, holiness, righteousness (though they did such things extraordinarily, and as Types of Christ either personally or officially) Christians in an ordinary way are commanded to follow, and therefore in the present case the vindicating of and promoting of the glory of God, the punishing of evil doers (which Blasphemers, Heretics, and schismatics are) the commanding good, being Morall-practicall things of perpetual reason and equity bind all those in authority and government according to their places, though they be no Types nor extraordinary persons.  
Fifthly, if this evasion of the kings of Israel and judah about typicalness be good, by the same reason it may hold against. Magistrates punishing under the Gospel for matters of the second Table, murder, adultery, etc. for may not the Socinians and Anabaptists, who deny Christian Magistrates may punish capitally for murder, treason, etc. say the same thing against all the examples of Magistrates and kings under the old Law punishing with death for such offences, that they were Types, and that people and Land typical, which no Magistrate nor people are now, and what ever can be said upon this ground against Princes meddling in matters of Religion, may as well be said against their punishing in Civil matters, and Anabaptists, and Socinians may as well say those Kings were Types of Christ in respect of their power over the State as over the Church; and if they should affirm it, how would it be disproved? And the Bloody ●Tene●▪ pag. 209. grants that in the Land of Israel all things, their civils', morals and naturals, were carried on in Types as well as their Spirituals and Ecclesiasticals; yea by this ground what ever shall be brought out of the Old Testament to show the duty of Magistrates, or the qualifications of them, as that they that rule over men must be just, fearing God, hating covetousness, courageous, etc. it may be answered, that was required of those who were typical, and their people typical, but it concerns not Magistrates now; and yet higher, by this evasion men may reason against all instances out of the Old Testament brought from Fathers, Masters, to bring up their children in the fear of God, etc. because the firstborn, such Fathers and Masters of families were typical, 
☜  and their children typical, which Fathers are not under the Gospel.  
Sixthly, if this answer of typicalness may hold, all those Kings and Princes actions and practices in other things of Moral particular duties, as prayer, mourning for sin, giving God thanks for deliverances, etc. are taken away from binding now, as well as their acts of power and authority; and when Ministers bring these examples of David, josiah, Hezekiah, etc. in such things, it may be said they were Types of Christ, and did them as Types of something to come: the Antinomian may upon this ground answer the example of David's praying so often and constantly, and of mourning for his sins, by saying David was a Type of Christ.  
Seventhly, by this Answer all the Scriptures of the Old Testament, Moses, Psalms, Prophets, with whatever of any duty commanded, or sin spoken against in any of these, are at once made void: for it may be said the Penmen were Types, and given to a typical people, written in a typical Land: It may be said of the whole Moral Law, that as Moses in his person was a Type of Christ in many particulars, so in delivering the Law he shadowed Christ the Mediator, Moses being a mediator between God and his people in giving the Law, Galat. 3. 19 the Law was delivered in the hand of a Mediator, that is Moses, Acts 7. 38. and therefore not binding to Christians. And so it may be pretended of all things written in the Psalms, Prophets, and the other Books that they were (viz. the Oracles of God) committed to the Jews and the Circumcision, Rom. 3. 2. Rom. 9 4. which people and Nation of Israel were typical of the true Israel, the Israel of God, Galat. 6. 16. So the Land of Canaan was typical of rest from 〈◊〉, and of true rest, and the heavenly inheritance, Hebr. 4. 1, 2, 3, 8▪ 9, 10, 11. verse. And indeed what was not typical some way or other in the Jewish Church and State, as the firstborn, the Priests, Kings, Prophets, the Land, the people, their worships, with many more particulars, so that if this Answer stand good, all the Scriptures of the Old Testament are overthrown, and all Heretics whatsoever, Socinians, Antinomians, Familists, etc. may evade any Scripture brought from thence, as well as the pleaders for Toleration the examples of the Kings of Israel and Judah.  
8ly. All the actions and practices done by persons and things typical are so far from nothing concerning them who live under the Gospel, that the Scriptures of the New Testament tell us, that many things under the Old Testament were made Figures and Type● for the admonitions and example of those in like cases under the New, and did teach to the uttermost, as the 1 Cor. 10. from the sixth verse to the twelfth, and that clause of promise in the fifth Commandment, That thy days may be long upon the Land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, is meant of the Land of Canaan a typical Land, which yet did teach Christians under the New Testament, that obedience to their Parents would bring a being well with them, and living long upon the earth (though they had not the Land of Canaan) as Ephes. 6. 1, 2. 3. fully shows. Saint Paul also tells us, Rom. 15. 4. that whatsoever things were written 〈◊〉, were written for our learning, and so those Magistrates and Princes of Israel and Judah (how ever they might typify Christ's Kingdom) they were such Types spoken of in 1 Cor. 10. viz. examples to Christian Magistrates to teach them to do so likewise, as Fathers than were to teach Fathers now to instruct their children, and therefore though such an order of men as Kings in Israel might be intended to typify Christ's Kingdom, yet that no way hinders, but what they did as Kings in ruling and ordering of their subjects, they performed as the proper works of their places common to them with other Princes, without any reference to their being Types, or doing them as Types, God in Scripture recording all along what they did, as going upon common moral grounds, and speaking nothing of them in their Reformations as in a figurative typical notion. And in the close of my Answer to this evasion of the instances of the Kings of Judah, I shall hint to the Reader to consider some notes of distinction between actions merely typical and fulfilled in the Antitype, done only to represent and shadow forth what Christ was to do, 
☜  and mixed actions, moral and typical too, or at least the actions of one who by person or order is a Type; and upon search it will be found that all the notes of actions moral, not merely typical, will be found in the practices of those Ks of Judah and Israel before named, As first, when their practices and ways are not barely related, but commended and praised by God, whereas actions merely typical are only related and set down, as in Samson, and divers others▪ Secondly, when done upon moral grounds and reasons, motives drawn from mercies, blessings, evils, and judgements, commands and messages from God experiences of God, upon God's convincing and converting men. Thirdly, when they of such an Order and office are reproved and punished for not doing such things, or for not thoroughly doing them, whereas I suppose persons typical, and whose actions are intended to be merely typical, will and shall do such things though they may not know the meaning of them, of which many instances might be given in some actions of Samson, Ionas and others. Fourthly, when as their actions are suitable to those qualifications, titles and descriptions given in Scripture of Magistrates and that office in general. Fifthly, when what they do is agreeable and suitable to the commands and directions given by God to all of that order and rank, and they do in the matter of Religion in commanding to good and suppressing evil, what all other Magistrates have done in all times and ages, who have cared for any Religion at all, as Heathen Princes before they knew the true God, and others after they have known him, however through ignorance or superstition they might mistake about the true way and worship: Now let the Reader but consider of all these notes of distinction, and others of the like nature that might be given, and he will find them agree to those Kings Jo●ia●, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Asa, etc. for the substance of all they did in commanding their people to the right way▪ and suppressing the false, and so much for answering of this evasion of the practice of the Kings of Israel and Judah, which I have been the larger in, because so great a weight of this controversy on all the Sectaries part lies on this typicalness both of the Jewish Magistrates and people.   

14. THESIS'.  
As for that which is said by M. S. pag. 51. that Idolatry and Idolaters were the adequate object of the coercive power of the Kings of Judah in matters of Religion, and that Idolatry meant not of those who worshipped the true God though in a false manner with the violation of the second Commandment, but of such who Apostatised from the God of Israel to serve strange gods, the gods of other Nations & those neither simply as such, but as drawing others away unto the same Idolatries with them, but we never read of any coercive power or punishment inflicted upon Heretics or Sismaticks which abounded in great variety and numbers amongst them, as the Pharisees, Herodians, etc. I answer, First, Idolatry and Idolaters were not the adequate object of the Kings and Magistrates coercive power under the Old Testament, but generally the matter of the Covenant, the whole worship and truth of God, as is apparent by the examples of Josiah, Hezekiah, Asa, and Jehosaphat, in putting down and suppressing other evils besides Idolatry, as will-worship, things abused to Idolatry, profanation of the Sabbaths, marrying of strange wives, abuses in Discipline and Church Government, profaning chambers in the Courts of the house of God, in commanding to keep the Passeover, which though their subjects had not kept, they might not have been Idolaters, in punishing those who were guilty only of wilworship, not of Idolatry, as also those who married strange wives, who did common works on the Sabbath day, who dealt with familiar spirits and Wizards, of all which the Reader may find proofs at large in these following Script● 2 Cro. 34. 31, 32, 33. There's a Covenant made to keep all the Testimonies and Statutes of God, and the people are made to stand to it, From 2 Kings 23. verse 8, 9 compared with 2 Chron. 14. 3. 5. 2 Chron. 15. 17. 2 Chron. 33. 17. 'tis evident there were in Judah two sorts of high places some on which▪ was God worshipped; others on which Idols were worshipped, the one sort was the high places of Idolatry, the other the high places of will-worship; yet the Priests of the latter as well as of the former were punished by Josiah, though not with the punishment of death as they were▪ for he caused them to go out of all the Cities of Judah, and to cease from the Priest's office, so that they durst not come up to the Altar of the Lord at Jerusalem. So Nehem. 13. 7, 8. 15, 16, 17. 25. 28. 30. Ezra 10. 3. 5. 2 Kings 23, 24, 25.  
Secondly, the Idolatry removed and punished by the Jewish Kings and Magistrates, was as well of worshipping the true God in a false manner, as of those who worshipped false gods, the gods of the Nations, and were Apostates from the true God to other gods, as is evident by the instances of worshipping the golden Calf made by Aaron, and worshipping of the golden Calves at Dan and Bet●el set up by Jeroboam, (called Idolatry, as in several places of Scripture) by Moses and some of the good Kings as Josiah removed, and the Worshippers punished, and yet the people of Israel in worshipping these did not go serve the gods of the Nations, but served the God of Israel as appears by those speeches of theirs, Exod. 32. 4, 5, 6. To morrow is a Feast to the Lord, not to the golden Calf. 1 Kings 12. 27, 28. It is too much for you to go ●p to jerusalem, behold thy gods O Israel which brought thee up out of the Land of Egypt; and our most learned Protestants in their writings against the Papists, do prove the Papists to be formal Idolaters from their adoration of God and Christ in Images (though they do not worship false gods, the gods of the Heathen) by these two examples of Aaron's golden calf, and Ier●●oams golden Calves, showing the people of the Jews were not so mad as to believe those Calves to be their God, or that brought them out of the ●and of Egypt, being brought up hundreds of years before, but only outward representations and remembrancers of God to them, in which they worshipped the true God, their worship being terminative related to God, and not to the Image. joshua 22. 11, 12. All the children of Israel gathered themselves together to go up to war against the children of Reuben, the children of Gad and the half Tribe of Manasse● upon supposition of their building an Altar, not to strange Gods, but for burnt offerings, or for sacrifices besides the Altar of the Lord God that was before his Tacernacle, verse 21. 26. 28, 29. which they were diverted from upon being satisfied it was not an Altar for burnt Offerings, etc. but for a witness between them and the rest of the Tribes that the Lord is God, verse 17. 34.  
Thirdly, the Scripture is contrary also to that, that the grossest Idolaters were not to be punished if not Sed●cers drawing others away from the true God to strange gods, for we read that Moses was so angry with the people that were seduced unto a lower kind of Idolatry, viz. worshipping the true God by a Calf, that besides the three thousand men that were put to the sword the Seducers and the Ringleaders, he burned the Calf, ground it to powder, strewed it upon the water, and made the children of Israel drink of it, causing the Idol to pass from them among their excrements. So 2 Chron. 15. 13. They that would not seek the Lord God of Israel whether small or great, the little ones (who could not be engineers of Idolatry) were to be punished. Deut. 13. When one of the Cities of Israel was withdrawn to serve other gods, than the inhabitants of the City, the children as well as the grown men (who could not withdraw from God) were to be smitten. And we shall find it all along in the Book of the Kings and Chronicles among the Idolaters and false worshippers, that there's no such distinction made, but some of whom no such thing expressed, are removed and punished, as those who may be supposed were inticers to Idolatry.  
Fourthly, As for that the Kings of Judah Asa, josia, etc. never punished Pharisees, Herodians, or any other Sect in the profession of the Jewish Religion, the reason is manifest, because there was none such till many hundred of years after these Kings, for these Sects of Pharisees▪ etc. began very late, not long before the coming of Christ, and as for Herodian● they sprung up after Herod was King (which shows the great ignorance of M. S. 
☜  speaking as if there had been Herodians in the days of Asa, H●z●kiah, etc.) but by the way if M. S. ●lias Cretinsis can prove there were such in the days of those good Kings I will undertake to prove that they used their coercive power towards them as well as towards Idolaters, and ●ndeed 'tis evident by many passages that all kind of corruption and declination from the way of God was the object of Josiah● and other Magistrate's Reformation, and had there been Sadduces, Herodians, etc. viz. men that had held those Errors and ways in those King's times, they could not have escaped their hands, and this is thus proved, because the high places not of Idolatry, but of will-worship, where they sacrificed to the Lord only, as 'tis 2 Chron 33. 17. were put down and the worshippers and Priests suppressed, and those good Kings who did not, are upon record blamed (which kind of worshipping was not so bad as the Herodians and Sadduces, who held Herod for the Messias, and denied Angels and Spirits) and that I may come up yet more close to M. S. objection, who saith nothing was done against Sectaries or schismatics, I conceive they were to the Church of the Jews, as Sectaries and scismatics are now, and their worship a Schism, worshipping the true God in a separated way apart from the public place and Assemblies of God's people, as our Sectaries do now.  
Fifthly, the true reasons why, when the Herodians, Sadduces, etc. sprung up among the Jews, they were not suppressed not punished. First in regard Religion was then mightily corrupted, all things were out of order, the Church of the Jews did then hasten to their destruction, and so no wonder if Heresies and false Doctrines were suffered in such a State as well as other things. Secondly, the Jews were not then a free people, neither had they the Civil power absolutely in their hands, they had no truly 
* Bellarm. De laicis lib. 3. cap. 19  jewish King who cared for those things, but Herod the Idumean, and the High Priest than could do nothing. Thirdly, 
* Gabriel powel Refutat. of an Apologet. Epistle ●e● Toleration page 40.  God permitted jury to abound with diversity of Sects in the days of Herod, as the Sadduces, Essenes', the Pharisees, the Herodians, because he had a purpose to destroy the jewish Commonwealth, and to bring all into subjection to Christ, and the Toleration of divers Religions among them was the forerunner, and preparer of the way for the ruin of the jewish State, as it hath been of many States.  
6ly. supposing the Kings of Iuda● and Israel de facto, had never exercised any coercive power on any other objects but Idolaters and Idolatry, and that all the commands in the Old Testament given to the jewish Magistrates had been in the letter of the text only against Idolaters and Idolatry, (which is not true) yet by virtue of those very commands and examples Magistrates might exercise a coercive power against evils of the like kind, though not in the letter specified; and the reason is this, because the commands of God and the examples of good men accordingly recorded in Scripture might in the letter (at least for the generality) be expressed only against those evils, and that kind and sort of them which were most in use in that age and time when they were given, and yet other kinds of those sins, or other sins as bad, or worse which should arise afterwards were by just Analogy, common equity, by a Synecdoche usual in such commands forbidden also. As for example the second Commandment forbids only in the letter and by name graven Image, and the likeness of any thing, and yet in that command all mediums of worships invented by men (though not graven Images nor likeness) are forbidden under the title of graven Images and likeness, and that by a Synecdoche common in the Decalogue, which because in those times of Moses they were the chief inventions of m●n corrupting the worship of God, they are fitly put in the place of all humane inventions brought into the worship of God, of which the Reader may find more in Doctor Ames Medul. Theolog. 2. Book 13. chap. De Cultu Instituto. So because Idolatry, and Idolatry with apostasy to serve strange Gods, the Gods of those Nations, whom God had cast out of the Land of Canaan (there being many Canaanites, etc. among them) were the corruptions the Israelites were most in danger of, the Idolatries most in use in those times, and by the Nations round about them when they should come to Canaan (as is evident by many places of Deutr.) and the false Prophets and Seducers than went most about to seduce men in that way, therefore God in the letter (as it was most needful) spoke by name against such Prophets and such Idolatry as were most stirring in those times, under which commands are forbidden by a Synecdoche and by Analogy other depravations of God's worship and name that might arise in after ages, for by the rules of Interpretation of Scripture given by Divines, where a thing is forbid, there all of that nature and sort are forbidden also; as for example, greater sins of that kind, than those expressed in the letter must needs be forbidden, and so lesser also. Now certainly where God hath given a command to Magistrates in the letter to punish such offences, if his subjects commit greater and higher against God and his worship by the equity of this command he is to punish them (if none in the letter for those) as if there had been no command but against Idolatry of such Nations, yet worshipping the Devil, offering up children to Moloch, blaspheming God and his worship, with other such, aught to be restrained, and if they commit Idolatry or other corruptions, not so great or so gross, yet by way of proportion and equity such aught to be, though in a lower kind and way. And 'tis evident by many instances that the jewish Magistrates Kings and others, as josiah Nehemiah, etc. did punish in a proportion (though not with death) those who violated the worship of God, and the first Table, though they were not guilty of Idolatry and apostasy to worship other gods, nor of worshipping the true God by Idols, as by the golden Calves of Jeroboam. And if that be good Divinity which M. S. the Father of that Evafion of Idolatry and Idolaters being the adequate object of the coercive power of the Kings of Judah in matters of Religion, hath pag. 89. of the same Book, That God prohibiting all manner of violence, oppression and hard measure among his people one towards another, though such Laws as those in the letter of them respected only Civil transfactions and dealings between men, yet the equity and spirit of them extends to spirituals also, men being every whit as liable to violence, oppressions and hard measure from men for their conscience sake as in any other respects, or upon any other grounds whatsoever, then from that command, Deut. 13. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and from those examples of Asa, josiah, to infer an equity of punishing other offences in the same kind, though not named in the letter, must needs be better Divinity, 
☜  because every one cannot but conceive that the equity and spirit of a Law may upon better grounds extend to things in the same kind and of the same nature, from one spiritual thing to another, from Idolatry to Will-worship or Heresy, then from civil things to religious, which differ tot● genere. But setting aside M. S. Concession, is there not all the equity and reason in the world from those commands forementioned (though granting according to the letter of those Laws no man should be put to death for any thing less than that kind of Idolatry with Apostasy, worshipping false gods) that those who worship the true God by graven Images by making likenesses of him, and that corrupt the doctrine of Faith and Religion, should also by the Magistrates be punished as well by suppressing their Conventicles, putting them out of places of power, etc. though not so much as the others. Or is there any equity and proportion in this, that God should command punishing with death (the highest kind the Magistrate can inflict) for Idolatry in worshipping strange gods, and should forbid any punishment or restraint at all of Idolatry, and corruption of his worship in the next degree to that? According to degrees of faults to have degrees of punishments is of the light of nature and right reason; but to have a higher degree of an offence to be punished with death, and all others not to be punished at all, is against the light of nature and all reason: Le's but look into the Scriptures for the violation of other commands of God, as in the 6, 7 and 8th. Commandments: and we shall find that where the higher degrees and violations had greater punishments, the others went not scorfree. For example, when adultery was punished with death, fornication was punished with fifty shekels of silver, and wit●● paying of money according to the dowry of virgins, Exod. 22. 16. 17. compared with Deut. 22. 22. 28, 29. So, when stealing of men was death, stealing of oxen and sheep was restoring five and fourfold, Exod. 21. 16. Exod. 22. 1.  
Seventhly, there is a great agreement between the false Prophets under the old Testament, and the false teachers under the New, between Idolatry under the old Testament, and Heresies now (many Heresies being gross Idolatries) as is evident by many Scriptures of the New Testament, which lively parallels and resembles these to each other, so that it cannot be upon any good ground conceived that the first sort should be punished with death, and the latter not punished at all; but I refer the fuller clearing of this to the 17. Thesis', where upon occasion of opening that 13. of Deuteronomic I shall speak more.   

15. THESIS'.  
Besides the full concurrent testimony and judgement of the most learned Protestant Divines, Calvin, Philip Melancton, Beza, Peter Martyr, Zanchius, Bullinger, Musculus, Chemnitius, Gerardus, Bucanus, Bilson, Cartwright, Professores Leydenses, Voetius, Triglandus, that the care of Religion and God's worship belongs to the Magistrate, that God hath given him a power and authority objective and external in Ecclesiastical causes to look to Religion as to Civil Justice, so as he is bound to see the true Religion and service of God set up and maintained in his Dominions, being thereupon generally by all Divines called Custos & Curator utriusque Tabulae. God himself in the Scriptures shows at much, annexing the care of Religion and keeping the Law, the first Table as well as the second to the Magistrate, Deut. 17. 18, 19 God there appoints that the King over his people when he comes to the Throne of his kingdom, should have a Copy of the Law written out of that which was before, the Priests the Levites to be always with him. Now the Law there spoken of is meant the whole Law of God, the first Table as well as the second, that which concerned God as well as man, because it was a Copy of that Original which was kept in the Tabernacle for the Priests and Levites, whose office was principally about matters of the first Table; and then the end expressed in the 19 verse, that the King might learn to fear the Lord his God, to keep all the words of this Law, shows as much that by the name of the Law must be understood the whole Systeme of the Divine Law, so that by this place of Scripture 'tis evident that not only the second Table of the Moral Law that contains justice and righteousness is committed to the Magistrate, but the first also concerning the worship of God is given to his custody. And as 'tis understood of the whole Law, so the custody of the Law of God is not here a Custodia legum personalis & privata, meant only of a personal private keeping, as the Pleaders for Toleration evade, saying, that the King in his person as well as others was to keep the Law, but also and chiefly of a 
* Meisnerus Sect. 2. Controvers. quaest. Politic. De Magistr. pag.  Custodia Officialis & publica quod Rex curare debeat ut Lex Domini pure doceatur, ut cultus instituatur, a public keeping out of office, it being the King's office to care that the Law of God should be purely taught, and his worship set up; and that it must be so understood, consider these following Reasons.  
First, this King, verse 15. was to be one from among themselves, a Brother, not a stranger, who was to know the Law of God, and to keep it personally as well before he was a King, as after, the Law of God being committed to private persons equally as to Kings for their particular personal observation, and therefore sure in this solemn injunction there's something new and more required of Kings than was of them before, or is of persons merely private.  

* bilson's difference between Christian subjection and unchristian Rebellion. part 2. pag. 178.  Secondly, this was not done till just he was placed in the throne, so saith the text, verse 18. The Law was committed to the King as a King at his Coronation, which shows it had not reference to the King's private conversation as a mere man, but to his Princely function as a Magistrate, which stood in commanding others, not in guiding himself. For no man is a King in respect of himself, but in ruling his Subjects. So 
* August. Epist. 50.  Augustin saith of Kings, As a man he serveth God one way, as a King another way; As a man by faithful living, as a King in setting forth Laws to command that which is good, and remove the contrary. So that Kings as Kings serve God in doing that for his service which none but Kings can do. This is also proved from 2 Kings 11. 12. compared with 2 Chron. 23. 11. where to King Jehoash in his solemn inauguration as soon as the Crown is put upon him, the Book of the Testimony was given him from the high Priest, that he might know the care and public custody of the Law was committed to him in his being made a King; and in that the command of God with the practice accordingly, together with putting the Crown on the head was to give the Law in the King's hand, it shows it was to command it to others, and make others keep it. And that this was the meaning of it in Jehoash, and so in other Princes, it may further appear in that the people at that time being much corrupted in Religion, and Jehoaida the high priest desiring much their Reformation, and the Restauration of Religion, as a means to effect it made a covenant between the Lord and the people: and as the medium and means that that people should be the Lords people, he brings in the King between them that he should interpose with his authority to make them the Lords people, verse 17. And jehoiada made a Covenant between the Lord and the King, and the people, that they should be the Lords people, 
* Vide Late Annotations of English Divines on the place.  that he should set up and maintain the true worship of God, and be for God to bring in the people.  
Thirdly, 
Vide Pet. Mart. in locum.  the ends expressed in Deut. 17. Of the Kings prolonging his days in his Kingdom, he and his children in the midst of Israel, of his not turning aside from the commandment to the right or to the left, of his learning to fear the Lord God, and keeping all the words of the Law, show, 'tis understood of a public official keeping the Law; for the Kings of Israel and Judah could not prolong their days in their Kingdoms, nor their children enjoy good days after them if they suffered Idolatry, Apostasy, etc. in their land, though themselves practised it not, as may be seen in Solomon, and the stories of the Kings of Israel and Judah, neither could they keep all the commands of God, there being many commands given to the jewish Magistrates (as is confessed, but pleaded to be judicial and peculiar to them) to see their people serve God only, and to punish Idolaters and false Prophets.  
Fourthly, the practice of the good Kings among the jews not only keeping the Law themselves, but causing others also, as Josiah, Hezekiah, Asae, etc. and that from this Text, and such like, shows it was meant of a public keeping the Law; the diligent execution of their office serves for an evident exposition what God required at their hands.  
And as I have proved that of Deut. 17. speaks of a keeping the Law ex officio as a public custos, so for the taking of another evasion brought by Mr. Goodwin in his Hagiomastix, page 132. I desire the Reader to observe that God having given power and authority to the Magistrate to see the first Table kept, the duties commanded to be performed by all under his jurisdiction, and to be guarded against all disobedience and contempt from men, it must be understood in the use of such means and ways God hath allowed the Magistrate as distinct from private persons or ministers, viz. such as are proper to him, and which God hath given him by virtue of his place to use. Now those means qua Magistrate are in the exercise of his coercive power by Laws and Edicts, and by the use of the temporal sword given him of God to restrain and hinder such evils, and to promote and further such good. 
* Phil. Mela●c. de Magistrate. Civilibus & dignitate Rerum Politic.  So Melancton when as the Magistrate is the keeper of the Laws he himself obeys them, and compels others to obey them, and defends strongly their authority: Therefore he is armed of God with the sword. The Minister he restrains and punishes only with the word of God, with preaching and excommunication without bodily force. But the Magistrate being armed with the sword, punishes those who are con●umaicous with punishments of the body. 
a Triglandu● de potest. Civili. & Eccles. c. 13. p. 258. 259  Triglandus shows how Ministers, Fathers of families, Magistrates and all people are commanded to keep the Law, and are keepers of the Law, and then lays down the difference between all these in keeping the Law. The Minister he teaches whole Assemblies the true rule of holiness, admonishes, and exhorts all to subject to the command of Christ, and by the power of the keys casts out from the communion of the faithful impenitent and refractory persons. The father of a family teaches in his family the exercise of true piety, goes before them in example, and by his authority restrains his that they shall not turn out of the good way. Now he who is Magistrate, doth not teach but as a believer out of the Law of love as other believers do, and as a Father of a Family his own household: But as a Magistrate with his coercive power he commands and forces all within his Territories that they shall not outwardly offend against the true Religion and worship of God. 
* Amesius Medul. lib. 2. cap. 17. pag. 551. Magistratuum est politicis medi●●, & potestate coerciva procurare bonum commun●, tam spirituale quam corporale omnium corum, quo● habent suae jurisdictioni commissos.  And so all our Divines who have written of the differences between Civil and Ecclesiastical power, as 〈◊〉, Z●●chiu●, Amesi●●, Apollo●●●, 〈◊〉, do show the lawfulness of the Magistrates using outward force by penal Laws and bodily punishments towards those persons and things whereof God hath given them power. I will quote one passage out of Amesi●●. Between the Magistrates and the Ministers of the Church, there is this difference. 'tis the duty of Magistrates by Civil means, and coercive power to procure the common good as well spiritual as bodily of all those committed to their jurisdiction, 1. Tim. 2. 2. but of Ministere by Ecclesiastical means to procure the spiritual good of those committed to them. 
* bilson's difference between Christian subjection and unchristian Rebellion, part 3. page 308.  And another out of Bilson, Ministers may teach but not command, persuasion is their part, compulsion is the Princes. By all which it appears the Magistrate having power in matters of Religion, as the Scriptures quoted, with that received maxim Magistratus est Custos utriusque Tabulae prove, the exercising of it by coercive means is no unrighteous way, but most suitable to the nature of that Ordinance of Magistracy appointed by God to be the keeper of the first Table quoad externam Disciplinam, the due consideration whereof fully answers Hagiomastixs rich sense of the Magistrates being Custos utriusque Tabulae, laid down by him, page 131, 132. and shows both his Senses to be but mere Evasions. The fourth Commandment contains the sum of all Religion and the public worship of God; the Commandment is synechdochical as the others are, containing more things than are experssed in words: In this Commandment not only the time to be allowed for public worship, but what ever belongs to this worship are briefly comprehended under the sanctification of the Sabbath. 'Tis commanded that the Church setting aside all other businesses of this life should meet to worship God to hear his word, pray, etc. For as these things cannot be done without time, so not without place, Ministers, etc. Therefore in this Synecdoche are contained the commands of the public Ecclesiastical meetings to worship God, of places chosen fit for meeting, of the Ministers and their office. In a word, this command of the sanctification of the Sabbath contains all those things which belong to the worship of God, and are judged to be necessary. Zanchi● upon the fourth Commandment, page 652. shows this at large. Chemnitius also in his Common Places De lege Dei on the forth Commandment, with Rivetus in his Explication of the Decalogue, page 111. are of the same mind that the worship of God is required under keeping the Sabbath day holy, the public worship, and the private serving in reference to the public being there commanded. And 'tis the observation of Zanchie on the fourth Commandment, page 651. that there is in the manner of delivering the fourth Commandment, and the other three before it, a threefold difference. 1. All the other are plainly negative, Thou shalt not, but this of the Sabbath is expressly affirmative and negative too. 2. In the others he sets not his own example, but in this he does. 3. In them he speaks simply, Thou shalt not, but here not contended with a simple Commanding, he adds a word Remember, by all which God would reach that 'tis much in his heart that this Commandment should be kept and that 'tis a command of great moment. Now this Moral Commandment containing the sum of Religion and Gods public worship, is given in the first place to the Father of the Family, directed immediately to him, Thou and thy son and thy daughter, etc. therefore given to the Governors of the Family, that they should see it be observed of their whole Family, God having so expressed it as Zanchius * speaks to declare he would 
Zanch. in qua●. precept. 659.  have Governors of the Family to be the Authors and leaders to the whole Family to bring them to the public Assemblies to sanctify the Sabbath. Now this pronoun thou being a Synecdoche comprehending more than is expressed by name, viz as all Governors of Families, Masters, etc. besides natural Fathers, so Magistrates the Fathers and Governors of their people, (as many learned Divines upon the place expound it) teaches us that this command comprehending the sum of all Religion and public worship, is given to the Magistrates in the first place for their subjects, and by this command we are instructed not only what lies upon the Master of the Family, but what is the Magistrates duty in Religion, viz. that he should do the will of God himself, and care that it be done also of others, and see Gods Sabbaths be sanctified. So that here we have in this fourth command the duty of Magistrates in Religion, and how that the care of God's public worship and Religion is committed to them, that they should look to it. 
* Zanchius in quart. precept. 659, 660 Quia vero Synecdoche est sub Patresamilias', complectens & Magistratum, ideo tacite etiam docet, non solum quid inc●●bat cuique Patrifamilias', sed etia● quodnam sit Magistratus officium in religione: nempe ut primo intelligat ex lege Dei quae sit ejus voluntas; deinde eam faciet ipse, & curet ab aliis etiam fieri, Sabbatumque ex ejus voluntat● sanctific●●i, vide ibi plura.  Zanchie upon this fourth command speaks much how under the Father by a Synecdoche is meant also the Magistrate, and that here the holy Ghost teaches what the office of a Magistrate is in matters of Religion, how that he is to command his subjects to the outward worship, and to use his endeavour that his subjects may come to the public assemblies, and together with others sanctify the Sabbath. 
* Chemnitius loc. come. de lege Dei in quart. precept. p. 144. Manifestum est a Parentibus, Patribus familias & Magistra tibus exigi non tantum ut ipsi Sabbatum sanctificent, sed ipsorum officii esse ut curent a reliquis etiam sanctificari, prohibeant & puniant prophanationem. Et oftendit Deus Magistratum debere curare ut peregrini habitantes in portis conforment se religioni verae, ne inde oriantur scandala.  Chemnitius upon the same command writes thus, 'Tis manifest, in this Commandment 'tis required of Parents, Masters of families, and Magistrates, not only that themselves sanctify the Sabbath, but that it is their place and duty that they care it be sanctified of others, and prohibit and punish its profanation. And God doth show that the Magistrates ought to care, that strangers inhabiting within their gates should conform to the true Religion, lest otherwise scandals should arise. And that by [thou] the Magistrate is understood, and so by this command, the care of the public worship and Sabbath to see it sanctified, is given to the Magistrate, is further proved from those words, nor the stranger that is within thy gates. By gates, in that place, are understood not only a particular family or city, but the whole country of any people, as Gen. 22. v. 27. He shall possess the gates of his enemies, and Gen. 24. 60. Deut. 24. 24. So learned Rivet upon the 4. Commandment, by strangers within thy gates are meant, First strangers who commonly inhabited and lived in the common wealth of Israel, Secondly strangers who came from other countries for a time, not to remain, but either to see the country, or to traffic, etc. both which are to keep the Sabbath, the latter sort so far, as not to violate it with any external servile work, as is evident by Nehem. 13. v. 19, 20, 21. Now the meaning of gates & strangers fully showeth the Magistrate is meant in the command; for many strangers in the first sense dwelled in houses of their own, & in the 2d sense the Father of a family had nothing to do out of his house, or with travellers & merchants who were of no family, but the restraining of them belonged properly to the Magistrate. Upon which interpretation 
* Rivetus in Decal. pag. 112. Zanch. in quar. precept. p. 600.  Rivet and Zanchius do show how 'tis the part of a Magistrate to provide that strangers may not give scandals in a commonwealth, but that at least they be made to keep outward discipline with others. The strangers among the Jews were compelled not only to stand to their Political laws, but to some of the outward precepts of Religion, and that partly lest the good manners of the Jews should be corrupted and disturbed with the Gentiles evil manners, and that the strangers among them might be in some sort instructed in the knowledge of the Divine law.  
And whosoever would be fully satisfied in this point that the public exercise of piety and Religion is commanded in the fourth Commandment, and that this Commandment belongs and is given to the Magistrates, not only as particular persons, but as they are Magistrates, so that 'tis their part to care by their authority that the Sabbath be sanctified, that is, that Religion be preserved, and the exercises of piety take place in their Countries and Territories; and further know what the office of a Magistrate is in matters of Religion both in respect of persons and things, and that in the several particulars, let him read learned Zanchius on the fourth Commandment, particularly in these pages 651, 652. 659, 660. and especially 788, 789, etc. the fifth Common Place De Offici● Principum in Religione, of the office of Princes in Religion. And therefore seeing Magistrates have the care of Religion and Gods worship committed to them, being by God appointed to be keepers of the first Table as well as the second, among other particulars laid down in the word, and branched out by Divines, wherein the Magistrates power in matters of Religion stands, this must needs be one, a power of suppressing false Religions and Heresies, and punishing those who by all ways and means go about to destroy the true. If the Magistrate be Custos prim● Tabula, he is also Vindex primae Tabulae. If the Magistrate have a power of commanding the true, and using coercive means to bring his people to it, then sure he hath of hindering the false, 
☜  as he that by Law hath the power of keeping the peace, hath a power also of suppressing tumults, riots, r●u●s, and the reason is manifest, because the one cannot be kept without the other: the Physician who hath a power given him over bodies for their health, hath a power over sicknesses, corrupt meats, poison, and all that would destroy the health and life. He who hath the power of keeping a Garden and the precious flowers and fruits in it, hath a power of plucking up weeds, taking Mouls, Snails and such like that would spoil all. He who may justly command, may justly punish; 
☜  and he that may lawfully punish, may certainly command. All learning will tell us that contraries be consequent to contraries. If Magistrates may lawfully command and establish that which is good, than they may forbid and abolish the contrary evil, of which see more in bilson's Difference between Christian subjection and unchristian Rebellion, part. 2. p. 278, 279. And therefore we see Josiah and other Princes who established the true Religion, & by their kingly authority caused the people to stand to it, removed and punished also all persons and ways contrary thereunto: Hence I conceive 'tis, that maxim is generally received among Divines, Magistratus est Custos ac vindex utriusque Tabulae, the Magistrate is the Revenger of both Tables as well as the Keeper.   

16. THESIS'.  
Magistrates▪ qua Magistrates, by virtue of their office, as Magistrates simply, every of them, though Turks, Heathen and wicked, as well as Christian and Orthodox, have an authority, right, power from God Jure divino in matters of Religion to command for God, and his Honour, and to forbid and suppress the contrary. The Magistrate in general being by his proper place the Minister of God, Rom. 13. God's vicegerent governing men in the room of God, even so far as his power and jurisdiction extends, is bound to care in matters of Religion. As now Parents qua Parents have by the moral law of God a power and a duty lying upon them to command their children to good, and to forbid evil, and have a rod given into their hands to those ends, although being Heathens or wicked, for the present they know not, or will not exercise it in teaching and bringing them up in the Christian Religion and fear of God: So is with Magistrates, the Authority and right every of them hath by being a Magistrate, who by his place is for the punishment of evil doers and the praise of them that do well, however to the due and right exercise of this, a good will and true knowledge out of the word of God may be required. 
* Magistratus omnis ta●. Christianus quam non Christianus potest & debet. Vide plura.  Zanehius in his M●scellaniet de Magistratu 167. 169. and De Ecclesi● militantis Gubernation, cap. 26. pag. 553, 554. shows that every Magistrate as well; wicked as godly, not Christian as Christian, hath this power and so doth Spalatensis in his sixth Book, fifth chapter De Republica Ecclesiastica, but for the better understanding of it I shall lay down this twofold distinction.  
First, that Heathen Princes so far as the light of nature teaches them and right Reason, are to make Laws in matters of Religion and whereas the * light of nature leads on strait to the knowledge of one God and Supreme Deity, 
Rom. 1. 19, 20, 21.  and dictates this God to be just, holy, good, perfect, etc. and to be worshipped with reverence, they should command so far, remove Idolatry, the worship of birds, fourfooted beasts, and creeping things, promote the worship of the true God, punish blasphemies and wicked opinions contrary to the nature of God, and that out of their proper office of being Princes, as the immediate Ministers and Vicegerents of God on earth: Hence we read in many Writers, as 
* Vit. Num. Pompil. De Reverend. Dei ho age. Numa also forbade the Romans to believe that God hath either form or likeness of beast or man, so that in Rome there was no Image of God neither painted nor graven. Vide ibi plura.  Plutarch, Aristotle, Plato and others, that Heathen Princes have made Laws for God and his worship, and have punished Atheists, Epicures Blasphemers, and Sacrilegious persons; and as any of them have come to more knowledge of God and Religion by any extraordinary work of God's providence, or by living among them of the true Religion as the Jews before Christ's time, and Christians since, though not fully converted, yet still according to their knowledge and means, they were bound, and many of them have gone on in promoting the true Religion, and forbidding the contrary, as the King of Niniveh, Darius, Nebuchadonezor, and Aurelianus at the request of the Church punishing Paulus Samosetenus the Heretic. But now if beside the light of nature and dictamen of natural reason, Princes have the light of faith, the knowledge of Christ and the Scriptures, of Heathens come to be Christians, or being borne in Christian Commonwealths, have from their child hood been brought up in the faith of Christ, then also out of their kingly office they should throw down all things contrary to faith and the true worship of Christ, and positively by outward acts promote and command the outward worship of God, have a care of the Ecclesiastical Discipline, and of all the parts of Religion that they may be preserved: Of which the Reader may be further satisfied in the writings of that learned man 
* De Republ. Eccles. cap. ●. 579, 580. Quod si praeter nudum lumen naturae, & naeturalis solius rationis dictamen, adsit in Rege terreno, ex Dei beneficio etiam lumen fidei, adeoque dictamen hoc rationis supernaturalibus etiam virtutibus infusis dirigatur, tunc similiter ex ●odem regis officio religionis queque Custes ita suam debet ordinare Politiam, primum negative ut illa cum fide moribusque fideli homini digni● no●s pugnet; deinde positive per actus externos (qui soli ad ipsius spectant potestatem) externam divinum cultum foveat, promoveat, etc. Vide ibi plura. Zanch. de Magistr. 553, 554.  Marcus Antonius de Dominis Archbish. of Spalleto.  
Secondly, though the care of Religion belongs to all Princes, yet in a special manner upon special obligations the Christian ●aith belongs to Christian Magistrates and Princes, whom God hath given to be nursing Fathers and nursing Mothers: these have not only a remote power, but the next power which they may bring into act by reason of the knowledge of Christ, and many helps; and this many Reformed Divines affert of the Christian Magistrate in the handling of this question of the Magistrates power, as Zanchius and others. But if the Magistrate be also Christian, we do believe it specially belongs to him to take a peculiar care of the Christian Religion. And I have set down this Thesis thus distinctly by itself, because divers of the Patrons of Toleration, especially Cretensis in his M. S. pag. 48, 49. and in his Hagiom●stix. 99, 100 125. do on purpose snarl and make intricate the question about the Magistrates power in matters of Religion, trouble the waters, by falling upon that phrase often expressed by Divines in this Controversy the Christian Magistrate, which how 'tis to be taken I have showed, and should have here more fully opened it, and taken off some cavils I foresee likely to be made against it, but that I have spoken of it in the Prolegomen●, and intent in the second or third part of Toleration to treat more fully of it.   

17. THESIS'.  
Besides all the proofs in the Old Testament of Magistrates power de facto in matters of Religion, with commands given to them to look to see the true Religion settled in their Countries (which I have given in former Theses) there are many express commands given by God to the Magistrates to punish persons in their Territories for matters against the first Table viz. Idolaters, Blasphemers, false Prophets, Seducers, Witches and Wizards, Prophaners of the Sabbath, as in Exodus 22. verse 20. He that sacrificeth unto any God save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed. Deut. 13. verse 1, 2, 5, If there arise among you a Prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, saying, let us go after other Gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them: Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that Prophet, etc. And that Prophet, or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he hath spoken to turn you away from the Lord your God, which brought you out of the Land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the Lord thy God commanded thee to walk in: So shalt thou put away the evil from the midst of thee. Deut. 17. 2, 3, 4, 5. If there be found among you within any of thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee, man or woman that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the Lord thy God, in transgressing, his Covenant, and hath gone and served other gods and worshipped them, either the Sun or Moon, or any of the host of Heaven, which I have not commanded; and it be told thee and thou hast beard of it, and inquired diligently, and behold it be true, and the thing certain that such abomination is wrought in Israel: then shalt thou bring forth that man or that moman (which have committed that wicked thing) unto the gates, even that man or that woman and shalt stone them with stones until they die. verse 12, 13. And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the Priest (that standeth to minister there before the Lord thy God) or unto the Judge, even that man shall die, and thou shalt put away evil from Israel. And all the people shall hear and fear, and do no more presumptuously. Levit. 24. 16. And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely he put to death, and all the Congregation shall certainly stone him: As well the stranger, as he that is borne in the Land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death. verse 23. And Moses spoke to the children of Israel, that they should bring forth him that had cursed out of the Camp, and stone him with stones: and the children of Israel did as the Lord commanded Moses. Levit. 20. 2, 3, 4. And the Lord spoke unto Moses saying, Again thou shalt say to the children of Israel, whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel that giveth any of his seed to Molech, he shall surely be put to death. Exod. 22. 18. Levit. 20. 27. Thou shalt not suffer a Witch to live. A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a Wizard, shall surely be put to death; they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them. Ye shall keep the Sabbath therefore, for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it, shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doth any work therein, that soul shall he cut off from among his people.  
Deut. 18. 20. 22. But the Prophet which shall presume to speak ● word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that Prophet shall die. When a Prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the Prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him, that is, afraid to put him to death, either for his threatening words, or for his signs, or for his shows of holiness, or because he hath the name of a Prophet of the Lord, and speaks in the name of the Lord, or is indeed a Prophet, as that old Prophet was 1 Kings 13. 11, 18, 20, 21, 30. Ainsw. upon this place, saith, the Hebrews, explain it, saying Whosoever withdraweth himself from killing a false Prophet, because of his dignity, for that he walketh in the ways of Prophecy, behold he transgresseth against this prohibition, thou shalt not be afraid of him. And so he that with draweth himself from teaching concerning him what he is guilty of; or that dreadeth and feareth for his words, etc. Now in all these commands, as their subject matter consists of things forbidden in the ten Commandments, as Blasphemy, Apostasy, Witchcraft, Profanation of the Sabbath, etc. So that the commands for punishing such (for the substance of them) are moral too of common reason and equity given to all Nations, and for all ages, as to the Jews and their times, I shall prove by these following Reasons; and for the most material things brought of old or of late by the grand Patrons of Toleration Minus Celsus Senensis, Acontius, Bloody Tenet, M. S. Hagiomastix to make void these places of Scripture, (as that these commands either are abrogated by Christ, the things commanded in those laws belonging to the Jews only, but not the Gentiles nor Christians, or if they be any way moral, yet they extend not to Heretics and false-teachers, but concern only Apostates, Blasphemers, such false Prophets who endeavoured to persuade men to the worship of a false God; and that by affirming that they spoke by the inspiration of some deity) to them also I shall return asatisfying Answer.  
For the first, let the Reader lay together these particulars. 1. that 'tis evident some of these commands, as against offering their children to Molech, as against dealing and contracting with a familiar Spirit deserve punishing among Christians and under the Gospel now, as well as under the Law, and if these, why not the other of Blasphemy, Idolatry, false-prophecie, & c? these latter are of moral things as well as the other; the first and these are delivered both by Moses in the samebooks, time, propounded after the same tenor and way, upon the same grounds and reasons. No difference at all, unless that these latter concerning Apostasy, Idolatry, false prophecy, be more strictly commanded and further enlarged, which the Reader by comparing the texts shall observe. But if it be said those commands against offering their seed to Molech and of witches, are therefore punished by the Magistrate, because they offend against lives and estates of mankind, in killing the children, in cattle being killed, and men's bodies being hurt by Witches and Wizards, which is not in the other of Apostasy, Blasphemy, etc. I reply, 'tis to be observed that in all those places where the commands are given by God to the Magistrate about these, there's not one jota or tittle expressed about offending against the second Table in life or goods, but all the reason formally declared, is, because against God immediately, and the commands of the first Table: For giving the seed to Molech, Levit. 18. 21. this is the reason alleged by God against it, Thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the Lord, Levit. 20. 3. the reason given against it, is the defiling of God's Sanctuary, and profaning his holy name, both which spoke in reference to the worship of God only and matters of Religion, as Ainsworth in his Notes upon both these Texts, fully and excellently shows, as also the late Annotations of our English Divines. It is further proved by those two Texts Jerem. 7. 31. Jerem. 19 5, 6. where God speaking against the Jews offering up their children to Molech, lays open their sins in these expressions, which I commanded them not, neither came it into my heart, which I commanded not, nor spoke it, neither came it into my mind, in which words God answers to what was in their hart, viz. that they did it as a worship to God, a thing commanded by him, and so out of conscience, but God tells them, and that in these reiterated expressions it was never commanded by him among all the duties of his worship he never spoke a word of any such matter. and among all the places in Moses Books, Prophets, the Books of Kings, Chronicles, where 'tis spoken of, we shall never find this condemned as murder, but still spoken against as Idolatry, a corruption of God's worship, and so recorded among such transgressions: besides according to Gods own rule and way of acquitting some men of murder, by providing Cities of refuge, Deut. 19 in some cases for men that had slain their brethren, upon that ground, because they hated them not in time past, twice expressed verse 4. 6. the givers of their children to Molech will be found to be adjudged to death for their Idolatry rather than the kill their children: for it cannot be supposed that the worshippers of Molech hated their children in time past, or at present, and out of that hatred offered them up in sacrifice, but out of their blind zeal and strong delusion, thinking therein they should do a high and extraordinary service; Rabbi Bechai saith, that the Parents were persuaded that by this sacrifice the rest of their children should be delivered from death, and that they themselves should prosper for it all the days of their life. For there's no question but these Idolaters loved their children and had affections to them as might be proved by several reasons, among others by the great noise made by beating upon Drums in the time of sacrificing to drown the cries of the children, left their cries working on their Father's natural affections should make the Fathers spare them; whereupon the place of sacrificing was called Tophet of Toph, which is a Taber or Drum. For the commands given to Magistrates against Witches, they are set down either without any reasons at all of them, or else in those places where any reasons are assigned they relate wholly to God as a breach of the first Table, nothing at all as to men, as these Scriptures show, Levit. 20. 6, 7. 26, 27. Deut. 18. 10, 11, 12, 13. and our English Divines in their late Annotations upon Exod. 22. 1●. write thus, Witchcraft in forbidden, and that upon pain of death. Some have thought Witches should not die unless they had taken away the life of mankind; but they are mistaken, (the proof of which the Reader may find set down there) But why then must the Witch be put to death? Answer, Because of the league and confederacy with the Devil, which is high treason against God, because he is God's chiefest enemy, and therefore though no 〈◊〉 ensue this contract at all, the Witch deserver present and certain death for the contract itself. Secondly, these commands to the Magistrate concerning Idolaters, Blasphemers, etc. were not for the punishing of Israelites, the Jewish people only, but of all strangers in their Land, both of Proselytes that dwelled among them, and of others that only traveled through, or were there a while upon trading or such like occasions, as these Scriptures show Levit. 20. verse 2. Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the stranger that sojourn in Israel, that giveth any of his seed to Molech, he shall surely be put to death, Levit. 24. verse 16. He that blasphemeth the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death, as well the stranger, as he that is borne in the Land. Upon which places of Scripture and others, as the fourth Commandment, etc. besides many reasons that might be given why stranger is to be taken in the largest sense, even for all strangers coming among them though not Proselytes, it is the judgement of many learned men as Rabbins who were best skilled in the Customs of the Jews, Maimonides with others, as modern writers Zanchius, Rivetus, our English Divines in their late Annotations on Levit, 20. verse 1. and above all Master Selden in that learned Book De Jure Naturali & Gentium lib. 2. cap. 3. clearly shows, 'tis understood of all Gentiles coming among them by accident, as those workmen of other Countries, Tyrians, Phaenitians, etc. sent by Kings to King Solomon for the building of the Temple, or those who passed from place to place for traffic sake, or any who passed through the Country. Master 
* Lib. 2. cap. 3. 154. 155, 156. De Jure Nature. & Gent. Lib. 1. cap. 10. Gentilis quilibet qui non in se receperat septem praecepta Noachidis imperata ultimo supplicio assiciendus erat si inditione nostra commoraretur.  Selden in that Book of his also shows, that when the Israelites were Sui Juris in their own Country, had power over the Nations, and were in a flourishing estate under David, Solomon and other such Kings, they denied all dwelling and habitation to the Idolatrous Heathen, or so much as to lodge them by way of Travellers or Guests, till they had given their names to the seven Precepts Juris Noachidarum seu Naturalis (as they are called) among which Idolatry and Blasphemy De Cultu extraneo, De maledictione Nominis sanctissimi seu Numinis, were the first. Nay further he proveth that every Gentile which had not received those seven Precepts was to be punished with death if he stayed in the Jews Territories, and particularly in divers places of that Book shows that Idolatry and Blasphemy were punished by death upon all that lived in the jewish Commonwealth, though they were not Proselyti Justiciae; and on those words Levit 24. And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death, writes thus, Id est sive fuerit Proselytus sen peregrinus, sive indigena aut civis, ex eo quod blasphemaverit nomen Domini morte plectendus est, yea 
* Mr. Selden De Jure Naturali & Gentium. l. 2. c. 3. 156 lib. 2. c. 12. 162. lib. 3. cap. 1. 274. 275. De jure Gentium lib. 2. cap. 12 263. Ceterùm quoniam hac in re gravioribus coerceri volebant panis Gentiles seu Proselytas Domicilii quam cives Ebraicos, ideo ex jure Gentium interv●niente seu Proselytis ejusmodi ipsisque superinducto, tam cogneminis alicujus Blasphemiam aut maledictionem quam nominis propri●, in Proselyto domicilii seu Noachide ultimo plectebant supplicia. Maimonides, Noachides qui maledixerit Nomini, five id fecerit Nomine Proprio seu tetragrammato, sive cognomine aliquo quocunque modo, reus est mortis, quod non ita obtinet in Israelita.  he saith that the Gentiles or Proselytes Domicilii, were punished more severely than the jews in this case of Blasphemy, not only for blaspheming the proper name of God, but the Cognomen. All which shows clearly these punishments were not inflicted upon the jews qua jews, and qua a typical people in a typical Land, etc. but upon them as the nature of such crimes calling for such punishments, and that 'tis the Magistrate's duty to restrain in jews or Gentiles in all under their jurisdiction, Idolatry, blasphemy, etc.  
Thirdly, the reasons and grounds of these Laws and commands with the use and end of them upon which they are enforced, are of common reason and equity that concern us under the New Testament as well as the jews. I do not find one Ceremonial or properly judicial reason given of any one, but all of them are laid down either absolutely and simply without any reasons at all, or else upon such reasons as are moral and perpetual; and I judge that in all commands which are not typical and ceremonial, and so some other thing appointed to come in upon the abolishment to make good their perpetual end and use assigned, that rule of Divines holds universally true, Ratio immutabilis facit praeceptum immutabile, which by the way may serve to answer the Evasions of Minus Gelsus Senensis, and of Hagiomastix bringing instances in Circumcision and such like, which the Scriptures declare expressly to be abolished, having substituted Baptism and other ordinances in their room, but have not said one word in the like kind of the commands in question; besides that Christ the substance of those shadows is come, and so they are of no further use at all. And indeed Acontius though a great Libertine doth confess that Law in the 13th of Deuterenomy of the stoning of the false Prophet and Seducer is not confined only to the time before Christ having no place at all under the Gospel, and to the ground and conjecture (as Acontius calls it) of that opinion, he saith that the reason set down in the same is against it, viz. All Israel shall bear and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you, 
* Acontius De stratagem. Satanae pag. 150. 151. Est enim in lege ut omnis Israel audience timeat &c: Quae certe ratio perpetuo viget, ut quanquam lex ipsa exspiraverit, tam sit tamen jus magistratui similem aliam condendi quam 〈◊〉 jus est in homicidas, adulteros aliosquae facinorosos homines leges condere.  which reason certainly abides always, so that although this Law had exspired, yet notwithstanding by virtue of it the Magistrate hath a right and power of making another like it, as he hath of making Laws against Murderers, Adulterers and other flagitious persons.  
Fourthly, Before these Laws in Deut. 13. and Deut, 17. for punishing Idolaters were given by Moses, yea before Moses time, or any Commonwealth among the jews was erected, in other Country's remote from the Land of Canaan, Idolatry in worshipping creatures deserved punishing by the Magistrate as I have showed already fully in page 13, 14. of this Book; yea the particular kind of Idolatry instanced in Deut. 17. 3. of worshipping the Sun, or Moon, which among the Israelites was to be punished by death, if it had been found in Job in the Land of Us he had been worthy of punishment from the judges for it Job 31. 26, 27. 28. And other Princes not jews, as Artaxerxes, Nebuchadonezar, etc. made Laws and Edicts for punishing those that blasphemed the God of heaven, and transgressed his Laws as the Scriptures testify. Now the Laws properly judicial that were the jews civil Laws simply belonging to them as such a people in such a Country, were in use only among themselves, and not practised by other Nations and Countries; but such Laws and Customs used among them that were observed universally among all Nations, or by divers Nations (though not of all) strictly speaking were not judicial Laws, but the Laws of Nature and Nations though according to the Discipline of the jews, that is, what was received in the Church and Commonwealth of the jews, and accordingly accounted by them as the Law of the world of all men and ages, or the Law of many Nations common to them with those Nations, of all which the Reader may be further satisfied in that learned Piece of Mr. SELDEN'S, De jure Naturali, & Gentium juxta disciplinam Ebraeorum; and particularly in the Preface of that Book, (where he showeth the reason of that Title, and gives the sum of his work and undertaking) and in his first Book. And among the jaws of Natural right, as distinguished from the civil laws of the Jews, or simply Israeliticall, those commands of punishing for strange worship, and Blasphemy, are reckoned by the Jews themselves, as the Reader may find in the 
* Nam ubicunque ultimo supplicio punitur in foro Israelitico ●ultus extraneus, ibi Noachides ob similem cultum plectendus erat. Et ubicunque in foro Israelitico morte non punitur ejusmodi cultus, neque ob similem gladio plectitur Noachides. pag. 132. Praeter Idololatriam at maledictionem Numinis, nihil omnino ex jure naturali seu hominum omnium communi pro crimine seu delicto circa sacra, quatenus scilicet Noachidas solùm ea respitiebant, in foro, quoties sistebatur Proselytus Domicilii, seu Gentilis ejusmodi ipsis est habitum▪ Pag 275.  first book de Jure Naturali & Gentium, cap. 10. 2 book, cap. 1. 12. 3 book, cap. 1.  
Fifthly, The Spirit of God under the New Testament, Hebr. 10. 28, 29. speaking according to the common equity and justice of the matter, and not according to a Political law peculiar to one Nation, saith of the despisers of Moses law that died without mercy under two or three witnesses, that they were worthy of it; as appears by the comparative, Of how much sorer punishment suppose ye, shall he be thought warthy? Every comparative implying a positive: The sorer punishment that he is worthy of, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, supposes the other worthy of the sore punishment inflicted upon them by Moses law for despising it. Now by Moses law in this place, the breach whereof deserved capital punishment, must needs be meant sins against the first Table rather then against the second; and that because the scope of the Apostle is to warn the Hebrews against Apostasy and falling off from the Christian religion, for which end he brings these words among others; and therefore would speak ad idem. Beza upon 〈◊〉 place, saith, that the Apostle speaks not of the transgression of any one command, but of the apostasy and total defection from the true Religion, of which Moses in Deut. 17. 2. had spoken. So Calvin upon this text. The law under Moses did not punish with death all sins or transgressions committed, but Apostasy. The Apostle had an eye to that of Deut. 17. 2. of stoning him that served strange gods. And Pareus upon Heb. 10. 28, 29. shows, that temporal death from the Magistrate, 
☞  (for of that he speaks, not of God's judgements) was justly inflicted by Moses law upon capital transgressions, as Blasphemy, Apostasy; and thereupon infers from the less, that much greater punishment must abide Apostates who despise the Gospel. Infert à minori, tanto gravius supplicium manere defectores illos. Si legis contemptoribus supplicium mortis, quo nihil est in hoc mundo acerhius, justè irrogabitur, utique supplicium quovis morte atrocius Apostatae Evangelii contemptores incurrent? And 2 Heb. 2. in those words For if the word spoken by Angels was firm, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward the Apostle shows that the law of Moses given by Angels, Gal. 3. 19 Act. 7. 30. had the breach and transgression of it justly punished mediately by the 
* Vide Pareu●● in locum.  Magistrates, to whom the execution of the laws was committed by God, which just punishment is there chiefly understood of transgressions against the first Table.  
Sixthly, Granting that 13. of Deut. with the other Texts of Scripture named, to be judicial political laws of the Jews, yet they may bind the Christian Magistrate under the Gospel. Indeed the Ceremonial law being given for certain uses, and for a certain time, till the coming of Christ, upon the arising of this Sun, all these shadows vanished away, as being but of one time. But now the Judicial laws, however delivered to one Nation, yet were not of one time, never tied to one time only: so that had the commonwealth of the Jews continued until this day, excepting a few things belonging to the vindication of the ceremonies (which would have ceased with the ceremonies) they would have used their Political laws still, in regard the Gospel neither changed nor took away any of them, as Beza observes in his Tractate de Haereticis à Magistratu puniendis, p. 154. And for the better understanding and proving that the Judicial laws under the Old Testament are still in force, I shall lay down two or three distinctions. 1. The judicial law may be considered, so far as concerns the distinction of the jews from the Gentiles, and the typical signification of the kingdom of Christ; or only so much as belongs to the form of Civil government. Now the judicial law, according to the first acception, is absolutely and simply abrogated; but, secundum quid, in part and some kind only, in the latter: that is, Whatever was in the judicial law of particular proper right peculiarly concerning the Jews, as of inheritances not to be transferred from one Tribe to another; of the Tribe of Levi having no inheritance among the other Tribes, Numb. 18. 20, 24. of the emancipation of an Hebrew servant or handmaid in the seventh year; a man's marrying his brother's wife, and raising up seed to his brother; the forgiving of debts at the Jubilee; marrying with one of the same tribe, with other such like, all of this kind is ceased: But what was of common right, common to other Nations with them, according to the common law of nature; of which sort are laws concerning the punishment of Moral transgressions, and other such; that all remains, and is in force. Of which distinction the Reader may find more in Piscator's Appendix to his Observations upon the 21, 22, 23, chap. of Exodus; 
* Bulling. lib. 4. adu. Anabapt. cap. 4. Aliae praeterea pars legis est politica quae versatur in judiciis, haeredetatibus, contractibus poenis & suppliciis & in administratione Rei publicae Quoniam vero non habitamus Cha●anaeam regionem, ad quam multae leges accomodatae sunt abrogata quoque est lex quoad hanc partem: interim pax & judicia & alia bonae non to●luntur.  Bullinger; and in Altingius his common places, par. 1. loc. 7. de lege Dei, p. 112. Lex judicialis simpliciter abrogata est quoad distinctionem Judaeorum à Gentibus, & typicam regni Christi significationem; secundum quid verò, quantum attinet formae gubernationis civilis. Nam quod juris in ea fuit particularis, Judaeos peculiariter concernans, qualis fuit lex de officio Levitarum, item alia de haereditatibus de tribu in tribum non transferendis, id omne cessavit. Quod autem juris suit communis, secundum legem naturae omnibus communem sancitum, cujusmodi sunt leges de paenis scelerum, aliaeque id totum manet. 2. The judicial laws may be considered according to their substance and equity, or according to many accessories, circumstances, forms, & manner of them. Now though the Magistrate under the Gospel is not bound unto these laws simply, that is, to every circumstance and particular of them for form, manner, time and place; as for example, not to the same kinds and formality of punishments set down in those laws; for those forms are accessions of the law; and therefore out of the nature of persons, times, places, and constitution of commonwealths, mutable: Yet he is bound to the substance & equity of them, so as not to derogate from the right of those laws. Of this distinction the Reader may find much said by Cartwright, in his 2. Reply to Dr. Whitgift, p. 98, 99 Beza de Haereticis â Magistratu puniendis, p. 154, 155. Tremellius and Junius, in their Preface before the five Books of Moses. Thirdly, these Laws may be looked upon as containing doctrine from God of punishment, i. e. that those who seduce, blaspheme God, etc. be restrained, yea and by death in several cases, or else as in their latter according to the great rigour and severity expressed in them, as in Deut. 13. etc. by smiting the inhabitants of the City with the sword, destroying it utterly and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof with the edge of the sword, and by gathering all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and burning with fire the City, and all the spoil of it every whit; in not sparing them though they should have truly repent, in enjoining the son, the wife of a man's bosom, to bring forth the father, husband, and to stone them with stones. Now though to the degrees and measures of punishment, the severity and utmost rigour the Magistrate is not now tied, yet to the thing in cases of Idolatry, seduction, false prophesying, speaking lies in the name of the Lord he is bound, and in some cases of gross and high Idolatry and Blasphemy committed presumptuously, to inflict capital punishment: of this distinction also let the Reader consult these 
* Synops. Puri. Theolog. cap. 50 Ames. Cas. Conscient. l. 4. c. 4. lib. 51 cap. 26. quaest. tertia.  Authors. And of this question that the judicial Laws of Moses in the sense now given, do yet last and are in force, besides the Resolution of many great Divines in the case, Beza, Calvin, Cartwright, Tremellius and Junius, Bullinger, Zinchius, Peter Martyr, Henricus Altingius, and more especially 
* Appendix ad, Exodum,  Piscator, who by eight Arguments proves the Question in controversy, besides answering two and twenty Arguments brought against it; I shall desire the Reader to observe these few Reasons. 1. The judicial Law differs from the Decalogue, the Law of the ten Commandments, in this, that whereas the 
* Beza de Haereticis à Magistratu puniendis pasia 54.  Decalogue comprehends in a few words all righteousness and equity, in all kind of duties to God and man, the judicial explains only that part of righteousness and equity which stands in those things of which judgements are appointed; and therefore seeing the judicials prescribe the equity of judgements which is a part of the Decalogue we must be bound to that as we are to the rest of the Decalogue, viz. so far as they contain a general equity though we are not tied to the forms of the Mosaical polity; Now Christ saith, Matth. 5. 17. he came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it; which words are comprehensive of the Judicial Law as for the substance a part of the Moral Law, (the judicial being indeed an Appendix and a more particular explication of that part of the Moral Law concerning matters of justice and judgement) and therefore must be understood by Christ to be established. 2. Though there be many pregnant proofs in the New Testament for abolishing the Ceremonial Law, yet we nowhere read in the New Testament of making void the judicial Law concerning the punishing of sins against the Moral Law, in the number of which are Idolatry, Heresy, Blasphemy. Now these 
* See Cartwr-second Reply to Dr. Whitgift pag. 98. 99  judicial Laws being the Laws of God and by his revealed will once settled, they must needs so far forth remain as they appear not by his will to be repealed. They who hold the Magistrate under the Gospel is not bound to punish for such sins, must prove from the Scripture those Laws of God revoked and cancelled, which none of the Patrons of Toleration have ever yet done. 3. The substance and equity of the judicial Law remains in that Christ and his Apostles make use of, transfer and prove by some judicial laws divers things under the New Testament. Christ makes use of a judicial Law concerning punishment, Matth. 5. 38, 39 An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth, viz. that of poena talionis, Exod. 21. 24. and frees it from the false gloss and interpretation of the Pharisees, in which he teaches the judicial Laws of Moses understood in their right sense are to be observed in the New Testament: For if Christ in that Sermon, of which this is a part would teach the Decalogue belonged to Christians, by his vindicating it from the false interpretations of the Scribes and Pharisees; than it follows he meant to teach the judicial Laws of Moses concerning the punishment of Moral transgressions belonged to them also, because he vindicated also one of them, of which particular with the proof of the consequence the Reader may find more in Piscator's Appendix to Exodus. The Apostle Paul 1 Cor. 9 9 1 Tim. 5. 18. among other proofs brought by him from fimilitudes fetched from the common use of men, that the Minister of the Gospel ought to be maintained of the Church's charge, whereas they might object those were but humane reasons, he allegeth as the eternal Law of God one of the judicial Laws of Moses, which was, that a man should not muzzle the mouth of the Ox which treadeth out the corn: where 'tis manifest he doubteth not to bind the conscience of the Churches unto the equity of that Law which was judicial, likewise from the 13. verse, of those that minister about holy things, and wait at the Altar, living of the things of the Temple, and being partakers of the Altar he concludes that they which preach the Gospel should live of it: Now this maintenance of the Priests albeit in the manner of provision it be held by many ceremonial, yet as it was a reward of their service due by men (as the punishments also if they failed in their duties) was merely judicial. So the equity of that judicial Law, Exod. 22. 2. 
* Ames. ●Cas. lib 5 cap. 52. quaest. 6.  Of the smiting of a thief in the night that he die,) is approved by Christ, Matth. 24. 43. So Christ and Paul both transfer that judicial Law of having two or three witnesses in judgement, Deut. 19 verse 15. to bind Christians in their Ecclesiastical censures and judgements, Matthew 18. verse 16. 2 Cor. 13. verse 1. 1 Tim. 5. verse 19 By which instances and some other particulars that might be given 'tis evident that in those judicials to all the circumstances whereof we are not bound, we are notwithstanding bound to the equity, of which the Reader may read more in Cartwrights second Reply to Doctor whitgift's second Answer, pag. 98, 99, 100 4. That God appointed under the Law, Blasphemy, Apostasy, Idolatry, Prophesying lies in thename of the Lord to be punished by the Magistrate, proceeded from God's holiness, justice, infinite hatred of such sins, and from their nature, being so contrary to his nature, so derogatory to his honour and glory, high treason against the Supreme Majesty, so destructive to the precious souls of men, so dangerous to Commonwealths and Kingdoms, as the Scriptures in divers places where these Laws of punishing are set down, assigns these causes and reasons: Now I would know of the Patrons of Toleration whether under the Gospel these fins of Blasphemy, Apostasy, etc. be not as much against God's holiness, justice, glory, as pernicious and damnable as they were under the Law? yea and in some respects more, as being against the Declarations of the Son of God Hebr. 2. 2, 3. and a treading under foot the Son of God, and counting the blood of the Covenant an unboly thing, which being granted, punishment by the Magistrate must needs continue. The rule of just and unjust in God and in his Law is always the same and immutable: It is as equally just to punish evil things as to forbid evil things, and therefore the right and Law of punishments is also immutable: Where and of what things the causes are perpetual, 
☜  there also the right is eternal and immutable, but the grounds and causes why such offences were punished, as God's justice, holiness, glory, etc. are perpetual and eternal: God is always like to himself, the moral transgressions of men do alike at all times displease him, no good reason can be given why the Majesty of God should be of less account with us then heretofore among the jews, and therefore by the like reason to be punished now as well as then: But the further proof of this the Reader may find in some learned Divines, Beza de Haereticis à Magistratu punie●●● 155. and in Tremellius and Juni●● Preface before the Books of Moses. 5. The judicial Law concerning the punishments of wickedness, for the substance, viz. that it should be punished remains under the Gospel, because it comes within the nature of the Moral Law, and was prescribed to the jews, not quae Iewes or a people peculiarly taken into Covenant, but qua men subject to the Law of nature as other Nations were: For the proof of which besides the judgement of divers learned Divines, Philip Melancto●, Peter Martyr, Zanchius, A●tingius, the reason of common right, from the proper peculiar right of the jews is known and distinguished by these following particulars. 1. 
* Henr. Alting. loc. common. per 1. loc. 7. de leges Dei. Cognos●itur autem Juris communis ratio, si idem ab aliis: quoque legiflatoribus ex luce naturae c●nr●su m, ac sanatum fuisse; vel ad tuendā Preceptorum Decalogi obedientiam facere corriperiatur.  If the same things have been also found to be concluded, and by civil sanction established by other Lawgivers from the light of nature. 2. If found to make for the defence and preservation of the obedience of the Decalogue. 3. If appear as useful and necessary now for the glory of God, the salvation of men's souls, the peace & safety of the Church and State as then. Now all these do most clearly appear in punishments of sins immediately against God, as Apostasy, Idolatry, Blasphemy, etc. For first, these commands are of the light of nature, tha● he who is in place and power should forbid and punish the speaking evil of God. This sentence (as 
a Phil. Mela. De Magistr. Civil. & Dign. Rerum Politic. Haec sententia omnibus hominibus, imo omnibus creaturis intelligentibus concionatur. Suo quisqu● loco prohibere manifestas Dei comumelias debet. Quare & Magistratus prohibere & puni●e debent Epicureos sermons, Idolorum honores, faedera Daemonum, professionem impior●● dogmatum. Vt omnes politiae sanxerunt paenas adversus perjuros, mult●● etiam apud Ethnicos sanxerunt paenas adversus perj●ros multae etiam apud Ethnicos sanxerunt paenas adversus Epicuraeos seu Atheos qui palam dixerunt nihil esse Deum, aut nullam esse providentiam Dei.  Melancton writes) is preached to all men, yea to all reasonable creatures, every one in his place ought to forbid and hinder the manifest reproaches and dishonours of God. And therefore Magistrates ought to forbid and punish Epicurean speeches, worships of Idols, profession of wicked doctrines. Many Commonwealths among the Heathens have made Laws against Epicures and Atheists, who have openly held there was no God, or that there was no providence of God. 
b Peter Martyr loc. common. Class. 4. cap. 13.  Peter Martyr in his Common Place●, that Heathen Princes used to care for Religion, and have punished men even to death for the matters of Religion. Thus Socrates was condemned at Athens for no other cause but for teaching of new gods, I and for with drawing the youth from their old worship of the gods. 
c Zanchius in quarr. precept. loc. 5. De officio principium in Religione, pag. 790. Hoc liquet primum à lege naturae: omnes enim principe inter Gentes judicarunt ad se pertinere curam Religionis.  Zanchius on the fourth Commandment writes, that by the Law of nature all Princes among the Heathen judged that the care of Religion belonged to them. The Athenians judged so, the Romans also, and thereupon made Laws and punished for violation of religion. 
d Beza de Hereticis à Magistrate. puniendis.  Beza gives three instances of punishments inflicted by heathen Magistrates upon three chief Philosophers for matters of Religion, Socrates, Theodorus, Protagoras, the last of which was by the Athenians banished out of their Territories, and his books burnt for writing contemptuously of the gods in these words, De diis neque ut sint, neque ut non sint habeo dicere 
e Musculus De Magistrate. 627. Agnoverunt hoc Ethnicorum quoque sapientes qui primum locum in Republicae Institutione Religioni dederunt. Fuerunt quidem illi homines Ethnici, viam Dei ignorantes, & ab Ecclesia illius alieni: in eo tamen haud quaquam errarunt, quod sine pietatis ac Religionis observantia, nullam cujuscunque Reipublicae politiam feliciter institui regique posse senserunt: cum ergo sententiae hujus veritas tam sit manifesta ut ne Ethnicos quidem latere potuerit: an non magis agnoscenda nobis & amplectenda qui cognitione Dei non gentes modo sed & populum legis longe ant●cellimus.  Musculus in his Common Places speaking of Magistrates having the care of Religion, saith, the wise men among the Heathen acknowledged it, and that the truth of this opinion was so manifest as that it could not lie hid from the Heathen, it was jus gentium, dictated by the light of nature, and therefore aught to be much more acknowledged and embraced by us, who in the knowledge of God go far beyond, not only the Gentiles, but the jews. 
f Mr. Selden De Jure Naturali & Gentium, lib. 1. cap. 8. cap. 10. lib. 2. cap. 1. cap. 2. cap. 3. cap. 12. cap. 13. l. 3. c. 1. Praeter Idololatriam ac maledictionem numinis, Nihil omnino ex Jure Naturali, seu hominum omnium communi p●o Criminc seu Dilecto circa sacra, qua●enus scilicet Noachidas solùm ea respiciebant, in foro, quoties sistebatur Proselytus domicilii, seu Gentilis ejusmodi ipsis est habitum. Caeterum ex alia lege sacra obtinuit apud aliquos opinio (quae hic non praetermittenda) Gentilium nemini licuisse, Numini patrio, seu quod ipse velut patrium coluerit, maledixisse. Hac locutioris formula, Levit. 24. 15. volunt nonnulli non solum cunctis mortalium Numinis sanctissimi, ac Vnici maledictionem interdici; verum etiam Gentilibus apud Ebraeos, maledictionem Deorum quos sibi adsciverant.  Master Selden in divers places of that learned Book De Jure Naturali & Gentium proves that those commands De Cultu Extraneo and De Maledictione Nominis sanctissimi seu Numinis, were Jus Naturalis, common to all men, were indeed the chief and first Heads of the Law of Nature, and that in those precepts, viz. for the negative part, all the Gentiles who lived or but passed through the Land of Judea were punished by the Magistrate for Idolatry and blasphemy as well as the jews, and that from Laws common to the jews with the Gentiles, though the kinds of the punishments, viz. this or that, as whether stoning, etc. were not of the same nature, but more proper to the jews; yea, he shows it was an opinion held by some learned men, that it was not lawful for any Gentile to speak evil of and blaspheme his God which he worshipped as the God of his Country; and saith it was founded upon those words. Levit. 24. 15. Whosoever curseth his god shall hear his sin, (the blaspheming the name of the Lord being spoken of after in the 16. verse, as if it were distinct from that in the 15. verse) In which form of speech divers learned men both Rabbins, Fathers and others would have forbidden to all the sons of men not only speaking evil evil of the most holy and only God, but also the speaking of those gods which they had chosen to themselves: So as none of the Gentiles might blaspheme their false God, which yet they had not renounced, without the violation of that Law, Whosoever curseth his god shall bear his sin.  
Master Burroughs in his Irenicum, though he be for a Toleration in a great measure, as in things controversal and doubtful amongst godly and peaceable men, and that with a liberty of declaration of difference of judgement, and some different practice, page 55. yea brings such Arguments for that Toleration, that if they prove any thing, they prove a general Toleration, yet confesses page 23. of that Book, 'tis the dictate of nature, that Magistrates should have some power in matters of Religion. The generality of all people have ever thought it equal. It hath ever been challenged of all Nations and Commonwealths. The Heathens would never suffer their gods to be blasphemed, but punished such as were guilty thereof by the power of the Magistrate. Socrates was put to death for blaspheming their multiplicity of gods. And Master Burroughs in page 19 of the same book affirms, that Principle, That Magistrates have nothing to do with matters of Religion is abhorring to nature. Is it not an abhorring thing to any man's heart in the world, 
☞  that men suffer that God to be blasphemed whom they honour? and that nothing should be done for the restraining any, but to ask them why they do so, and persuade them to do otherwise? There hath ever been as great a contestation amongst people about Religion, as about any thing. Exod. 8. 25, 26. Pharaoh hade Moses sacrifice in the Land: But Moses said it is not meet so to do, for we shall sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians: Lo, shall we sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians before their eyes, and will they not stone us? Though they had leave of the King, yet the people would not endure it. By which place of Scripture 'tis evident that the Egyptians who were heathens, by the light of nature would not endure the dishonour of their gods to see those creatures they worshipped for 
e Vide Ainsworrh. late Annotat. of our English. Divines. Piscat. in Exod. 8. 26. Quod abominationi est Egyptiis. Hoc est animalia à quorum caede abhorrent Egyptis, quip quae ipsi adorant: ut bones antony's vitulos▪  gods to be killed, as Oxen and Sheep the principal sacrifices of the Hebrews, but they would kill the Israelites for so doing. And lastly, Master Prynne in that late Book of his, The sword of Christian Magistrates supported, doth largely and excellently show that by the light of nature in all ages Heathen Magistrates have made Laws against, and punished such whom they esteemed Atheists, Heretics, Blasphemers of their Gods, or oppugners of their established Religion, and that with no less than Capital punishments, unto which Book from page 14. to 19 I refer the Reader, where he shall find many examples of Heathen Kings and Nations recited, and shall conclude this with that saying of Seneca, De Benefic. lib. 3. cap. 6. Violatarum Religionum aliubi atque aliubi diversa p●na est; Sed ubique Aliqua; as well as of homicide, parricide, poisoning Secondly, the Magistrate's sword in matters of Religion in punishing Blasphemies, Idolatries, Heresies, hath been found by good experience in all ages to make greatly for the defence and preservation of the first Table, to stir men up to obedience and deter them from the contempt and violation thereof, whereas on the contrary, for the want of this, all Blasphemies, Heresies and Errors have abounded, of which I could give many instances, but shall refer them to the more proper place of handling, viz. to the Reasons for Magistrates punishing men for Idolatries, Blasphemies, Heresies, Schisms; only for the present shall hint, that God himself saith twice, once in Deut. 13. 11. the other Deut. 17. 13. the Magistrates punishing in such a case shall cause all the people to hear, fear, and to do no more presumptuously: the Lord gives this blessing unto the punishment of such offenders, that others not only which see, but hear of them, have the bridle of fear put upon them whereby kept from the like. Thirdly and lastly, this coercive power of the Magistrate will be found every whit as useful and necessary now for the glory of God, salvation of men's souls, peace of Church and State as it was then, yea and in some respects more necessary, there being in our days not only the same reasons and causes for that power of the Magistrate, but others also: Were there under the Law many incorrigible presumptuous offenders against God and his worship, that could not be otherwise reclaimed, and are there not such now? were there then many gross ways of false worship and Religion destroying foundations, broached among the people? were they then infectious drawing away and seducing many souls? were they then provoking the wrath of God causing it to wax hot against his people? Ought the glory and Name of God to be then dear to Magistrates? Why, behold under the Gospel there are as incorrigible desperate persons broaching all kind of damnable Heresies, making it their work to lay waste all Religion, whom no Admonitions, Church Censures can do any good upon: Heresies and Errors now are as infectious, spreading, subverting whole houses, eating as a Gangrene, and so in the rest. Master Burroughs in his Irenicum page 23. confesses there is a necessity of the Magistrates power in matters of Religion 〈◊〉 truth now, as there was then, and shows though we cannot argue the being of spiritual Ordinances from our need of them, but from their institution, yet in natural and civil things this way of arguing is strong enough; there is need of such a help, and therefore we should seek to have it. And the necessity of the Magistrates coercive power under the Gospel he sets down as follows. Now sure the need we have of such a power is exceeding great, we were in a most miserable condition if we had no external civil power to restrain from any kind of Blasphemies and Seducements. The condition of the Jews, O how happy was it in comparison of ours, if this were denied us! for if any of theirs did blaspheme God, or seek to seduce any from him, they knew what to do with him besides persuading of him to the contrary; but if any should seek to seduce the wives of our bosoms, children of our bodies, friends as dear to us as our own lives into those ways that we think in our consciences will und●e their souls to all eternity, yet we must only desire them they would not do so, we must only admonish or seek to convince them or remove them, but restrain them we cannet: If the deliverance of us from the Pedagogy of the Law hath brought us into this condition, 
☞  our burden is greater in this thing then any that the Law laid upon our forefathers; Hath Christ delivered us from one burden to lay a greater upon us? Must we now see those who are dearest to us drawn into the way of eternal destruction, and stand and looks on, but no way left to help them or ourselves, unless we can persuade to the contrary? Surely our condition is very sad: Have we not cause to say, Lord let any burden of the Ceremonial Law be laid upon our necks, rather than this; If there were a company of mad men running up and down the streets with knives and swords in their hands, endeavouring to mischief and kill all they meet with, and we must do nothing to restrain them; if we could persuade them to do otherwise well and good: but that is all we can do for help; what a dangerous thing were this? The case is the same, when those who are mad with damnable Heresies, run from place, to place, seeking to draw all they can from the truth: If we have no means of help but 〈◊〉, it is ill with us; Surely God hath not put his people ●●to such a sad condition or this is, be hath provided better for his people then thus. And I appeal to the consciences and experience of men, whether this power of the Magistrate of punishing Blasphemies and Heresies be not found to be useful and necessary both for the honour of God, the safety of other men's souls, the peace of Church and State? and whether all other men's without this (when this might have been had) have made good these ends? or whether this coming upon other means, as Admonitions, Instructions, Synods, Church Censures, hath not suppressed Heresies, 
☜  Schisms, vindicated the honour and truth of God, recovered many souls, settled the peace of Churches and States, as among the Donatists of old, and the Arminians in Holland of late. Any man's reason, yea sense may tell him, that in this sinful corrupted condition of man there is in coercive power a naturalness and suitableness to work upon the outward man for the furtherance of spiritual good, and that when no other means can, this power removes outward things that hindered, keeps from outward evils, applies outward means. And yet further, besides the same reasons and grounds now of the necessity of the Magistrates coercive power, as well as under the Old Testament, there seems to be new reasons under the Gospel over and above that plead for the necessity of this power. As that under the Gospel so many outward visible judgements are not inflicted by God upon offenders as were under the Law, whereupon Master 
* Cartwrights second Reply to Dr. whitgift's second Answ. pag 98, 99  Cartwright speaks, Certainly if ever there had been any time wherein the Magistrates sword might have rested in the sheath, the time of the Law had of all been fittest when the Lord did so visibly sit in his judgement seat, and himself in proper person held the Assize and Jail delivery. For as the Lord doth not now by outward blessings give so plentiful testimony to the obedience of the Gospel as the Law, so doth he not with so many and so severe punishments revenge the breach of it as in the time of the Law, for in these outward punishments the dispensation of God under the Law is divers from that under the Gospel, in that be did more terribly revenge disobedience, and therefore God not striking now so often immediately Blasphemers, Seducers, false Prophets, Schismatics as under the Law, the Magistrates have the more need not to bear the sword in vain, lest Heretics and false Teachers go on the more desperately, corrupting and destroying all, but of these Reasons I intent to speak more in the next Thesis.  
Seventhly, supposing all these commands simply Judicial, given to the Jews only (which yet I have proved not to be so) there are other commands and examples recorded in the Old Testament distinct from the Judicial, which cannor be counted Judicial, but are Moral and perpetual, as the fourth Commandment (one of the ten Commandments) given to the Magistrate, that by his authority true Religion be preserved, take place, and all false Religion suppressed (the proof of which is laid down in the 15. Thesis') as that command Psal. 2. 10, 11. given to Kings and Judges, which cannot be Judicial nor Ceremonial for several reasons, neither have the Patrons of Toleration ever said so of it (of which place I shall speak fully in the 19 Thesis') as those examples of Abraham and Jacob, not suffering those under their power & command to commit Idolatry, which were long before those commands in the 13. & 17. chap. of Dut. said to be judicial, and that these examples were not judicial, besides what the Reader shall find in the ninth and 12. Theses, Musculus in his Common Places De Abrogatione Mosaicae Legis, even in that Common Place where his Authority is most urged by the 
a Minus Cessus Senensis Sect. tert. p. 183.  Patrons of Toleration for the abrogation of all Mosaical Laws, 
b Abraham utique non fuit sub Paedagogi● Mosis. Muscul. loc. Commun. De Abrogat. Mosaic. leg. p. 142.  affirms that as a Christian is not under the Mastership of Moses; so likewise Abraham was not under the pedagogy of Moses. And so much for the first particular, that the commands for punishing Idolaters, Blasphemers, false Prophets, etc. were of common reason and equity given for the times of the Gospel.  
Secondly, as to the grounds brought by the Patrons of Toleration, Minus Celsus Senensis, Hagiomastix, etc. that these commands doe● not bind now because they were 
c See Hagiomastix from Sect 34. to Sect 41. and Minus Celsus Senensis from p. 183. to 192. and compare them together.  Moses Laws, jewish and abrogated by Christ, that we may by these commands as well prove the man Moses is now alive, because he was alive under the Old Testament, that if the commands be in force for inflicting of death, they be in force in all other particulars commanded by the same Authority with this, as that the offenders must be put to death with stones only, as that the whole City must be put to death, as the cattle must be slain as well as the inhabitants, as that the City must be a heap for ever and never built again, that there's clear particular reasons why the Old Testament Law for putting false Prophets, Blasphemer● and Seducers to Idolatry to death should not now be in force because the jews to whom this Law was given in all difficult cases about matters of Religion had the opportunity of immediate consultation with God himself, who could & did from time to time infallibly declare what his own mind and pleasure was in them, because that corporal punishment was a Type and pray significative of spiritual punishments, cutting off then, of casting out now, as also of eternal damnation: to these with divers such like I give these following answers, which I desire the Reader to observe. First, besides the Reasons already given that Mos● Laws (in the sense expressed) for the punishment of Apostates, Blasphemers, etc. are not abrogated by Christ, le's con●ider that Christ by his coming hath not abolished that Law which contains the love of God, his glory and honour, and the love of our neighbour, and therefore neither those things which do necessarily belong unto and make for the love of God and our neighbour; nor secondly those Laws in the Old Testament, which the New Testament for the times of it approves of; not last, those commands which are of the light of nature and the Law of nature dictates, all which because they are so clear and generally confessed, I shall forbear adding the proofs, and refer the Reader for further satisfaction to Zanchius De Magistra●● Quest. secunda. An Magistratui Christian● liceat capitales 〈◊〉 de haereticis sumere, page 170. Bullingers' Histor. advers. Anabaptist. liv. 5. cap. 5. pag. 176. Musculus Common Places de Magistratibus, pag. 627. Mr. Burrough Irenicum page 23. But now the Magistrates restraining and punishing false Prophets, Apostate●, Blasphemers, etc. is an act of the love of God and his glory, of love to their brethren's souls, of safety and good to Commonwealths, is very useful and necessary for vindicating the glory of God, and good of the Church (the glory of God, and the salvation of our neighbour being by that means preserved) is ●●proved of also in the New Testament for the times of the Gospel, and is the dictate of nature. For the proof of this Assumption I shall make it evident in all the three parts of it. For the first that 'tis an act of the love of God and his glory and of love to our neighbour, besides the assertion of many great Divines, as 
* Zanchius' 〈◊〉 magistrate p. 170.  Zanchius, Calvin, Beza, Bullinger, A●es●u●, etc. 'tis apparent thus, Because in the commands given by God, Deu●. 13. Deut. 17. for the Magistrates punishing false Prophets, Idolaters, and those who would not hearken unto the Priest, the reasons of his so doing and the ends of those punishments imply as much, and have reference all along to the honour of God, the vindicating his name, and keeping others from doing the like, as these phrases show, That Prophet, or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he hath spoken to turn you away from the Lord your God to thrust thee out of the way which the Lord thy God commanded the● to walk in. And thou shalt stone him with stones that he di●: because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God, And all Israel shall hear and fear, and shall do n● more any such wickedness as this is among you. If there be found among you man or woman that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the Lord thy God, in transgressing his Covenant, and hath gone and served other gods, then shall thou bring that man or that woman (which have committed that wicked thing) unto thy gate●, and shalt stone them with stones till they die: So thou shalt put away the evil from among you. And the man that will d●e presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the Priest, etc. even that man shall die, and thou shalt put away evil from Israel. And all the people shall hear and fear and do no more presumptuously, which passages fully hold out the Magistrates punishing Blasphemers, Idolaters, etc. to be an act of love to God: and the people, yea of zeal to his glory and the salvation of the people: that sentence, so thou shalt put the evil away from among you, saith 
* In league Moses punitionun sons illa vox au● fer●s malum de media 〈◊〉 Pet. Martyr loc. common. p 647.  Peter Martyr, is in the Law of Moses the fountain of all punishments of wickednesses against the second Table, as of transgressions against the first; And therefore if the Magistrates punishing of Murder, Theft, Adultery, etc. for the taking away of the evil from amongst the people, be an act of love to God and man, a vindication of the glory of God, than the punishing of Blasphemy, Idolatry, and such like for the taking away of the evil is an act of love to God and our neighbour: The punishing of menbers of the Church under the Gospel by excommunication is held an act of zeal to the glory of God, and love to the Church: the Reasons why such a censure ought to be in the Church, are referred to, those heads by 
* Zanchius Dedisciplina. Synops. purior. Theolog De Discipl. Eccles.  Divines, yea by the Separatists and Independents themselves, as 
* Robin's Justifi. cat. of Separate. Catechism.  Mr. Robinson and others, and those very reasons and ends spoken of in Deut. of putting away the evil from among you, as the people shall hear and fear and do no more presumptuously, are in the new Testament by Paul given as the reasons of Excommunication, 1 Cor. 5. 2. 13. 1 Tim. 5. 20. 1 Tim. 1. 20. (Those very phrases there used by Paul being alluded unto, and taken from those in Deut●ronomie) and therefore if love to God and men stands in these sentences under the Gospel borrowed from the Law, of putting away the evil, of others fearing and doing no more so, then certainly love to God and men is contained in those reasons and ends under the Law, the original and fountain from whence the Gospel took them; nay, yet further, excommunication (which I have showed is founded on the reasons expressed in Deut. 13. 17.) is made by Christ an act of brotherly love Matth. 18. 15, 16, 17. compared with Levit. 19 17. Secondly, because those King's Magistrates and Persons recorded in Scripture above others for loving God and the people, for being most zealous of God's honour and glory used most this coercive power against Idolaters, Seducers, Blasphemers, etc. of all others, and more especially at such times when they were at best for grace and goodness and commended by the spirit of God for their zeal and forwardness, as Moses in the business of the golden Calf, as the children of Israel in the case of the two Tribes and a half building an Altar, as Asa, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, then spoken of especially for zeal, courage, perfect hearts, when they most exercised the power of the sword against Idolatry, Apostasy and all Will-worship: When Jehu and Jehoash were at best, had most zeal, they destroyed Baal and his worshippers; Manasses upon his conversion in his first love and zeal commanded Judah to serve the Lord God of Israel, and took away the strange gods and all the Altars, and cast them out of the City: Nebuchadnezar, Darius, upon their hearts affected by the sight of the great works of God make Laws for God's honour against Blasphemy, etc. Christ out of his zeal of his Fathers. House and love to his glory, used coercive power upon those who made his Father's House a house of Merchandise (though he never used it in matters of the second Table but declined it) John 2. 15, 16, 17. compared with Psal. 69. 9 of which I shall speak more in the 20. Thesis'. Paul out of love and zeal to the glory of God, and the salvation of the Galathians prays for corporal capital punishment upon false Teachers, Gal. 5. 12. which place that 'tis so ●o be understood, I shall prove it in the 20. Thesis'. And I desire the Patrons of Teleration to answer this question, whether in their consciences they think not those godly Magistrates under the Old Testament, 
☞  as Moses, Josiah, etc. punished Idolaters, etc. out of love to God and their Brethren, whether love and zeal set them not a-work? which if they did, certainly they were to continue under the Gospel: For I would willingly know 
* Baz● de Haeret. a Magistr. puniendis. Nullae idone● ratio afferri potest cur Dei majestas minoris apud nos ponderis esse debeat quam olim apud Judaeos fuerit; imo vero Christiani si veram religionem minore studio tueant●r quam olim Judaei, imo minus excusari possint quo clari●s sese Dominus per filiu●● suum quam per prophetas patefecit.  what good reason can be given that Magistrates under the Gospel should not have as much zeal and love to God and the public, as they had under the Law, and if under the Law it made them restrain Blasphemers, Idolaters, etc. if their zeal and love worked so, why not now also when the glory of God and the safety of the Church requires it, the Magistrate after other remedies used in vain, should draw the sword against Heretics, Apostates and Blasphemers. Ames. Casus Consc. lib. 4. cap. 4. do Haeresi.  
Thirdly, the Magistrates punishing with the sword Traitors, murderers, thiefs, adulterers, that so God may not be dishonoured by those sins, nor the Commonwealth and our neighbour's hurt, is an act of love to God and men as is evident by the Office, Rom. 13. verse 3, 4. compared with 8, 9, 10. verses and by other reasons that might be given if it were needful. Bullinger in his fifth Book, chapter 6. page 177. against the Anabaptists, shows that the punishing of offenders is according to Christian love, that the Magistrates punishing is not only profitable for one man, but for the whole Commonwealth, the punishment of one guilty person preserving many alive, and that just punishment is not against love, neither doth true love abrogate punishments. Zanchi● in his. Tractate De Magistrate Quaest. secunda, writes to this effect, that to punish offenders who are injurious to God and our neighbour, is a work of charity, which requires that we should defend the glory of God and the safety of our neighbour by all means that may be; As when thiefs, robbers, murderers, are by the Magistrate taken away, lest the City and our neighbour should be hurt, this certainly is a work of charity: So doubtless those obstinate Heretics who go on to blaspheme the name of God, who overthrow religion and piety, who corrupt the true and sound Doctrine, who disturb the peace of the Churches, who steak from their neighbours the members of the Church not their estates neither kill their bodies, but endeavour to destroy their souls, do most of all wrong God and their neighbour, therefore to punish them is the greatest work of love to God and their neighbour. 
☜  Now if the restraining of those who spoil men of their goods, temporal lives, outward dignities, that corrupt and embase coin be a work of love to God and man, then to hinder Blasphemies, Treasons immediately against the Supreme Majesty of God and his Kingdom, the ruining of immortal souls and the eternal lives of men, the adulterating the truth of God and the Faith once delivered to the Saints is an act of higher love to God's glory and our Brethren, in as much as such offences immediately against God transcend any Treason against earthly Kings, and the kill of souls is a greater evil than the kill of bodies, and the corrupting the truth more dangerous than counterfeiting or mixing base metals with Gold or Silver. Wolphius in Deut. 13. Si quis human at Tabulas depravatet magnum est: quid de Divinis. In a City if any one seek to draw away persons from the Prince and government, and to draw men to their side, they are punished, and should they escape unpunished for drawing men away from the King of Kings? As also because those reasons and ends appointed for punishments of the second Table, as to take away the evil, as that others shall bears and fear, etc. (which shows punishments are acts of love) are given for a ground of punishing Idolatry, false Prophesying, etc. yea set down more expressly in those commands then in the others, with other reasons too, as of turning th●t away from the Lord thy God, which implies also love to God and our Brethren. What follows hence then? Therefore those precepts which God hath given Magistrates of punishing Offenders, Heretics, subverters of Religion are not abrogated by the coming of Christ, because by that means the glory of God and the safety of our neighbour are preserved. Commands to Magistrates for punishing in matters of Religion, being no more against Christian charity then punishment of Traitors, seditious persons, thiefs, etc. and therefore as they are not abrogated by the coming of Christ, so neither are these. The old Anabaptists (as 
* Bulling. ad verses Anabapt. lib. 5. cap. 5. 175. 176. cap. 6. 177. 178. cap. 8. 184.  Bullinger shows at large in that excellent book of his) who were against Magistrates punishing in matters of Religion, and that all those commands in Deut. 13. etc. were merely Mosaical and abrogated, held as well those commands for punishing murderers, thiefs, etc. to be abrogated, and that among Christians no offences should be punished with prisons, mulcts, death, but only Excommunication, and among other reasons they gave this, because it was against brotherly love, which they urged equally against bodily punishments for transgressions against the second Table as they did for punishments against the first; and indeed 
* Osiand. Enchi●id De Magistratu Polit. quaest. 4.  Lucas Osiander with others who write against Anabaptists for denying that Christians may be punished with outward punishments for any offences, show they bring the same Arguments, as that in Matthew 13. of the Tares, etc. which the Patrons of Tolaration do now against the Magistrates coercive power in matters of Religion, but Bullinger shows very well at large, that those commands given in Exod. Deuter. Levit. of punishing capitally in some transgressions against the first and second Table, were according to the Law of love, and that by the same reason by which the punishing by the Magistrate in matters of Religion, is against Christian charity, the punishing of thiefs, seditious and flagitious persons will be so to. And Bullinger asks the question whether it had not been more agreeable to love, if in the beginning of the tumult of Mu●ster in Westphalia, a few seditious kn●ves had been put into prison, and according to their demerit punished, then that whilst no man is punished for his conscience, such a horrible slaughter of many should follow, and the Anabaptists should far and 〈◊〉 destroy all with fire and sword. Secondly, that the Magistrates punishing of Apostates and false Prophets is approved of for the times of the Gospel, I shall speak to it fully in the 19 and 20. These, and therefore will not anticipate myself, only say this, that in Zac. 13. v. 2, 3. a Prophecy of the times of the Gospel we find the same thing, almost the same words which are in Deut. 13. 6.  
Thirdly, 'tis the dictate of nature, 'tis of the law of nature and of all Nations to punish●men for violations in Religion as well as for matters of life and goods: I will not here enter into a large discussion of that question what's requisite, and how many ingredients go to make a thing of the Law of nature, and how Jus Naturale and Jus positivum differ. I shall refer the Reader in this question to many learned Tractates and Discourses of it by the 
* Alexander Alensis paar 3. quaest. 26. Thomas Aqinas 1, 2. quaest. 94 Estius in lib. S●ntent. lib. 3. Distinct. 36. Suarez. de legib. lib. 1. cap. 3. lib. 2 c. 6. Molina Tractat. 1. De Jure & Justitia, Alphonsus a Castro de lege paenali lib. 2. cap. 14. Azor. Institut. Moral. Muscul. loc. common. de lege naturae.  Schoolmen and Casuists, to Popish and Protestant Divines, particularly to Amisius Cases of Conscience, Book 5. first Chapter De Jure, Voetius Theses De vecat. Gentium part. secund. De Jure & Justitia Dei. Master SELDENS De Jure Naturali & Gentium first book throughout, especially the third and eight chapters. Master Burges Vindiciae Legis 6. 7. and 8. Lectures. Master Cawd. Master Palm. Sabbatum Redivivum cap. 1. pag. 11, 12, etc. I will build only upon that which all learned men who have written of the Law of nature grant, viz. that to hold there is a God, and that that God is to be adored and worshipped is of the Law of nature, yea it is principium juris naturalis. Musculus in his Common Places, de lege nature, p. 36. and the legib. pag. 139. shows 'tis of the Law of nature to have a sense of a Deity, and that this Deity is to be worshipped and feared: So that from the beginning among all men some Religion hath always been received. So Purchas Pilhrimage chap. 6. p. 26, 27. Among all the lessons which nature hath taught, this is deepliest indented Religion: The falsehoods and variety of Religions are evidences of this truth, seeing men will rather worship a Beast, stock or basest creature, then profess no Religion at all. It is manifest then that the Image of God was by the fall depraved, but not uttrerly extinct; among other sparks this also being raked up in the ruins of our decayed nature, some science of the Godhead, some conscience of Religion.  
Now all those Nations whom the Law of nature instructed to believe and worship a Deity, it instructed also not to suffer their God and the Religion they embraced to be openly blasphemed and spoken against; and I do not believe any instance can be given of any Nation or body of people among the Heathen form into a Commonwealth who punished not A theists and Blasphemers of their Gods. The best Writers and Historians among Heathens, and of Heathens, as Cicero, Seneca, Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch, Livy, Justin, Diogenes Laertius, Caelius Rhodiginus, Diodorus Siculus, Herodotus, Xenophon, assure us of Laws and punishments enacted by Princes and States in matters of Religion; And other Historians who write Histories of the World, of all ages and times, as Sir Walter Raleigh, Purchas, etc. give us many instances in this kind among all sorts of Religions and people. Whence 'tis that so many learned men, Zanchius, Musculus, Peter Martyr, Beza, with divers others finding laws and punishments of this nature so common and general among Commonwealths and Kingdoms, and that in so many examples recorded in the old and new Testament and in other Authors, make punishments by Magistrates for violation of religion to be of the light of nature as they do the knowledge of a God, and that he is to be feared and worshipped. Bullinger in his fifth book against the Anabaptists fifth chapter, in answer to the Anabaptists affirming the commands of punishing in matters of religion belong to Moses sword, are mosaical from which Christians are now freed, saith that this coercive power was not by Moses then instituted as being never before, and as a ceremonial law which should cease in the time of Christ, but from the beginning this law as natural and necessary was appointed by God. For all the old Magistrates before Moses, from this command of God used this sword. And this law therefore God inserted in the Israelitical laws, which is not now taken away by Christ's coming as a mosaical coaction, because Christ abrogated not the policy and law of nature. Musculu● in his common places De Magistratibus showing the Magistrates coercive power in matters of religion to be so manifest a truth as that the heathen could nor be ignorant of it, concludes 'tis to be much more acknowledged by Christians, 
* Nec est ut dicat quisquam non est nobis Christianis ●ttendendum in religione quid dictitet lumen naturae, sed quid nobis sanctae Scripturae praescribant quae ad hoc sunt datae, ut ad omne bonum opus instructi red daemur. licet 〈◊〉 in iis quae fidei nostra mysteria concernu●● non sit c●asulendu lex naturae, sed magis sacrae Scriptura: simul tamen conte●●i 〈◊〉 debent, quae divi●oconsilio 〈◊〉 ●estric naturaliter ●sure● inscripta qualis est lex illa, quam naturae vocamus; cuj●● nobis directionem & Prophetae, & Christus & Apostoli commendant.  neither is it that any man should say it's not for us Christians to hearken in points of religion what the light of our nature dictates unto us, but what the Scripture speaks to us of which are given for that end, that we may be instructed to every good work. For although in those things which concern the mysteries of our Faith, the Law of nature is not to be consulted with, but rather the Scriptures, yet alsothose things ought not to be contemned which by God are written in our ●earts by nature, as is that law of nature whose direction both the Prophets, Christ and his Apostles, commend to us. Is not that power which fathers have over their children of the law of nature which the Scripture also confirms. And who will deny that it specially belongs to Parents to bring up their children in true religion and the fear of God? In Abraham this was praised Gen. 18. Now if we consider the Magistrate, what is he otherwise to be accounted of, than the supreme Father of all his subjects, whose power is much greater, then of a Father over children, and therefore it belongs more to him then to a Father, that be should take upon him the care of Religion and among ●is subjects set it up. As for Musculus Authority which is so much urged by Minus Celsus Senenfis Sect tertia page 183. that all the judicial laws are by the Gospel wholly antiquated, and therefore those of Deut. 13. Deut. 17. etc. concerning the kill of false Prophet●, Blasphemers: I answer, 'tis evident that is not Musculus meaning that under the Gospel's Magistrates may not make laws or punish for points of Religion: for in many of his writings he pleads for this coercive power, as in the second Psal. verse 11. Serve the Lord with fear. Let them note this place who deny kingly and saecular power that the Magistrate b●th to do in the cause of religion. The spirit of God admonishes Kings and Judges of the earth to serve the Lord. But he understands it of that service which is due to the Son of God. Let them answer here in what thing, Princes ought to serve Christ if in religion there be nothing at all which ought to be done by them. When therefore Princes by their power do care that the Doctrine of God's word be kept in the Church, Idolatry and false worships taken away, Ministers conveniently provided for, and adversaries suppressed, forbidding also that the name of God be blasphemed, and ●aring that those who live godly may be safe, but the wicked and turbulent may be punished, do they not serve Christ then?  
So in his commentaries on the 
* O utinam & body amputentur omnes illi falsi Doctores ac Pastores qui ●●●pus Ecclesiarum Christi sic occupant, ut inde avelli non posse videantur nisi quemadmod●m ves●es ferro exciduntur & abjiciuntur, i●a ipsi quoque forti ●anu p●r Christianos, Magistratus ●mputentur, qu● salus fidelium quae peri●litatur recuper●tur.  fifth of the Gal. 12. verse he is for cutting off false Teachers by the Christian Magistrate, which Mr. Goodwi●● page 74. of his H●giomastix confesses of him. So in his Common Places De Magistratibus and De Haeresi he pleads for at large the coercive power of the Magistrates in matters of Religion, and 
* De Haeresi. p. 611, 612. De illis here●icis loquer, qui et si graviter errent haud tame● blasphemi sunt adversus Deum. Blasphemum lex Dei vivere non patitur.  particularly of restraining and imprisoning Heretics, yea, in case they be blasphemous against God of cutting them off by death. For saith he, the law of God doth not suffer a Blasphemer to live. By which testimonies of Musoulus and divers others that might be taken out of his writings 'tis apparent whatever his meaning was of the Abrogation of the whole judicial law, it could not be that all the commands concerning the Magistrates coercive power against Heretics, false Prophets, Blasphemers, were by the coming of Christ wholly taken away: For whereas Musoulus his express judgement is (though against the Magistrates cutting off by death a simple Heretic) for putting to death blasphemous Heretics, his proof is, the law of God doth not suffer a blasphemer to live, which law was given by Moses as well as those in the 13. and 17. chapter of Deut. and I find no law spoken of, or example recorded in the new Testament for putting Blasphemers to death, but what hath immediate reference to that law in L●vit. 24. 16. or was founded on the law of nature common to all Nations. Now for that abrogation of the mosaical law in Mus●ulus common places de legibus spoken of by Minus Celsus Senensis, 'tis not of the abrogation of the judicial law only but of the moral also, which is equally pleaded by Musculus in that chapter; and yet 'tis well known that Musculus was no Antinomian, So that however, he differed in the way of his expressions from other great Divines about the manner how the moral law in the ten commandments binds us christian's, viz. not as delivered by Moses legally to the Israelites, but as agreeing with the law of nature, justice and equity, commanding good just, and holy things, so far tying all men to observance. 
* Musculus in qu●tum precept. pag. 81, 82. non dico simpliciter ad solos Israelitas pertinere Decalogi hujus observantiam, sed quate●us pertinet ad legem Mosaicam & tabulas ●abet foederis à Deo cum Israele initi Hacte●us utique neque Gentes neque Christian●s constringit sed solos Israelitas, quos legis hujus dispensatio peculiariter & nominatim concernit. Interea tamen sciendu● est, quae in hoc Decalogo 〈◊〉 nentur, quatenus in sesunt bona, justa aequa & pia, & ad legem naturae pertinent, hactenus illorum observantiam pertinere ad omnes. Quatenus Israelitis per Mosem legaliter est traditus, solos Israelitas legaliter constringit: quatenus vero cum lege naturae justitia & equitate consentit, non solos Israelitas, sed omnes homines ad sui observantiam habet obnoxios. Muscul. de legibus 141, 142.  Musculus explains his own meaning, that the observation of the Decalogue did not belong simply to the Israelites alone, but secundum quid in some respects as given by Moses upon Mount Sinai, and as it contained the Tables of a Covenant made by God with Israel. So far it binds not Heathens nor christian but only Israelites. But the things containe● in the Decalogue, the matter of it concerns all. The Decalogue so far as to be under Moses, and his pedagogy doth not bind Christians, but as it contains things agreeable, or contrary to righteousness and the law of Christ 'tis in force to, and therefore commands the one and forbids the other. Musculus saith he is so far from condemning the use of the ten Commandments in the Church of God, that he greatly praises their study and diligence, who first brought that in for a part of the Catechism of the Church. So that notwithstanding any thing Musculus hath of the abrogation of the mosaical law, Moses Laws for punishing Idolaters, false Prophets Blasphemers, are in force now for the general equity and reason of them as containing matter agreeable to the rules of reason and justice as well as the Decalogue; and indeed considering what Musculus in his Tractate de legibus writes of the judicial laws that they are Appendices of the moral commands, inserted here and there in Moses writings and added for exposition of the Decalogue, as also what he saith De Magistratibus that the Magistrates power in matters of Religion is of the light of nature, nature dictates it, and that the law is still in force against Blasphemers, than we cannot understand the abrogation of these laws of Moses of punishing in matters of the first Table, to be any otherwise meant by Musculus then in his sense of the abrogation of the Decalogue formerly expressed.  
2. The reasons of those commands expressed in the 13. and 17. chapters of Deut. concerning putting to death false Prophets, Apostates, etc. whether taken from the nature of the things themselves to which drawn, or the nature of the persons guilty, Seducers, or the common condition of the sons of men, shall fear and do no more so, etc. or the end of punishments, putting away evil, to which of them soever we look, they have been, were, and are still the same, always of a like nature and force both before the commands were given by Moses, in Moses time, and now under the Gospel, and therefore the reasons of those laws being perpetual and universal not abrogated by Christ, neither are the laws themselves (of which though I gave a touch of it in pag. 50.) yet I shall here further clear it. 'tis a rule given by many Divines in such sentences as these, Tale praceptum qualis ratio praecepti. Ratio immutabilis facit praceptum immutabile. 
Episcop. Winton. opusc. pag. 145. Ames. lib. 5. cas. consc. cap. 1. Mepul. lib. 2. cap. 13.  Vbi ratio legis redditur moralis, ibi ●ex ipsa est moralis. Officia illa omnia sunt moralia et immutabilia, quae rationes morales & immutabiles habent sibi annexas. Now though this rule is liable to Exceptions and holds not universally as in Levit. 11. 44. Some special determination may be confirmed by a general reason; and the immutable nature of the lawgiver hath its place and virtue in appointing mutable commands. Yet where the reasons of a law ex natura rei & not merely ex instituto are perpetual and universal, and the duties following from those reasons founded thereon, the special inward and proper reason of such a command being moral and perpetual; there always it follows that law is moral and perpetual, of which the Reader may be further satisfied in Aims Cases Consc. lib. 5. cap. 1. Quaest. 9 and his Medulla l. 2. c. 12.  
Now the special inward and proper reason of that command Deut. 13. so shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee, is juris moralis & naturalis, and therefore so is the command itself. For a conclusion of this that these laws of punishing Idolaters, false Prophets, etc. were not properly judicial laws, nor abrogated by Christ's coming, le's take notice that that distinction of the judicial law from the moral, viz. the moral law was given of God publicly declared by his voice twice writ in tables of stone, but the judicial was afterwards delivered to Moses, and by Moses to the people without any such solemnity, is no exact nor perfect one. For many of the laws not expressed in the Decalogue, but delivered afterwards among the judicial, as about restoring the pledge, of weights and just measures, of giving the hire to the laborour, and many other such like, are no more judicial or less moral than thou shalt not steal, Yea such commands are transferred to the times of the Gospel, as that of Levit, 19 17. to Matth. 18. 15. and Luke 17. 3. and therefore though these commands of punishing Blasphemers, Apostates, false Prophets, etc. be not expressed in the Decalogue, but added after, yet they may be no more judicial than the third and fourth Commandment. And therefore the most accurate distinction that is given by Divines between judicial laws properly so called, and those laws numbered among the judicial, is this, those were properly judicial laws which had a singular respect to the people of the Jews, so as the reason cause and foundation of them was placed in some peculiar condition of that people: But those laws which were wont to be reckoned among the judicials, and yet in their reason had no singular respect or relation to the condition of the Jews more than to other people, all those are of moral natural right common to all people, of which distinction with some other particulars about the nature of the judicial law, and how far it binds Christians under the Gospel I refer the Reader to 
* Judi●iales le●es proprie illae fuerunt quae cum non fuerunt, caremoniales, singularem populum Judaicum respectum habuere, ita ut ratio causa & fundamentum earum positum fuerit in illius populi peculiari aliqua çonditione. Leges igitur illae quae judicialibus annumerari solent & tamen in ratione sua nullu● singularem respectum habuerunt ad conditionem Judaeo●um, magis quam aliorum populorum, illae omnes sunt juris moralis ac naturalis, omnium populorum communes.  Ames. Cases of conscience the fifth Book, chapt. 1. De Jure and to Zepperus explanation of the mosaical laws, chap. 5. who shows two extremes of men in that point, one in the excess holding all the judicial laws promiscuously in force, others in the defect holding them all and wholly abolished, but holds the middle way between both, viz. what ever in the mosaical laws hath an immutable and perpetual reason and nature by common right, immutably and always as by an adamantine chain binds all men in all times and places: But whatsoever hath an implied reason and condition of change, does no longer bind the consciences of Christians. Zepperus also in his first Book chapt. 12. of the mosaical laws, answers at large the places brought by Minus Celsus Senens. and others, out of Musculus, Luther, Calvin. Zanchius and others, for the abrogation of these laws, showing they are understood only of those things that peculiarly belonged to the commonwealth of the Jews, and as given by Moses to the Israelites, and not of such judicials which either in the law of nature or Decalogue have their reason founded. Now of this latter sort, are all those commands for the substance of them, for punishing the false Prophet, Apostate, etc. as appears in the nature of those laws and the reasons of them: for what singular respect or relation to the condition of the Jews, hath taking the evil away, fearing and doing no more so, turning away from the Lord their God, more, then to the condition of Christians.  
Thirdly, As to Hagiomastixs' affirmation page 43 that to prove by the law of God in the old Testament, Deut. 13. etc. that false Prophet's Blasphemers, etc. may be bodily punished under the New Testament is all one as if a man should go about to prove that the man Moses is now alive, by this argument viz. because he was alive under the old Testament, I answer, 1. Moses is alive under the new Testament, as God said in the bush to Moses, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, so God is the God of Moses as well as of Abraham, etc. Now God is not the God of the dead but of the living. Matth. 22. 32. compared with Mark 12. 26, 27. 2. Though Moses body be dead and buried by God in a Sepulchre that no man knows of, yet his Doctrine may be alive, 'tis a gross non sequitur, that their Doctrine must be dead and buried whose bodies are dead, for than David's Doctrine in the Psalms, the Prophet's Doctrine, yea the Evangelists and Apostles Doctrine should be dead, they being now all dead as well as Moses, and so all proofs brought for any Doctrine, from David's Psalms, the Prophets, the new Testament may be thus evaded, by saying, we may go about to prove David, the Prophets, Evangelists and Apostles are now alive by this arguments, because they were alive some of them thousands, and others of them many hundred years ago. Thirdly besides this false consequence, 'tis evident upon many grounds that Doctrines are alive, do bind when the Publishers and writers of them are dead, yea they are written for that end, that they may teach and be a rule when the men who writ them are dead, that being dead, by these they may yet speak as the Apostle ●om. 15. 4. tells us; yea many things are spoken and written to be a rule of direction to the Church, intended to take place rather after their death then in their life time, as the Prophecies of the Prophets, and some Prophecies also of the Apostles, so that it may be said as Z●ch. chapter 1. verse 6. Your Fathers, where are they, and the Prophets, do they live for ever? But my words and my Statu●● which I commanded my servants the Prophets; did they no● take hold of your Fathers? though Penmen and writers of Scripture die, yet their words and Doctrine take hold and place when they are dead. Fourthly by this reason of holding Moses is now alive, if the law of God in the old Testament binds, it will follow that all Moses Doctrine, the ten commandments and all he writ in the Pentatench, Genesis, etc. are void as well as these commands about punishing false Prophets, etc. for they were made known and written by Moses when he was alive, and to be found in his Books together with these laws termed judicial: So that the Antinomian may as well say the same against the moral law under the Gospel, when the ten Commandments are pressed, and the Socinian and Anabaptist against those commands to put to death murderers, which now Master John Goodwin doth against these laws in Deut. 13. etc. that men may as well prove the man Moses is now alive, by these commands, because he was alive under the old Testament, as bring those places of Scripture written by Moses to prove the moral law in force, and those commands who so sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed. Fifthly whatever Hagiomastix by way of scoff hath spoken thus of proving as well Moses may be now alive, 'tis evident, besides the new Testaments Confirmation in many places of the Evangelists and Epistles, of the old Testament being in force in the days of the Gospel (of which I shall speak in the 18. THESIS and so will pair the Reader here) it by name particularly ratifies the Doctrine and Authority of Moses writings, and proves and urges several things upon men under the Gospel from texts taken out of the five Books of Moses, as these places in the new Testament unanswerably show, Matth. 23. 2, 3. Matth. 28, 29, 31, 32. Mark 12. 26. Luke 16. 29, 30, 31. Luke 24. 27. John 1. 45. Acts 3. 22. Act. 26. 22. Acts 28. 23. Rom. 9 7, 9, 15, 16, 17. Rom. 10. 6, 8. Rom. 13. 8. 9 Ephes. 6. 2. 3. yea several particulars of the judicial laws, are brought to prove duties required in the new Testament as page 56, 57, 60. of this Book shows; and lastly Moses Authority and writings are of such sacred account under the new Testament, that in the P●●lation the Book that concludes and shuts up the Canon of the new Testament, the Book that speaks of things that shall be in the Church of the new Testament till the end of the world, Moses his name and writing are joined with the Lamb, and that to be made use of by the most eminent and faithful servants of God, that have gotten the victory ever the beast, and over his Image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, these standing on the sea of glass having the harp of God, sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, great and marvellous are thy works Lord God almighty, etc. So that all these things being laid together, I suppose by this time every ingenuous Reader must needs see, that by this Answer to Deut. 13. etc. Hagiomastix intended rather to spread a table of mirth for himself and his Church to feast on, then to give any satisfaction to the Reverend Author of the Vindication of the printed Paper entitled an Ordinance for the preventing of Heresies, etc. and the rest of the Presbyterians.  
Fourthly, as to that answer of Hagiomastix p. 48. 49. they that will have the ancient law for putting Blasphemers & Idolaters to death to be now in force, must consequently hold 'tis in force not simply only as to the inflicting of death upon the offenders, but in all other particulars commanded by the same Authority, as not be killed after any manner, nor with any kind of death, but with stones, not only the seducer but the seduced themselves, though whole citys, not only the inhabitants, but the cattle also, with divers other particulars named in that of Deut. 13. For if men will urge this law as being still in force, they make themselves debtors to urge the execution of the whole in all the particularities and circumstances thereunto belonging. For who hath any power to make an Election or Reprobation amongst the Commandments of God, where God himself hath made none. I reply, it follows not: 'tis no good consequence that all circumstances, accessories, particularities must bind because the substance of a command binds; or that the substance and sum of a command must be taken away, because some circumstances, forms and particularities are not in force.  
To argue a thing itself abolished, because the modus of it binds not always, or that the substance and essentials must cease, because divers accessories, circumstantials and forms wherewith it was clothed most suitable to such a time, Country condition of such a people, are ceased, is a fallacy a dicto sec●ndum quid ad dictum simpliciter, which all Logicians know is no good reasoning: If I, or any other Presbyterian had argued thus, such a man's bond binds not now, or this is not such a man, he is dead, because his apparel, hair, place of abode, with some other such accessories are changed antiquity altered, we should certainly have spread a table of mirth for the Independents, and therefore I judge, for Hagiomastix thus to reason shows no great strength, and I do desire Mr. John Goodwin, but to rub up his old 
* Kekerman lib. 1. cap. 7. D● praedicam. Substantiae & lib. 1. cap. 21. Burgerdis. Institut. Logic. l. 1. c. 13. c. 4. Seton. Log. De Substantia. Substantia quà substantia non variatur gradibus seu non recipit magis & minus. Substantia eadem numero permanens, potest contraria accidentia in se suscipere. Accid. communia recipiunt gradus. Accidens est quod adest & abest sine subjecti interitu. Accidentia sunt seperabilia à subjecto.  Logic of the nature and difference of Substance, and Accidents, and then I know he will confess (though for him to confess any thing as manifest as the light wherein he is mistaken in writing, is as rare as a black Swan) that Accidents may be varied and taken away salva substantia. And that I may show the weakness of this reasoning, that this 13. of Deut. is therefore not in force because then the manner of punishing with stones, and the person tempted to Idolatry, though never so dear, stoning him, with divers other particulars must still bind, I shall give instances in the old and new Testament of moral and Evangelicall commands, and examples, that the things themselves are in force, and yet many accessories, acccidentals, circumstantials accompanying them at such a time in such places, and such a condition of the Church, not binding; And certainly if commands and rules confessed to be moral and Evangelicall had such accessories, accidentals, circumstantials, forms and manner of expressions accompanying them, to which we are not now tied though we are to the commands and duties themselves, than the commands called judicial in Deut. 13. 17. because consisting in judgements and matters of punishing offences, may easily be conceived upon several reasons, to have for the manner and form of proceeding with the kinds and extent of punishments, many accessories & accidentals to which the Church of the new Testam. is no ways bound▪ although not free from the substance of the commands, or those jaws as containing such a Doctrine that in their general nature and proportion of equity give us the best determination naturalis juris, as 
* Cas. Cons. lib. 5. cap. 1. De Jure.  Amesius speaks. The Decalogue is in force and binding for the matter and substance of the commands of all Christians under the N. Testament as is confessed even by them that hold the judicial laws totally abrogated, and yet many of them plead that in divers respects, and in several particular things, viz. accessories & appendices attending that time and that people, the Jews, as under such considerations, that law binds not us: Now though the judgement of the generality of Orthodox Divines goes not along with them all their expressions about the manner of the abrogation, yet all confess that even in the Decalogue there are some things, accessories accommodated to that time & condition of that people the Jews, which have the nature of ceremonials & judicials, as that clause in the preface which brought thee out of the Land of Egypt, out of the house of Bondage, upon which the ten commandments are enforced to the Jews, as that clause in the 
* Zepperi Mosaic. Leg. Forens. explanat. l. 1. c. 6 de varia legum mosaicarun composit. pag. 36. 37. Decalogus sane ut nt mere moralis, immutabilis, & perpetuus videri queat, aliquid tamen & cereminiale & forense admixtum habet. Quintum praeceptum morale est quatenus parentibus a liberis honorem exhiberi vult; judiciale & politicum quatenus terrae Chanaan & benedictionis in illa promissionem continet. Ceremoniale in super aliquid, quatenus Chananaea terra typus erat caelestis illius patriae. vid. ibi plura. Rivet. explicat. Decal. p. 12. promissio enim addi●a praecepto quinto expresse loquitur de terra-quam Deus erat daturus populo quae hoc tempore nos non respieit.  fifth command that thy days may be long upon the Land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, was specially meant and had particular relation to the Land of Canaan, though in the general equity it was meant of a good and long life upon earth, as is evident by Ephes. 6. 3. where the Apostle changes it from days being long in the land which the Lord thy God giveth, to this, that it may be well with thee and thou mayest live long on the earth, as something in the fourth commandment, which that Colos, 2. 16, 17. shows, and so some other phrases might be instanced in, which bind not; and yet from hence to reason against the Decalogues binding Christians under the new Testament, as Hagiomastix in page 48, 49. against that command in Deut. 13. and to say as he does were frivolous and absurd: Now if it be so in the matter of the Decalogue, than the same reason holds more in Deut. 13.  
The Government, Discipline, and order of the visible Church laid down in the new Testament for the essentials and substantials binds all Churches to the end of the world, as the Reformed Churches hold, and divers Ministers of that way as Gersom Bucerus, Parker, Danaeus, Cartwright, &c have written, and yet they do not hold all accessories, circumstantials, occasionals, &c of Discipline spoken of in the new Testament to bind, but distinguish of things, showing what's immutable and perpetual, and what not, of which the Reader may consult Parker, De Politia Ecclesiastica, 
* Danaus' in Tim. 2. Epistol. Dedicat. in cap. 3. v. 15. cap. 5. v. 14.  Danaeus on the first of Timothy, who shows in divers places of that Book that the fundamentals, essentials and substantials of Ecclesiastical Discipline cannot be increased nor diminished by any new constitutions of men: but for accessories and accidentals they may be diminished, increased and moderated according to the various circumstances of places, things, persons and times. For Discipline being as a comely garment fitted to things, persons and times, as these may be changed viz times, &c so Discipline also in accessories and lighter things may be altered, and if out of a foolish zeal of observing all things practised in the Apostles times men will imitate all things then done without considering a difference of times, places and state of things, they must needs do that which will be to the great evil of the Church and detriment of consciences. 
* Apologet Narration. Mere circumstances we except, or what rules the Law of nature doth in common dictate.  Independents themselves though they hold the substantials of Church Government and order ought to be the same in our times, that they were in the Apostles, yet they do not in all circumstantials nor accidentals judge Discipline now binds; and I suppose if Hagiomastix had thus reasoned against their Independent Government and order, that if that tied us in these days, than we are bound to all circumstances and accessories, as to the number of seven Deacons, &c as to widow's just of such an age, &c or else the office of Deacons and widows are ceased in the Church, they would have laughed at him for his folly, and yet this is the way of the man's reasoning against the command of God, Deut. 13. 17. the command itself must be wholly abrogated, or else all accessories and formalities accompanying it Christians are tied unto. Baptism, the Lords Supper, Preaching of the word to speak properly are not points of Government and order, but the worship of God: Love, Humility, Hospitality, are graces and moral duties commanded under the Gospel, and yet all these with many others of the like kind that I could instance in, had in the Apostles days those Primitive times, some accessories and appendices, ways of manifestations of them which are now ceased, as the feasts of Love, the Kiss of love, washing the Saints feet, etc. in which humility, brotherly love, kindness to strangers were expressed, as proper & peculiar to that condition the Church was then in, & the customs of those Countries, etc. Now if any Seeker should reason with Hagiomastix that these Ordinances were all antiquated, or any Antinomian that these graces were not to be exercised by us now, because these accessories and appendices were laid aside, or would enforce from the Practice of them a necessity of washing feet, the Kiss of love, and all other things proper and peculiar to the state of the Apostles, I suppose he would laugh at them, and in his answer jeer them to purpose. Now therefore if in Evangelicall Ordinances and Commands, in points of worship and graces under the time of the new Testament, where there is still one and the same manner of administration of the Coveenant of grace, there may be such a non obligation in respect of accessories and accidentals, though yet the Ordinances and graces themselves remain in full force and vigour, we may then easily conceive in commands concerning punishments of sin against the first Table, how under the new Testament being a divers manner of administration from the old (though the same in substance) there may well be a great change of accessories, accidentals, forms, and manner of proceeding, which nevertheless give no ground for the taking away things and commands themselves, but only clearly show there may be a cessation of all such forms, accessories, manner of proceeding, which were peculiar to that time and people. And if we do but observe and consider the composition of most of the mosaical laws, how they are mixed of moral, 
☞  judicial, and ceremonial, how laws judicial have something moral, and something ceremonial in them, and ceremonials have something judicial and moral in them, and how that those things which in their nature are moral and perpetual, have yet somewhat judicial and ceremonial annexed to them, of all which we may be further satisfied in Zepperus his explanation of the mosaical laws, we may easily conceive how in these mosaical laws, a command the thing itself may be binding for the substance, and yet several particulars accompanying as being properly judicial and ceremonial may cease, among which now the form and kinds of punishments, the extent with rigour and severity of punishing to the cattle, the making the city a heap for ever, &c may be reckoned; And that these are but accessories and appendices of these laws for punishing Idolaters, false Prophets, which therefore may not bind, though the commands for the substance be still in force, may appear thus, because inflicting death simply upon Apostates, false Prophets, &c is commanded without any of these accessories of destroying the cattle, and making the city an heap, &c as these places Exod. 23. 20. Deut. 17. 2, 5, 6. and Deut. 18. 20. snow, which is worthy to be taken notice of; besides in the commands to punish those who offer up their children to Molech, and that Blaspheme God, Levit. 20. 2. Levit. 24. 16. the inflicting of death upon them is required, but none of those particulars mentioned Deut. 13, 15, 16, 17. In the new Testament also, though the punishing by death according to Moses law of Apostates be approved of, as in page 52, 53. of this Book I have shown, and several judicial Laws for the substance ratified page 56, 57 yet the formalities, accessories, with all particularities of such Laws never are spoken of; and lastly, though severe punishment by the Magistrate the substance of that command in Deut. 13. be both before Moses Laws as in Jobs time, and after Moses times by Artaxerxes, Nabuchadnezzar, Darius in cases of Apostasy, Idolatry, Blasphemy, approved of; yet there is not a word spoken of destroying cattle, the whole Cities, etc. And to stop Hagiomast. mouth for ever, I wish him to consider this, that by virtue of commands under the old Testament, Apostates, false Prophets, Idolaters, may be now put to death, and yet the Magistrates under the Gospel not bound to destroy whole Cities, cattle, nor fulfil the rest of his inferences: For it will appear by many instances in the old Testament, even in that time of Administration of the Covenant, wherein the 13. of Deut. was written, that the Magistrates held not themselves bound to àll those particulars of destroying all the inhabitants, cattle, etc. though they inflicted punishments, yea death upon some Idolaters, and Apostates, as these instances fully show, viz. in Moses Exod. 32. commanding in the worship of the Golden Calf three thousand to be slain, not all the people, nor the cattle, Numb. 25. 2, 3, 4, 5. commanding for the bowing down to the gods of Moab, the heads of the people to be hanged up, not all the people, neither the cattle to be killed, in Eliah killing the Prophets of Baal only, 1 Kings c. 18. not the people; in Asa, entering into Covenant that whosoever would not serve the Lord the God of Israel should be put to death, and in deposing Machah, his Mother for making an Idol in a Grove 2 Chron. c. 15. but not entering into Covenant to destroy all the cattle and the Cities where such persons lived; in Josiah sacrificing all the Priest of the high places in Samaria that were there upon the Altars 2 Kings. chapt. 23. but not sacrificing the people nor the cattle; and so in others which might be given. And therefore if Magistrates under the old Testament, though all thought it their duty to punish● Idolaters and Apostates, were not tied to all the particulars in Deut. 13. then certainly the Magistrates under the new are less tied to those accessories and formalities of that Law, by all which 'tis apparent those things laid down in 
* The stoning to death with stones Idolaters, false Prophets, was not essential as Zach. 13. 3. shows who there prophecies they shall be thrust through, not stoned.  Deut. 13. 15, 16, 17. are only accessories & accidentals of that command of punishing with death those that go after other Gods, and not of the nature and essence of it; yea holding only in some particular cases, time, but not general to the jews themselves, which in what cases and how, I shall forbearespeaking of now for fear of enlarging this part beyond its proportion intended.  
And for a conclusion of this; the consideration of this mixture and composition of the Laws of God under the old Testament is exceeding useful for this purpose, viz. that thereby we may judge more easily of the mutability or immutability of them, whether they be temporary or perpetual, and so whether they bind all men, or only some. In commands alleged out of the old Testament, this is to be carefully looked into whether they be merely and purely moral or ceremonial or judicial; 
☞  or whether mixed and compounded, and how, of what laws mixed. If the command be pure and simple the thing is evident, where moral is binds, where ceremonial or judicial it binds not. But if it be mixed of judicial, ceremonial and moral, or of ceremonial and moral, the moral remains and is in force: by all which we may see the weakness of Hagiomastixs' inference, that if that command in Deut. 13. does at all bind Christians, it must bind in every particular there spoken of: for what's moral in Deut. 13. abides, and yet what's properly judicial and ceremonial is taken away: look as that were no good argument against the fifth commandment being in force under the new Testament, because than what was judicial and ceremonial in it as containing the promise of the Land of Canaan, and a blessing in it etc. must remain under the Gospel, so neither is this of Hagiomast. For as a command moral may have somewhat judicial mixed with it, so may a command judicial have much of moral in it; but now what judicial laws and how mixed are temporary and changeable, and upon what rules and grounds, and what judicial laws are immutable and perpetual, and how to be known, I refer the Reader for satisfaction to Zepperus explanation of the Mosaical Laws, 1. Book chapt. 7, 8, 9, 12. And as for those commands in question of Magistrates punishing in cases of Apostasy, Idolatry, Blasphemy, they are upon all occasions reckoned by learned Divines among the immutable and perpetual, as by Zanchius De Magistratu Quaest. Secunda p. 170, 171. Beza De Haereti●is a Magistratu● puniendi●, p. 152. 154, 155. and by Zepperus in his explanation of the mosaical judicial laws, first Book c. 10. page 72. and 4. Book chapt. 2. p. 243. where he makes the laws against the false Prophet teaching publicly, the private Seducer, the public defection of the whole City, &c to be appendices of the first command and of common right, and particularly in the third chapter of that fourth Book proves by several Reasons the punishing of false Teachers, Heretics, Blasphemers, aught to be perpetual, which learned Authors notwithstanding, grant the kinds of punishments, the particular forms of those laws, and as they were given of Moses to be constitutive of the Jews policy, to be changeable and not binding: The kinds of punishments are taken away, Christ would not have the Gentile Magistrate to be bound to those laws for the kind of punishments which were given to the Jewish Magistrates, but notwithstanding punishments in general are not taken away, but commanded. In the constituting the kind of punishment, there seems a peculiar reason to have been had of that Nation. There were certain peculiar things in those laws that do not now belong to us which particulars being taken away, there are two things by virtue of those laws remain. First, that defection from the true Religion, and seducing to tha defection should be punished by the Magistrate no●. Secondly, that Capital punishment should be inflicted according to the greatness of the Blasphemy and wickedness upon factious and seditions Apostates. For of such account ought the Majesty of God to be among all men in all ages of the world, that whosoever shall despise and mock at that, be who speaks evil of the Author of life, is most worthy to have his life taken away. So Zanchius De Magistratu Quaest, secunda page. 170. 171, 172, and Beza De Haereticis a Magistrate p●niendis page 154, 155. speak and therefore according to that threefold distinction laid down page 53, 54, 55. of this Treatise, this law in Deut. 13. may be in force, 1. according to the substance and equity of it, according as there is a common right in it, 
* Beza De Haeret. a Magistr. Page 154. Judicialis autem L●xeam duntaxat justitiae & aequitatis partem sigillatim explicat, quae in iis rebus versatur de quibus judicia constituta sunt.  common to other Nations with the Jews, and secondly, as it contains a Doctrine made known by God for punishing such offences (though we Christians are not tied to the particular forms of that command according to the Mosaical law or polity, nor as it was given by Moses to one people, nor to the utmost vigour and severity of it expressed in every particular) which being in force under the Gospel but in this sense & thus far, fully makes good that which 'tis brought for the Magistrates coercive power under the new Testament to punish false Prophets, Apostates, &c: neither does the abating somewhat of the rigour of the Law suitable to the Mosaical pedagogy, or the relesiang of the particular forms of that Law the kind and manner of punishing, abrogate all punishment and restraint: For we may easily conceive and we often see it in experience, the rigour and utmost severity of a Law in regard of some circumstances abated, and yet not all punishment, neither the substance of it taken away; and indeed if we consider what the judicial Law concerning punishing in criminal matters is, as 'tis laid down by divers learned men, 
* Ames. lib. 5. Cas. Conscience. cap. 1. de jure ista Lex judicialis quae per Mosen traditae fuit Israelitis ut eorum propria, fuit ipsis accuratissima determinatio & accommodatio juris naturalis secundum illius populi singula●em determinationem. Ista Lex ad Christianos pertinet tantum sub ratione doctrinae quatenus vel generali sua natura, vel proportionis aquitate, exhibet semper nobis optimam naturalis juris determinationem.  Beza. Zepperus, Amesius, viz. that law which doth peculiarly explicate that part of righteousness and equity concerning executing justice and judgement, or the most accurate determination and fit application of the natural right according to the special and singular condition of that people, it must needs follow that though those circumstances which were proper to that special estate of the Jews are ceased, as of necessity they must, the State of the Jews being changed, yet the things themselves as abstracted from their relation to the Jewish Church and state, cannot be abolished, as being naturalis juris, which still do hold forth to us the best determination of natural right as Amesius speaks, as the changing of the fashion form and proportion of a man's clothing and apparel cannot alter a man's substance and person, so neither can the forms and manner of the judicial Law by which it was fitted for the Jews condition as a garment is to a man's body, take away the Law itself; so that judicias being ●othing else but naturals and morals clothed for a time after such a manner to fit the nature and manners of such a people, that time and people being passed away, 
☜  the substance, viz. what's natural and moral must needs remain.  
Fifthly, as to those other inferences added by Hagiomastix page 50. 51, 52. to the former, that if the obligation of the Mosaical Law for putting Blasphemers, Idolaters, &c to death, was intended by God to continue under the new Testament, why was the Apostle Paul so far from enjoining a believing brother to detect, or to put to death his Idolatrous wife, that he doth not permit him so much as to put her away from him? if the Law in question was to continue in force under the Gospel, than was every person in an Idolatrous state and kingdom whilst it remained Idolatrous, bound to seek the death one of another, yea to destroy one another with their own hands. Yea the civil Magistrate was bound to sentence all his subjects that practised Idolatry to death without exception, and to make a bloody desolation throughout all his dominions: then were believers in Idolatrous states and kingdoms upon their respective Conversions to the Christian faith, bound to accuse their neighbours, being Idolaters and Blasphemers, round about them before the Magistrate, especially if he were a Christian, and to require the execution of this Law of God upon them to have them put to death. I answer M. goodwin's If● & Thens proceed either out of the gross ignorance of the state of the question of Toleration, and scope of Deut. 13. or elsefrom a design to delude and abuse the people with a show of some reason, which though he knows in his conscience very well hath no weight at all, yet he thinks will serve to misled his followers who takes shadows for men. For whereas the question about punishing men with death, or other severe punishments in cases of Idolatry and false Doctrine is understood by all Divines who write of the Controversy, in case of Apostasy and defection, meant of those who have once known and received the Christian faith, and not of Jews, Turks, and Pagans; of Magistrates also in their own jurisdiction and Territories, not others; and when it may be with the safety, and for the good of a Nation and Kingdom, & not to the manifest destruction and ruin of a Kingdom, as he may find in the writings of many learned men who have writ upon the Question Calvin, Beza, Zanchius, Bullinger, Danaeus, Musculus, Gerardus, Baldwins cases of conscience, Zepperus, Videlius, Voetius, Master Rutherfurd, &c and is evident by the state of the question laid down in the Prolegomena, as also Deut. 13. is understood of Apostates who having professed the Law are fallen from it, and of persons in the territories and power of the Jews, not that they should do so to all neighbouring Nations round about them, as these phrases imply, If there arise among you a Prophet, If thy brother, or thy Son, or thy Daughter, entice thee secretly, saying, le's go serve other Gods. If thou shalt hear say in one of thy Cities, which the Lord thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying, certain men, the children of Belial are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city. Deu●. 17. 2. If there be found among you within any of thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee, man or woman that hath wrought wickedness in the fight of the Lord thy God, in transgressing his Covenant; If it be true that such abomination is wrought in Israel, then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman unto thy gates, and stone them with stones till they die: On which place * Calvin observes in his handling that question whether it be lawful for Christian Judges to punish Heretics, 
Calvin. Refut●t errorum Serveti, in Quaest. an Christianis Judicibus H●reticos punire liceat. p. 59●  that the punishment of stoning in Deut. 13. was not commanded to be inflicted upon foreign Nations, but upon Apostates from the Jewish Religion who had perfidiously fallen from it: by which saith he is answered that objection made by some, who ask whether Jew's, Turks, and the like are by the sword to be forced to the Faith of Christ? Neither doth God command the sword to be drawn promiscuously against all, but Apostates who have wickedly with drawn themselves from the true worship and have endeavoured to draw others to the like defection, he hath subjected to just punishment: Yet for all this Hagiomastix makes Ifs and Ands, brings instances of Suppositions in Heathens, and of States wholly Idolatrous, nothing at all to the question in hand; for the Apostle speaks in 1 Corinthians and the seventh chapter, of a Heathen and infidel that never received the faith of Christ, but being borne and brought up in Heathenism continues so, however one of the married persons, husband or wife was converted to the Christian faith, besides that question put by Hagiomastix, why was the Apostle Paul so far from enjoining a believing brother to detect, or to put to death his infidel or Idolatrous wife that he doth not permit him so much as to put her away from him, is absurd and ridiculous, and a man would wonder that such a great champion as 
* Cretensis p. 11.  Cretensis would be taken for, that dares challenge all Presbyterians in England, Scotland, and France, assembled and not assembled, and so cried up and deified by the Sectaries in divers 
* A letter by way of Answer to a letter of Mr. Vicars. A candle to see the Sun. Apolog. for some passages in Hagiomastix by divers Independents.  Pamphlets, should bring such weak poor stuff; for the Corinthian State and Magistracy being then heathenish, and infidels, (as the Apostle in the chapter going before 1 Cor. 6. 2. shows, only many particular private persons living in Corinth being converted who were not the civil Government) it had been to no end for Paul to direct the believing husband to complain to the Magistrate of his Idolatrous wife, that had been the way for himself to have been punished, that had been all one as to have complained to the civil Magistrates of themselves; and certainly the Apostle that blamed the believing Corinthians for going to law one with another before their Magistrates who were unbelievers, though he would not, if they had been Christian Magistrates, had no reason to stir up Christians to complain unto unbelievers in matters of Religion and Christianity. Master Goodwin might with as much reason have ask● why the Apostle Paul did not enjoin the unbelieving wife or husband to complain of the believing wife and husband, as why he did not enjoin the believing wife to detect her Idolatrous husband; and might as well, nay better▪ reason it unlawful for Christians to go to law now under Christian judges, because they might not under Heathens, as to argue against Christians complaining and detecting of Christians that turn Apostates, Heretics, Idolaters, &c because Christians did not complain in Paul's time to Heathen Magistrates of Heathens; yea this is so unreasonable a question to build an argument upon against an express 
* Viz. that of Deut. 13. 5. 9  command of God, and that with a triumph in the close of it, saying Certainly this Doctrine of the Apostle ●olds no tolerable correspondency with the opinion of our severe Inquisitors, about the non a brogation of the Law for putting Idolaters to death, that though I read in Ecclesiastical Histories of Christians complaining to some Heathen Emperor's favourers of Christian Religion, of Christians when they turned Herrticks, as to 
* Eusebii Eccles. Histor. lib. 7. cap. 29.  Aurelianus of Paulus Samosetenus the Heretic, and of 
* Rivet explicat Decal. p. 209.  Heathens seeking to Heathen Princes, against Priests that were very wicked under the show of Religion, being guilty of sacrilege and corrupting the chastity of Matrons; Yet I never read of any complaining of and desiring Princes to punish Heathens of the same Religion with themselves; so that by all this the Reader may easily perceive besides the dissimilitude in the instance of 1 Cor. 7. from that of Deut. 13. the one speaking of an Heathen Idolater, the other of a Jewish Apostate, there was very great reason why the Apostle enjoined not the believing wife to seek to take away the life of her unbelieving husband; for in so doing she might have hazarded her own, but could have done no good to the hindering of his Idol worship: But however Paul enjoins nothing to the believing husband and wife about detecting their unbelieving Yokefellowes upon the grounds already given, yet I make no question had Paul lived in a time wherein the Corinthian Magistrates had received the faith, he would have given both them and believing husbands in their places, injunctions to have demolished Idol Temples and their worships, not to suffer Blasphemies against Christ, but on the contrary to have sent preachers among them, and to countenance and honour those who received the faith; of which in the practices of Constantine, Theodosius and other Emperors, I might give many instances De inhibitis pagan●rum sacrificiis, and of the shutting up, yea 
* Theod. Hist. Eccles. lib. 5. cap. 20.  pulling down the Temples of the Heathen Gods, of their removing from Offices and Places those who were not Christians. There is no question but Paul who dehorted so earnestly the believing Corinthians from going to the Idols Feasts in the Idols temples, and from eating of the sacrifices in their Temples, 1 Cor. 10. 2 Cor. 6. would if the State of Corinth had been Christian have exhorted them to put down the Idol Temples, to forbid those Idolatrous sacrifices, to suppress their Priests; as also Christian husbands in case their wives would have gone after Idolatrous Priests, worshipped Images brought to them, they would have desired their Magistrates help against such Seducers and Corrupters. And for conclusion of my answer to this fifth Head, if I would give liberty to my pen to writefully against every particular passage in the 39 and 40. Section of Hagiomastix, as I have done of some of them, I should make his folly and weakness manifest to all, but having hinted already his mistakes, and the utter dissimilitude between that command in Deut. 13. and all his instances of an Idolatrous state, and a Magistrate bound to make a bloody desolation throughout all his Dominions, etc. I say no more but here is a great cry and a little wool, and so come to the fixed head to give Answer to something that seems more material.  
Sixthly, to that Hagiomastix saith page 46. There is this clear reason why that old Testament law for putting of false Prophets, Blasphemers and Seducers to Idolatry to death, should not now be in force upon any such terms as it was when and where it was given; because in all difficult cases that happened about matters of Religion, the jews to whom this Law was given, had the opportunity of immediate consultation with the mouth of God himself, who could and did from time to time, infallibly declare what his own mind and pleasure was in them. So that except those that were to give sentence in cases of Religion had been desperately wicked, and set upon blood and despised that glorious Ordinance of the Oracle of God amongst them, they could not do injustice, God being always at hand to declare unto them, what kind of Blasphemer and what kind of Idolater it was that he by this Law intended should be put to death. Whereas now the best Oracles that Magistrates and judges have to direct them in doubtful cases about matters of Religion are men of very fallible judgements, and every way obnoxious to error and mistake. Yea confident I am, that the wisest & most learned of them are not able clearly or demonstratively to inform the Magistrate what Blasphemy or what Idolatry it was which was by God sentenced to death under the Law: Therefore the going about to prove that the Law for putting Blasphemers and Seducers to Idolatry to death, is now, or amongst us in force, because it was once given to the Jews, is as I should prove that a man may safely without danger walk among bogs praecipices & ditches, at midnight because he may well do it at noon day. I answer in the general, this Section is full of many unsound and dangerous passages, very prejudicial to the perspicuity, perfection and certainty of the Scriptures, very derogatory to the state of the Church under the new Testament, preferring the old before it for clearness and light as much as noon day before midnight (which is contrary to many Prophecies in Scripture of the times under the Gospel and to divers texts in the new Testament 2 Cor. 3. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 18. 2 Cor. 4. 4, 6.) and tending to bring in with a high hand, Scepticism and Pyrronian uncertainty in all points of Religion into the Church of God, passages becoming a jesuit and an Atheist, but altogether unbeseeming a Protestant Minister and 
* Appendix to Hagiomastix Apolog. of some of Mr. goodwin's Church, for Hagiomastix A Candle to light the Sun.  one who would be accounted to have laboured more abundantly in vindicating the Authority of the Scriptures and building men on a rock then all other men: Whoever does but compare the jesuits & Papists writings, Stapleton, Bellar. Turnbull, Fisher, &c with learned Whittaker, Chamier, Rivet, Cameron, Doctor White, 
Whitak. disput. de sacra Script. contra Bellarm. & Staplet. De Scripturae authoritate, perspicuitate, interpretatione, & perfectione. John Whites way to the true Church. Rob. Baron. Apodixis Catholica sive Apologia pro Disput. d● Firmali objecto Fidei. Rivet. Cathol. Orthodox. Tractat. Prim. de Scriptura.  Baron, Willet and other Protestant Divines who have written of the Authority, perspicuity perfection, &c of the Scriptures against the Papists, and then look but upon this Section, he must needs say Higiomastix writes as one brought up in the Schools of the jesuits, and had sucked their breasts; as also he that reads but Minus Celsus Senenses, and the Socinians with the netherlands Arminians will confess these lines are the very breathe and actings of that Spirit which dwells in that generation of men: I could out of the writings of our Orthodox Divines written against Papists, Socinians, Arminians, upon those heads of the authority, perfection, perspiculty, certainty of the Scriptures and points of Christian faith at large confute him, but these belong not properly to this Controversy about Toleration, and therefore I shall not insist on them: and further I desire the Reader to observe what follows, that this clear reason (as Hag●omastix terms it) may be resolved in that common evasion of Socinians and armenians and all our Sectaries of Infallibility and Fallibility: Whoever well weigh● that 36. Section of Hagiomastix with that part of the 107. Section page 130. fifth Answer, will find the Sum and substance of all that discourse to be nothing else but the usual Plea of the Patrons of Toleration, in their late Libertine Pamphlets, as Bloody Tenet, Storming of Antichrist, Compassionate Samaritan, Justification of Toleration, 
With divers Pamphlets of Saltmarsh and walwyn for liberty of Conscience.  Quaeres upon the Ordinance for preventing of Heresies, etc. that there is no infallible judge now, all men are fallible, subject to error or mistake, and therefore the proper place of speaking to this, will be in answering their Grounds for Toleration and pretended liberty of conscience, where I hope by the grace of God to speak so fully to that particular of Infallibility and Fallibility, that I doubt not to promise the Reader such ample satisfaction to that grand Argument, as by the blessing of God all men who have not sold themselves to Libertinism will never again after that object it: yet however for the present I shall hint these things by way of Reply.  
1. This very point of Infallibility and fallibility was the main rise and cause of setting the Pope in his chair, of making one that must be an infallible judge in the Church, and so is the ground work of the Pope's Authority and Tyranny over the Church, 
☜  which all who understand the Controversies between the Papists and the Reformed Churches De Papa do well know: And on the other hand 'tis made the foundation of bringing in all Anarchy and Libertinism into the Church to overthrow all power of Magistrates, and of Synods and Counsels in matters of Religion: so that at on the one hand it hath exalted the Pope and given him an unjust Domination and usurpation, so on the other it casts down the use of all civil and Ecclesiastical power for the good of the Church, so that the same thing that set up the Pope and made Antichrist, sets up a Toleration and universal liberty of conscience, which is a new and worse Pop●. But as the want of infallibility was no good ground for ●etting up the Pope (as I suppose Hagiomast. and all the Sectaries will grant) so will it be found no good argument for a general Toleration of all Religions, a far greater evil than a Pope.  
Secondly, I deny that which Hagiomastix takes for granted, the reason itself upon which he found'st why the old Testament law for the putting of false Prophets, Blasphemers, and Seducers to Idolatry to death, should not now be in force; I desire him to prove the Vrim and Thummim of the Lords holy One, the glorious Ordinance of the Oracle of God among the Jews by which they inquired and consulted immediately and received Sentences and Answers immediately and infallibly from the mouth of God, to be appointed of God, or ever made use of by the Priest upon the desire of the Magistrates and Elders in cases of resolving doubts whether this or that was Blasphemy, Idolatry, false prophesying, and thereupon putting to death Blasphemers, false Prophets, Seducers to Idolatry: Hagiomastix gives no place of Scripture at all for proof, and upon serious perusal of all places of this kind both of commands and examples for punishing false Prophets, Idolaters, &c I do never find the Magistrates were commanded in those cases to inquire by Vrim or ever practised it. Let Deut. 13. Deut. 17. Levit. 20. 2. 3, 4, 5. Deut. 18. 20, 21, 22. Levit. 24. 16. with the examples of Asa, Josiah and others be looked into, and we shall not find a word spoken of concerning the deciding who were or who were not or killing false Prophets, and Idolaters upon receiving an Answer from God by Vrim and Thummim, but still the grounds expressed of proceeding against them are upon the Law of God, the nature of the sins, and other reasons of a common nature, and among the signs and marks by which false Prophets are to be known, this discovery by the glorious Oracle is none of them, but the thing following not, nor coming to pass which was spoken in the name of the Lord, their prophesying in Baal and causing the people to err, their strengthening the hands of evil doers that none returns from wickedness, their saying unto them that despise God, Ye shall have peace, and unto every one that walketh after the imagination of his own heart, no evil shall come upon you, with divers such like as is evident by Deut. 18. 22. Jerem. 23. 13. 14, 17. and many places out of Moses and the Prophets. In Joshua 22. when the children of Israel heard of the two tribes and a half building an Altar, they did not before they gathered themselves to go up to war, inquire by Vrim and Thummim whether it was Idolatry or not; and when an Answer was given to Phinebas and the ten Princes that they had not built an Altar to turn from following the Lord, but only for a witness between them and the rest of the Tribes, that it might not besaid to their children in time to come, ye have no part in the Lord, Phinehas the Priest, and the Princes of the congregation did not consult the Oracle spoken of to be resolved in this Controversy: Thus Asas and the People's entering into Covenant to put to death men or women for matters of religion, was not founded on an Answer by Vrim and Thummim, but upon whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel, and for Asa's putting down Maachah his Mother from being Queen, because she made an Idol in a grove, there is not the least hint expressed of his consultation beforehand with that glorious Ordinance of the Oracle of God, whether she was such a kind of Idolater and her Idolatry of such a nature, as she was to be punished with that punishment of being removed from being Queen. Josiah in all the exercise of his coercive Power upon the Violators of the first Table, 2 King. chapt, 23. in sacrificing some of them upon Altars and burning their bones, in putting down others, &c never enquired by Vrim whether those he killed were such kind of Idolaters as God by the Law intended should be put to death, and whether the others were not such. So the Priests, Prophets, and People in taking Jeremiah and saying he shall surely die, and that he is worthy to die, they pretend not to pass sentence upon enquiring by Vri●, but upon his prophesying in the name of the Lord, This house shall be like Shiloh, and this city shall be desolate without an inhabitant, Jerem. 26. 8, 9, 11. which they judged a Prophesying falsely upon mis-underst anding some Scriptures, as appears plainly by those words, why hast thou prophesied in the name of the Lord, saying, This House shall be like Shiloh, and this City shall be desolate without an inhabitant. For because of Gods promise concerning the Temple, that he would abide ever there Psal. 132. 14, They presumed that it could never perish, and accounted all preaching that looked that way, blasphemous, Matth. 26. 61. Acts 6. 13. of which see more in the late Annotations of our English Divines upon the 9 verse. And Jeremiah in his 
* Jwius in locum Narratio de litis contestatione, qua accusatur Jeremia v. 11. & seipsum defendit, Defensio Jeremiae juridicialis absoluta (ut vocant Rhetores) incipiens & concludens a vocatione dei & jure ab ipso factum afferens.  judicial defence to the 
* See in Mr. Gillesp. Aaron's rod blossoming, p. 18, 19, 20.  Court and Council (for so it appears it was a Court, by verse 10. 16, 17. speaking of certain Elders of the Land rising up and speaking to the Assembly of the People) pleading his immediate call from God to prophesy against the City as his Answer against their accusation and in all the contestation and Controversy that was between the Princes and certain of the Elders and the Priests, Prophets, and People concerning Jeremiah's being worthy to die, neither Jeremiah, nor the Priests, Elders, and People that were for his being put to death, or against it, once offer for deciding this difficult case and doubtful matter to propound the enquiring by Vrim and Thummim, but both sides plead the case upon Scripture Grounds and examples, as he who reads the chapter may easily see; and certainly if enquiring by Vrim and Thummim had been appointed of God, and practised by the Church as the Oracle to which in all difficult cases about matters of religion the jews were to repair, by which to judge whether such things were Blasphemy, Idolatry, Prophesying falsely, yea or no, and whether the persons were such kind of Blasphemers, false Prophets, Idolaters, as the Law intended should be put to death, it is strange that in all this sharp contest and great Controversy about accusing Jeremi●h for prophesying falsely and arraigning him upon his life, neither himself, nor his enemies, none of the Priests, Princes, Elders, People, nor Jeremiah should once move to inquire immediately from the mouth of God by Vrim and Thummim the infallible Resolution of this question whether Jeremiah prophesied falsely in the name of the Lord, and deserved to die. And therefore from this and all the Premises, yea upon serious searching into all places of Scripture that speak of Vrim and Thummim and of those who enquired of the Lord in that way, and comparing them together with the help of many judicious and learned Interpreters, besides consulting Divines who have written of Vrim and Thummim, I cannot find the least Ground that the jews either were commanded, or ever made use of enquiring by Vrim to be satisfied in judicial Proceedings, whether this or that was Idolatry, or Blasphemy, or this man an Idolater, or false Prophet, or no, but they proceeded in those things by the Law of God given to them, and in difficult cases too hard they were enjoined to go to the Priests by way of consultation to be informed of the true sense and meaning of God's law; and the Priests, as the great Lawyers among the People, practised in the meaning of God's Law according to which judgement was to be given, gave them Resolutions out of the Law, and never in those cases upon consulting by Vrim, as many Scriptures-show. The resolution of the Priests upon enquiring of them in hard matters was to eaccording to the sentence of the Law Deut. 17. 8, 9, 10, 11. jer. 18. 18. the Law shall not perish from the Priest, the meaning is (though falsely applied against Jeremiah) that the Priests keeping to the Law are the Oracles of truth, and therefore Jeremiah is a false Prophet, seeing they who have Authority in the Church, and understanding of the Law contradict him. Mal. 2. 7. For the Priests Lip. should keep knowledge, and they should seek the Law at his mouth; he Priest's lips keeping knowledge, and seeking the Law at hi● mouth, not new immediate Revelations from the mouth of God, are here set down to be looked after. In questions about moral things, sins and duties, the Priests are to give answer from the Law. As for that judgement of Vrim spoken of in Numb. 27. 21. which was by way of Oracle, the high Priest having Vrim and Thumim about him giving answers in God's name, which were of infallible truth, and made a supreme determination, that was for the resolution of doubtful and difficult businesses and enterprises in matters of events and successes of things, for direction and counsel from God what course to take in distresses and such and such cases as about going to war, etc. for discovery and revelation of hidden and secret causes of judgements; but never was upon occasion of questions of things forbidden in the Moral Law, and for determination of who or what was an Idolater or Idolatry, a false Prophet, or prophesying falsely, a Blasphemer, or Blasphemy; and if we consult the Scriptures where the judgement of Vrim is spoken of, w● shall find as much, which I desire the Reader well to observe. All the places I have taken notice of that speak of enquiring of God by Vrim are th●se following, Exod. 28. 15. 30. Numb. 27. 21. Josh. 9 14. Judg. 1. 1. and 20, 18, and 20. 1 Sam 23. 9, 10, 11, 12. 28. 6. 30. 7, 8. 2 Sam. 21. 1. all which speak only of enquiring of God in the cases forementioned, and not in the least of controversies arising upon Moral transgressions against the first Table, and of what punishments shall be inflicted upon men for them: unto which considering the judgement of divers learned men in their 
* Aainsworth Annot. on Exod. 28. 30. Numb. 27. 21. Eleazar shall ask council of God for Joshua in all doubtful cases in all their war, etc. Diodates' Annot. on Numb. 27. 21. 2 Sam. 21. 1. Annor. of our English Divines on Exod. 28. 30. Iuni● Annot. in Num. 27. 21. 1 Sam. 28. 6.  Commentaries upon most of these places of Scripture concerning the enquiring by Vrim, and 
* Petr. Mart. loc. common. Class. 1. cap. 7. Weems Christian Synagogue. chap. 4. Theodoret. Quaest in Exod quaest. 60. Suara pectus erat: Indumenti genus quod Rationale vecabatur, tegens cor partem ration alem. Quo quidem vestimento cognoscebatur, victoria ne an clades bello immuneret: ut perspicuum est ex Historiam Regnorum.  others in their writings going this way, of enquiring in cases of of war, distresses and for public persons enquiring not hereby for a common man, but either for the King, or for him on whom the affairs of the Congregation lay, but not giving any one instance in matters of Idolatry, Blasphemy, Prophesying falsely, or any other corruption in Religion, I confess I am much confirmed that the judgement of Vrim was not appointed for that use to resolve what violations of Religion were, and what were not punishable by death. Now that the judgement of Vrim was of any such use to inquire of God by the Priest in points of Idolatry, Blasphemy, &c I see not the leastcolor for it, unless in these places of Scripture Deut. 17. 8, 9, 12. (which place is urged by Hagiom. p. 130. the sentence of the Priest against which he that should do presumptuously in not harkening to it was to be put to death, was only such a sentence, with the Priest did upon inquiry by Vrim and Thummim receive immediately from the mouth of God himself) Deut. 21. 5. Deut. 19 16, 17, 18. and in those examples of him that blasphemed the name of the Lord, being put in ward that the mind of the Lord might be showed ●h●m Levit. 24. 11. 12. and of him that gathered sticks, put inward till the Lord should declare what shall be done to him. But for Answer, in none of these places or examples is there any thing spoken, of consulting by Vrim; For the first place, only urged by Master Goodwin, to say nothing that these verses are quite another thing from that command in the beginning of the chapter about putting to death for serving other gods, and worshipping the Sun and Moon, there being in that case not a word tending that way (which yet is the point in question) of going to the Priest and enquiring of him, and upon this judgement putting to death, besides this command being of things of another nature as ●erse 8 shows, here is no direction in this place to inquire by Vrim, but the matters here spokenof being difficult, council is given to go to the Priests skilled in the meaning of the Law, and in answering of doubts arising, to be informed by them of the meaning of the Law, many passages in those verses show as much (and whereas in the case of enquiring by Vrim in all places) expressions are used of enquiring of the Lord, the Lords answering and such like, here still all is put upon the Priest or judge, and upon the sentence and judgement that they shall show, and they shall tell; and that this place cannot be meant of the judgement of Vrim 'tis evident thus, because that Vrim and Thummim belonged only to the Priesthood Deut, 33. 8. and particularly to the high Priest Numb. 27. 21. Exod. 28. 30. Now he who would have God to be inquired of concerning some great business, did come to the Priest and the Priest putting on the Ephod to which the breast Plate of Vrim and Thummim was fastened verse 28. stood before the Ark of God, and so God gave answers which were of infallible truth, (of which, with a more particular relation of the manner of inquiry, and the way of Answer by Vrim and Thummim, the Reader may see more in Ainsworth Annotat. on Exod. 28. 30. and Numb. 27. 21. Diodate Annotat. on Exod. 28. 15, 30. Numb. 27. 21. 1 Sam 23. 6, 28, 6. the Annotations of our English Divines on Exod. 28. 15. 30. 1 Sam. 23. 6. 
* Petr Mart loc. commun Class. 1. cap. 7. Hic ut inquit Chambi mos erat interrogandi Deum. Qui volebat de publico, vel alioqui de gravi negotio percontari, veniebat ad sacerdotem: Is indutus Ephod, stabat coram arca Domini. In Ephoa sine in pectorali, erant inclusi duo decim lapides pretiosi, in quib us nomina duodecim tribuum erant inscripta. Interrogantem oportuit faciem ob vertere ad sacerdotem & interrogare non quidem tam aperte ut vox audiretur, nec ita etiam obscure, ut tantum in anima cogitaret, quae petebat. Deinde sacerdoti hoc pacto reddebatur oraculum. Spiritus sanctivi literae quaedam in pectorali eminebant idque vel loco vel fulgore, in quibus sacerdos oraculum & voluntatem Dei legebat. Haec Chimb● Cui quantum fidei fit tribuendum nescio. Potuit enim fieri ut spiritus Dei absque literis oracula ediderit per vocem summi sacerdotis, cujus animum vaticinio afflasse●. Weems Christian Synagogue Prolegomena cap. 4. The Revelation by Vrim and Thummim is not expressly set down: josephus thinks when they were to go to battle, the Priest putting his Ephod upon him, if they were to march, than the stones did shine, but if the stones did not shine, than they were to stay: but this seems not to have been a sufficient way to have directed them in other cases. Wherefore 'tis most probable that the Priest having these stones upon his breast, that the Lord inspired him by his Spirit what answer to make to every question asked him.  Peter Martyrs common places and Weems Christian Synagogue) but never was the judgement of Vrim by a judge and Magistrate who was a Person distinct from the Priest: Now 'tis evident Deut. 17. 9 12. that the Priest and the judge are 
* Junius in Deut. 17 9, 12. Conjunctionem disjuctivam esse apparet ex verse 12. ut reipsa munera esse disparata constat ad quae haec officiorum nomina respiciunt. Mr. Gillespies Aaron's rod blossoming c. 3. 11. Here are two Judicatories distinguished by the disjunctive Or v. 12. which we have both in the Hebrew, Chaldee, Greek, and in our English translation.  distinct and divers persons there, and the man that will not hearken unto the judge, even that man shall die, as well as he that will not hearken unto the Priest, which fully shows that what Hagiomastix writes page 46. 47. and 130. of death inflicted only upon such who would not hearken to the Priest enquiring by Vrim, to be an untruth. Secondly the sense and meaning of this place from vers. 
* Vide Mr. Gil lesp. Aaronsrod blossoming, Book 3. c. 11, 12. showing fully in this Scripture a transmitting difficult cases from inferior courts to those at jerusalem, and to the supreme court there. Vid Luther & Piscat. in locu●. In judiciis conveniens ordo observandus est, ut sc. judices inferiores quum iis oblata est causa difficil●c ex qua expedire se non possunt causam illam deserant ad judices superiorestanquam juris peritiores.  3. to the 13. is that inferior Courts and Assemblies in cases too hard and difficult for them, are commanded to go higher to some superior Court and Assembly, as those words clearly show, thou shalt arise, and get thee up into the place which the Lord thy God shall choose. This place afterwards was Jerusalem as 'tis said Psal. 122. 5. there were set thrones of judgement, and in jerusalem did jehoshaphat set of the Levites and of the Priests, and the chief of the Fathers of Israel, for the judgement of the Lord and for Controversies, 2 Chron. 19 8. 9 10. Ainsworth upon the place writes, that by the judge that shall be in those days, is understood the high Council and Senate of judges which were of the chief of the Fathers of Israel, as they who are called Priests verse 9 are called verse 12. Priest, so many judges are called judge; only as among the Priests one was chief, so among the judges one was Prince. 2 Chron. 19 11. The Hebrew records say, when any doubt a●ose in any case to any one of Israel, he asked of the judgement H●ll that was in his City; if they knew they told it him: if not, than he that enquired, together with the Synedrion or with the messengers thereof went up to Jerusalem, and inquired of the Synedrion that was in the Mountain of the Temple; if they knew they told it them; if not, than they all come to the Synedrion that was at the door of the Court yard of the Temple: if the● knew they told it them; and if not, they all came to the chamber of hewn stone to the great Synedrion and enquired; 
* Nicol. lyra in Deut. 17. 8, 9, 10. Surge & ascend i e. in his casibus & consimilibus recurrendum est ad superiores judices s●. ad summum sacerdetem & Judicem populi.  and Interpreters generally understand these verses of judicatures and Courts in Israel, and of the lower Courts going to the highest the great and high Synedrion: Now I find no command no● example recorded in Scripture of any of the jewish Courts Ecclesiast. or Civil enquiring by Vrim of moral transgressions of what sort they were, and what punishments the Committers of such sins should have, but still they determined according to the Law and judgements. Ezek. 44. 24. I never read of the high Synedrion either in Scripture or any other writers of it, that they were wont to give their Answer by Vrim and Thummim. If we observe those instances in Scripture of enquiring by Vrim, we shall see they are inquiries made of particular persons, by the Priest, not by a Court, and of the high Priest not as sitting in Court, nor as always at jerusalem, nor of Criminal cases, but of going in and out to war and such like, and whoever doth but consult with the Annotations of Ainsworth, Diodate, and Luther English Divines, the Commentaries of Lyra, Piscator, and others on this place, will confess 'tis quite another thing is here spoken of then the judgement of Vrim. 3. Amesius in his Cases of Conscience in his Answer to that question, whether that Law, Deut. 17. 12. of putting him to death who would not hearken to the judge and the Priest was just, resolves it was, and faith the equity of that Law will easily appear; and among other reasons gives this because that 
* Cas. Conscience. lib. 4. cap. 4. pag. 122. Si igitur haeretici sint maniesti, & publice noxii, debent a Magistrrtu publica potestate coerceri. Si vero ●tiam manifestè blasphemi sunt & in illis blasphemiis pertinaces praefracti, possint etiam affici supplicio capitali.  place speaks of disobedience in those things which out of the Law of God are clearly and manifestly determined. verse 11. so that we see Ames judgement in the resolution of that case, is, that the Answer of the judge, or Priest was made out of the Law of God, and not by Vrim, and it seems that learned men never dreamt of any such thing in this Deut. 17. for among all his reasons he mentions no such thing; and certainly if that were the meaning of the place which Hagiomastix puts upon it, that had been such a strong reason for the equity of putting those to death who would not hearken to the Priest, giving them council immediately and infallibly from God as that Dr. Ames could not have omitted it: For if Mr. Goodwin who is so kind and charitable to all Atheists, Antiscripturists, Blasphemers, Idolaters, &c in his Queries upon the printed Paper entitled an Ordinance against Heresies, and his Hagiomastix, as that he would have no coercive power made use of against them, doth yet grant there was an equity in that Law, that sentence of death should pass on such that would not hearken to the Priest speaking immediately and infallibly from God, and 
* De in obedientia in illis rebus quae ex lege Dei manifesto & clare determinantur.  saith that for his part if the Inquisitors now can give any satisfying account of any sentence awarded against Blasphemers, Heretics that comes by infallible Revelation from God, he shall think it equal and meet that he that shall do presumptuously and not hearken unto it should be put to death, than 
* Hagiomastix page 130.  Dr. Ames who was fully for the Magistrates coercive power in matters of Religion, and for putting Blasphemous Heretics to death, could not have forgotten this reason. Fourthly, on Deut. 17. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. is founded by the judgement of many great Divines, that which is called the Council, the great Sanhedrin at Jerusalem, the Seventy: Spanhemius in his third part 
* Ad hoc tribunal referebantur quaecunque non poterant definiri ab aliis vel ambigua erant, & varia judicia inferiorum judicum experiebantur ex praescripto legis Deut. 17. 8, 9  Dubiorum Evangelicorum page 800. 801. shows, that by the command of the Law this very place Deut. 17. 8, 9 to this supreme Tribunal of the Synedrion were referred all things whatsoever that could not be determined of the inferior Courts, or were doubtful, and had tried the several judgements of the inferior judges. Gersom Bucerus in his Dissertat. de Gubernat. Ecclesiae page 62. quotes this Deut. 17. 8. 9 for the general Convention at jerusalem to which the hardest things were brought, which could not be determined in the lower judicatories. Walaeus in his Tractate de Discrimine muneris politici & Ecclesiastici brings this place to prove the Synedrion or College at jerusalem, that if among the judges or Priests in the lesser Cities and Towns there fell out some things of greater moment; or if any one would not rest in their sentence, the cause was devolved to higher judges, who after David's time had their Synedrion at jerusalem as the chief Metropolis of Iud●●. Mr: Gillespie in his Aaron's rod blossoming 1. Book 3. chapt. write● thus. 'tis agreed upon both by jewish and Christian Expositors, that this place holds forth a supreme civil Court of judges, and the Authority of the civil Sanhedrim is mainly grounded on this very text. And as the high civil Synedria is founded here, so many Divines show a supreme Ecclesiast. Sanhedrim, distinct from the Civil, is held forth in this very place, to which the People of God were bound as to the supreme Ecclesiastical Court to bring all the difficult Ecclesiastical causes, which could not be determined in the lower Assemblies, in which Court they were determined without any other appeal, of which the Reader may find more in Walaeus, Gerson Bucerus, Apollonii, jus Magistratus circa sacra, first part, page 374. and second part second chapter, page 48. and above all others in Mr. Gillespie his Aaron's Rod blossoming Book 1. chapt. 3. who at large handles this point, that the jews had an Ecclesiastical Sanhedrin distinct from the Civil, and among other grounds from this of Deut. 17. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. But none of these learned men not any (but Papists) that ever I met with, give the least hint of any judgement by Vrim to be meant in this place, neither do I find in all the Authors that I have read concerning the way of passing sentence in the highest Synedrion at Jerusalem, and determining the difficulties about the Law brought to them, whether the Ecclesiastical of which the high Priest was precedent, or the Civil, that ever for the satisfaction of the parties, and giving the true sense of the Law thus controverted, and so putting an end to all controversies, they were wont in that Court to inquire by Vrim; nay there are several things written in the Scriptures, and by learned men who write of the customs of the jews and proceedings in that Court, which show the contrary, as those words imply as much Deut. 17. the Priest and the judge that shall be in those days: from whence the Hebrews gather, that if the high Synedrion had judged and determined of a matter, as seemed right in their eyes, and after them another Synedrion rose up, which upon reasons seeming good unto them, disannulled the former sentence, than it was disannulled, and judgement passed according as it seemed good unto these latter; thou art not bound to walk save after the Synedrion, 
Ainsworth Annot. on the place.  that are in thy generation. Now if it were a sentence by Vrim immediate and infallible from God, no following Synedrion might have disannulled it. So those words according to the sentence which they shall teach thee, shows the sentence was to be according to the Law, the word written, and not by a voice from heaven; as also that instance of jerem. being condemned to die by the supreme Court at jerusal. the Court of the Priests doing their part judging him a false Prophet and worthy to die, the Court of the Princes acquitting him as a true Prophet, of which see more in Aaron's Rod blossom. p. 18. 19 both of them going upon Scripture Grounds, as I have shown, p. 99 but in this great Controversy, never appealing to the judgement of Vrim; and so in their way of trying false Prophets, they went not by the Priests putting on the Ephod to inquire of the Lord, but therein, all (say the jews) was this If he had threatened a judgement to come, although it came not, yet he was not a false Prophet for that: God (say they) is gracious, as he was to the Ninivites, and to Hezekiah. But if he promised a good thing, and it came not to pass, 
Weems Christian Synagogue pag. 171.  than he was a liar. For every good thing which God promiseth, he performeth, so jeremiah tried Ananias to be a false Prophet, because he promised a good thing to Zedekiah, and it came not to pass.  
Fifthly, the current of the Scripture both in the Law and Prophets still speaks of going to the Law and according to that, making that the last resolution of Practice and Controversies in all moral things, both of duties and sins, and that for private and public persons, Esaiah 8. 20. To the Law, and to the Testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them, Deut. 30. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. the jews must hearken to the commandment written in the Book of the Law, 'tis not hidden neither is it far of, 'tis not dark that it cannot be attained to, It is not in heaven, that it should be said, who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it and do it? But the word is very nigh, &c Deut. 17. 18. v. the Law of God is to be for the direction of the King and of the Priests, and Levites. The Book of the Law of the Lord given by Moses 2 Cron. 34. 15, 19, 30, 31. compared with 2 King's chapter 22. 8, 11. v. chapter 23. 2, 3. was that by which Josiah made his Reformation both in the removing of persons and things, not once enquiring by Vrim whether he should slay Idolatrous Priests, put down others, keep such a solemn passover, &c and 'tis observable that the King commanded Hilkiah the high Priest and Shaphan the Scribe, &c to go and inquire of the Lord for him and for the People concerning the words of this Book, what 
* Vide Diodate & English Divives Annotations on the place.  judgement hanged over their heads and when it was like to fall, and whether there were any means, or whether it was not too late to appease his wrath, and accordingly they went unto Huldah the Prophetess, yet he commanded not Hilkiah to inquire by Vrim, neither did Hilkiah the high Priest put on the Ephod, but went to the Prophetess; which is to me a great argument, that the judgement of Vrim was only in some particular set cases, as going in and out to war, and such like, but not for inquiry in cases of the Law, what Reformation to be made, or what transgressions of the Law to be punished by death. As for those other two places Deut. 19 17, 18. 21, and 5. I shall not spend many lines in clearing them, as being not brought to prove the glorious Ordinance of the Oracle, lest I should be charged by Hagiomastix to show my valour in fight with men of clouts of my own setting up; For the first, 'tis understood of a single witness accusing one for seducing to Apostasy and revolt, so Junius reads it ad testificandum in ●um Apostasiam, and Ainsworth to testify revolt against him, not civil wrong, as the English translation seems to carry it, and the meaning is this 
* Junius in locum. Et si in omnibus aliis causis ad minimum duo testes ex lege requiruntur: tamen in religionis negotio unus testis ad Questionem habendam sufficit. adeo vult Deus Magistratibus conservationem doctrinae commendatam esse. Est autem appendix legis quae habetur supr. 17.  although in all other causes two witnesses atleast are required by the Law, yet in the business of religion one witness is sufficient to make a question of the party; by which God shows be would have the preservation of Doctrine commended to the Magistrate, for this is an appendix of that Law which is spoken of Deut. 17. 2. So junius, Diodate also on the place writes thus, in case of a secret Seducement from God's true service; he that had been solicited, though he were alone, aught to detect the Seducer. Deut. 13. 6. 8. and the Judges ought to proceed therein, as upon an advice and denunciation; not as upon a formal accusation which had required two witnesses. And if the calumny was made to appear unto them they were to observe this Law, if it were truth, that of Deut. 13. 9 So then this place holds forth no more than what Deut. 17. 8, 9 does, which hath nothing to do with the judgement of V●im, as I have already shown at large; and yet if this place had any thing in it more for enquiring by Vrim then the former, it could do Hagiomastix no good, nor is to the point at all brought by him, because this enquiring by Vrim is not to know from the Lord what kind of Idolatry and Idolater this is, whether that for which death is to be inflicted, but whether this be a false or a true witness, as the words clearly show; the question is not about matter of Law, whether such a thing be Idolatry, or not, what kind of Idolatry, but of matter of fact, whether the party did commit such a thing or no, of which he is accused. And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and behold if the witness be a false witness and testifieth falsely against his brother: then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done to his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from amongst you. As for that place Deut. 21. 5. the coherence and scope of the place shows it cannot be meant of the judgement by Vrim, but those verses from the second to the tenth, contain a direction from God, of what course is to be taken for the expiation of an unknown murder, and among other things that are to be done for the putting away the guilt of innocent blood from the Land, as the Elders and Judges must do according to the verse 2. 3, 4. so the * fifth verse shows what the Priests are to do for the freeing the people of Israel from innocent blood being laid to their charge, namely in the audience of the people to pray for atonement and expiation, that prayer in verse 8. The Elders were to wash their hands and say; Our hands have not shed this blood, and the Priests said, Be merciful O Lord, and lay not innocent blood unto thy People Israel's charge, and if any thing else were to be decided about that business, by the words of the Priests, as expounders of God's Law, it should be determined; not that they had any absolute or arbitrary power of themselves, but by their word, meaning the word of God which they should show, as Deut. 17. 11. The subject matter of this Scripture, is not to inquire of the Priests whether this were a casual or a wilful Murder, and for them to tell who were the murderers that had slain this man (the resolution of which questions by the Priests might indeed imply some colour for the Priests by enquiring by Vrim) these things are not once named, but all the matter is, what's to be done to expiate the blood of a man slain in the Land, it being not known who hath slain him; that's supposed, and is the case upon which all the direction both for Elders, Priests and People is built. Lastly as to those examples in Levit, 24. 11, 12, 13. and that of Numb. 15. 33, 34, 35, of the Blasphemer and Sabbath-breaker put into ward that Moses might receive an Answer immediately from God what to do with them, & accordingly the Lord spoke unto Moses that they should be stoned, I answer, First, the 
* Theodoret Quaest. in Levit. Quaest. 33. Deprthensus est quidam qui Deum omnium blasphemaverat. nondum autem Lex erat scripta De Blaspemia propterea legislator hanc legem servari jussit.  Law concerning blasphemy was not yet given publicly to the Jews, the mind of God declared what should be done to them that blasphemed the name of the Lord, & therefore no wonder the Blasphemer was put in ward, that the Lord might be consulted with, what kind of punishment should be inflicted upon him; by the light of nature and the Law of the Decalogue, the people of the Jews knew he was to be punished for it, though the particular kind and form was not yet made known by God; and therefore bring him to the supreme Magistrate Moses, and make him fast, till the mind of God for the particular kind of punishment should be made known, upon which 
* Vide Nicol. Lyram, Babingt. in locum, Leu. 24. 15, 16.  occasion God doth not only declare what shall be done to that particular man, but gives them a Law concerning all Blasphemers in the 16. verse, taking an occasion from this as he did from other transgressions committed, and his people's ill manners, to publish judicial laws, the appendices of the moral Law in matters of justice and judgement: But though God was immediately consulted with before there was a law (for that is the case here) of which there was all the reason in the world, how doth it follow that after an express Law is given, and ordinary means and ways apppointed by God, for the full knowing and executing of that Law, now Persons must immediately upon all occasions have immediate Answers from God whether and how they may punish upon that Law? and indeed to what end were express laws written & made known, and knowing able men in those laws deputed by God to judge according to them, if immediate and infallible Answers were to be sought from God upon all occasions, and persons not to be judged by those Laws? And for the Sabbath Breaker in Numb. 15, however the 
* Vid. Lyram in Num. 15. Nesciebant tamen qua morte dehebat mori, quoniam modus mortis non fuit determinatus Exod. 13. 14. Ergo recluserunt eum quo usque scirent hoc per revelationem Domini.  Law had said the Breaker of the Sabbath should die Exod. 31. 14. yet it was not declared by what kind of death he should die, as Ainsworth, Diodate, and our English Divines in their Annotations upon the place observe, saying, though there were a Law to put to death a Sabbath breaker, yet it was not declared what manner of death he should die; and of that the question being proposed, the Answer is made by declaring the kind of death he must suffer which is set down in the next ver. Solo. Jarchi saith it was not declared what manner of death the Sabbath Breaker should die; but they knew he that profaned the Sabbath was to die: Now the Israelites were to receive directions from God, as well for the manner and kind of their Laws and punishments as for the punishments themselves, and some of them being not declared, no wonder that Moses stayed till he enquired of God; but what's all this to make good Hagiomastix● assertion that because Moses who was to receive Laws from God both for matter and form for that people, did wait upon God by special immediate enquiring in cases of some transgressions that accordingly all things might be done, therefore after God had given all Laws both for matter and form in cases of Idolatry, Blasphemy, prophesying falsely, as in Deut. 13. Deut. 17. 2. Levit. 24. 16. the Judges and Magistrates following must do so too.  
Secondly, in both these instances alleged, the men were put into ward, not to inquire of God, concerning their sins committed whether they were Blasphemy, and Sabbath-breaking, there was no question in that kind, both the people and Moses were satisfied in that, as appears by the stories and by putting them in ward, but only in what manner they should be proceeded against, God not having before declared his mind particularly in those cases, so that these instances help Hagiomastix nothing at all, as not speaking to the matter in hand: For whereas Hagiomastix makes this ground of the jews putting to death Blasphemers, Idolaters, their enquiring and Gods declaring by Vrim what kind of Blasphemer, and so what kind of Idolater particularly it was, that be by his Law intended should be put to death, Moses and the people neither inquired any such thing, what kind of Blasphemy it was, nor did God speak to Moses in that kind; but, bring forth him that hath cursed in the camp, and let all that heard him lay their hands on his head, and let all the Congregation stone him.  
Thirdly, the declaration of the mind of the Lord in these two examples, was no Answer by Vrim; for besides that there is no mention in the text of the high Priest being spoken to put on the Ephod to inquire by Vrim, neither do any Interpreters, understand it so, both the texts are against it in those words, And the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, bring forth him that hath cursed; And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall surely be put to death, the declaration of God's mind being to Moses immediately; whereas in the judgement of Vrim, it was to the Priest immediately, so that these Answers of God were the Answers of a Lawgiver, giving Laws and Penalties by the hand of Moses, but not any new Interpretations and declarations of the meaning of the Law upon controversies and doubts arising; and besides God's way of answering Moses, and answering by Vrim were different things, as the Rabbins and other learned men who write of those things show, Gods answering Moses and giving him Laws and Commandments being by voice, but answering by Vrim being in an other way by beholding the Breastplate, and seeing therein by the Vision or Inspiration, as these Scriptures Exod. 25. 22. Numb. 7. 89. Exod. 28. 30. with Ainsworths' Annotations express. As for the immediateness of these Answers from God to Moses, though not by the judgement of Vrim, there were special reasons thereof, God in an immediate way, communicating to Moses all his Laws moral and judicial Exod. 25. 22. and Moses being such a Prophet whom the Lord knew face to face, and such an extraordinary man in several respects as there was none like unto him. Numb. 12. 6, 7, 8. Exod. 33. 11. Deut. 34. 10, 11. But for the Magistrates and judges that came after Moses, to whom the moral Law and the Appendix of it the judicial Law was given and delivered, they were to proceed according to the written Law, and there were in hard matters higher Courts, consisting of a greater number & more able to go to to determine what the lower could not; & then the highest of all the Synedrion at Jerusalem who were in all their judgements above moral transgressions, to go according to the Law of Moses, as many Scriptures testify Deut. 17. 11. &c But no such Grounds after the whole Law, moral, ceremonial and judicial, was published, of immediateness of Answers from God to any of their Courts, no not to the high Synedrion as to Moses who was to receive all for the first constituting of their policy, according unto which all Courts and judicatures higher and lower were bound to go.  
Fourthly, In these great and weighty cases of the Blasphemer and Sabbath-Breaker, Moses did not presently pass sentence, but made delays, put them in Prison, till he knew the mind of the Lord, and as for other reasons before alleged, so for these following, 1 to teach judges in matters of great weight of life and death not to be too sudden and hasty, 2 in causes that are very hard to ask council and to use all means to be well satisfied before they do any thing. In Ainsworths' Annotations upon Numb. 15. 34. the Reader may find the Chaldee paraphrazing thus; This judgement was one of the four judgements that came before Moses the Prophet, which he judged according to the word of God: Some of them were judgements of lesser moment and some of them judgements of life and death. In the judgements of lesser moment (of pecuniary matters) Moses was ready; but in judgements of life and death be made delays. And both in the one and in the other, Moses said, I have not heard, [viz what God would have done] For to teach the Heads (or chief) of the Syn●drions (or Assizes) that should rise up after him, that they should be ready to dispatch inferior causes (or money matters) but not hasty in matters of life and death. And that they should not be ashamed to inquire, in causes that are too hard for them; seeing Moses who was the Master of Israel, had need to say I have not heard, Therefore he imprisoned him, because as yet it was not declared what sentence should pass upon him. Babington in his comfort: Notes on Levit. 24. writes, Moses although such a man, yet will do nothing hastily in judgement, and especially touching life, but he will be advised by God, who then spoke from betwixt the Cherubims Exod. 25. and Numb. 7. But it follows not because judges and Courts of justice were to learn to be cautious and careful in matters of religion for what they punish especially with death, that therefore they may punish no violations in religion, though expressly and directly against the word of God, unless God do immediately from heaven declare them Blasphemies, &c, and such kind of Blasphemies, which the Law intends death to: And for a conclusion of my Answer to this Evasion of Master Goodwin of the judgement by Vrim in the cases of Blasphemy, Idolatry, Prophesying falsely, the clear reason why then they were punished with death but may not be so now that being ceased under the new Testament: I shall say no more but this, I challenge him among all the examples recorded in Scripture of punishing men with death, imprisonment or banishment, &c for Blasphemy, Idolatry, Prophesying falsely, profaning of the Sabbath, marrying Idolatrous wives and other transgressions of God's worship, to produce any one Instance that by the judges, or by the high Sanhedrin God was enquired by Vrim, whether such and such facts were Blasphemy, Idolatry, &c, and of that kind and nature intended by the Law as punishable with death, or among all Classical Authors, Rabbins and others who have written of the customs of the jews, of Vrim and Thummim, of the Sanhedrin at jerusalem, to cite me out of them any passages that affirm the judges, or the high Council of seventy at jerusalem, or the high Priest for them were wont in cases of Apostasy, Blasphemy, etc. to inquire by Vrim, and to pass sentence upon persons according to that Answer, 
☜  and not according to the law; which if he cannot do as I am confident upon serious search, he cannot, than the Reader may easily see what poor shifts this great Champion of the Sectaries is put unto, to uphold his damned cursed cause of Toleration of all Religions, and to elude the commands of God forenamed for punishing Blasphemers, Apostates, Idolaters and false Prophets.  
Now among all who have written of the high Priest, and of Deut. 17. 11, 12. I find only some Papists going Hagiomastixes way, as Tostatus, Lorinus, who from all places of Scripture of the high Priest drawing matter to the Pope for establishing his Authority, do from this place also that they may establish his Authority above the Scriptures, and appeals to him in cases of Controversy as the sole infallible Judge, speak of the high Priest in matters of moral transgressions giving Answers by Vrim, and not by the sentence of the Law. So Lorinus upon the 11. verse according to the sentence of the Law which they shall teach thee, saith, that by the name of the Law in this place is neither necessarily understood the Mosaical Law, nor the holy Scripture, but the sentence itself of the Judge as the pronouns insinuates: the Heretics would have it to be a conditional command of hear●●ning to the Priests according to the Law, that they might take away the Authority of Traditions, and appeal to the Scripture alone. 
* Lutherus in Deu. 17. 8, 9, 10 11. Et h●nc locum miro conatu Papistae ad suum Idolū●raxerunt, ut Papatum statu●rent.  Luther long since writing upon this place observed as much of the Papists, And the Papists with a great deal of endeavour have drawn this place to their Idol, that they might set up the Papacy: So that by this it seems the Papists and Sectaries are agreed upon the same Mediums to set up the Pope, and his Infallibility, and a Toleration and Dispensation to believe and profess whatsoever men please.  
Thirdly, this clear reason of Master Goodwin in his 36. Section of Hagiomastix against the old Testament Law being now in force for putting of false Prophets, Blasphemers and Seducers to Idolatris to death, upon which he vapours and triumphs so exceedingly over the 
* One of the Members of the Assembly was the sole Author of the Vindication of the printed paper, entitled An Ordinance for the preventing of the growth of Heresies, and not 3. or 4. which worthy Member could he get any time from his often preaching and constant attendance on the Assembly, would (I doubt not) make Hagiomastix not only a stripling, but a very child.  Anti Quaerists, certain striplings of the Assembly (as he by way of scorn terms them) is so far from fight against the Magistrates punishing (even by virtue of that old law) for matters of Religion, where he is sure and certain the things he punishes for, are Apostasies, Idolatries, Heresies, Blasphemies and that he is not mistaken, as that in all such cases of certainty and infallibility, it establishes the Magistrates coercive power in matters of the first Table, and is indeed a strong reason for it: For if that were the formal cause and reason why Magistrates might then punish Idolatry, false Prophesying, etc. because they might infallibly know, such a thing was Idolatry, etc. and so be out of danger of fight against God, than what things may be as certainly known under the Gospel to be Idolatry, false Prophesying, Apostasy, &c, the Magistrate may as well restrain: I shall not need to prove the consequence, because, besides its own evidence that it necessarily follows, Master Goodwin in express terms grant and confesses page 130. that for his part he shall think it equal and meet, he that shall do presumptuously, and not hearken unto what is by infallible Revelation from God should be put to death, and the only ground brought by him in this 36. Section of denying this power to Magistrates now, is their uncertainty in matters of Religion, the best Oracles that Magistrates and judges have to direct them in doubtful cases about matters of Religion being men of very fallible judgements, and every way obnoxious unto error and mistake, and therefore to go about to prove that the old Law is now in force, because it was once given to the jews, is as if one should prove that a man may safely and without danger walk among bogs and praecipices at midnight, because he may well do it at noon day. So that by Hagiomastixes own confession, what's certainly and infallibly known to be Error, Idolatry, Blasphemy, Heresy, may and aught to be punished by the Magistrate under the new Testament, which is indeed a yielding the question that Magistrates may punish under the Gospel in matters of Religion, for that's not the question what is truth and what is Error, what is Heresy, and what is Idolatry, and whether any thing can be known certainly under the Gospel to be truth or no? and how the Magistrates come to know it, and who shall tell them which is truth, that is quite another question, but the question in hand about Toleration and the Magistrates coercive Power in points of Religion, is, supposing and granting there are many things certain in Religion, which he certainly knows and believes, whether then the Magistrate may punish? which upon this very question, whether Princes have full Power to command for truth, was well observed 
* bilson's true difference between Christian subjection and unchristian Rebellion part 2. p. 277.  by Bishop Bilson long since in his answer to a Jesuit, making this objection, Yea, But who shall tell Magistrates which is truth? That is not this question: When we reason whether Princes may command for truth, and punish error, you must not cavil about the means to know truth from error, but suppose that truth were confessed and agreed on, and in that case what may Princes do for truth. If I should ask you whether Princes may revenge Murders and punish thefts, were this an Answer to say, but how shall they know what Murder is, and who be thiefs? No more when we demand what duty Princes owe to God and his truth, should you stand quarrelling what truth is or how truth may be known? The Prince's duty to God is one question which we now handle; the way to discern truth from error is another, which anon shall ensue when once this is ended; But first let us have your direct Answer whether Princes may command for truth or no? And then the jesuit answering, for truth they may: but if they take quid pro quo they both hazard themselves and their whole realms, Bilson replies, you slide to the second question again before the first be finished, stay for that till this be tried. Now then to bring this point to ahead and issue, Hagiomastixs clear reason grants that in cases about matters of Religion sure and certain, the Magistrate may punish in the times of the Gospel, which directly overthrows that universal Toleration so much pleaded for in divers of his Books: so that Master Goodwin by his own clear reason is forced upon this Dilemma, either to hold no points in matters of Religion and Doctrine of faith can be certainly and infallibly known under the Gospel, 
☜  or if they can, than the violations of such may by the Magistrate be lawfully censured. And here in this matter I do appeal from Master goodwin's wanton wit, great applause among his Seduced Members, and from all others his engagements to the Sectarian party, to his conscience (if so be in this point of pretended liberty of conscience, he hath any conscience at all left) to resolve me this question, whether Christian Magistrates under the Gospel may not by the Scriptures and other means that God hath given and appointed in his Church infallibly and certainly know that there is a God, that this God is but one, that the Scriptures are the word and mind of this God, that this God is holy, just, good, wise, eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, merciful, perfect, that this one God though but one in essence, is three in persons the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, that the Son was manifested in the flesh became man, that he died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he rose again from the dead, ascended into heaven, sitteth at the right hand of God, shall come to judge the world, that there is a Hell and eternal Death for all wicked impenitent persons, and a Heaven, and eternal life for the Elect and true believers, that for a Christian to worship and serve the Sun, Moon, and stars, or fourfooted Beasts and creeping things is Apostasy and Idolatry, that to revile, scoff at and speak reproachfully of God is to blaspheme God, that for a man to say God revealed to him the day of judgement should be on such a day, or such and such things should come to pass at such a time, when the contrary is manifested to all, be not to prophesy falsely, and so I might instance in many more: Unto which question, if Master Goodwin answers affirmatively that Magistrates may in these and some other points of Religion infalliblity and certainly know the truth, than the universal Toleration pleaded for by him in M. S. Some modest and humble Queries concerning a printed Paper entitled an ordinance for the preventing of the growing and, spreading of Heresies, &c Hagiomastix, Appendix 〈◊〉 Hagiomastix and other his Pamphlets falls to the ground, and the Ordinance presented to the Honourable House of Commons for preventing Heresies and Blasphemies, may take place, and the Inflicters of heavy censures upon such who broach Doctrines contrary to these, viz. that there is a God, that he is perfectly holy, ●ternal, that he is one in three persons, &c may infallibly know such Opinions are not the sacred Truths of God and the c●eer reason of Hagiomastix in this 36. Section against the old Testament Law for putting false Prophets, &c to death now, is of no force at all; for in these Principles of religion named, and divers others, as the resurrection of the dead, that Christ is God, that Christ according to his humane nature was borne without sin, &c Christian Magistrates walk no more at midnight, but at noon day, than the jewish Magistrates in cases of Blasphemy, Apostasy, Idolatry, Prophesying falsely, etc. are as certain and sure as they who received Answers under the old Law in matters of Religion of Idolatry, Blasphemy (supposing there had been any such) from the Priests by the judgement of Vrim; But now if Master Goodwin dare answer negatively, that there is no infallible certain knowledge in any point of Religion under the new Testament, no man infallibly and certainly knows that there is a God, or that this God is holy, perfect, eternal, that there is a jesus Christ who died for our sins and rose again from the dead, that there is a resurrection of men's bodies, and a day of judgement, &c, 'tis all opinion and probability, the 
* Master goodwin's Modest & humble Queres about the Ordinance, Quere 2.  contrary may be the Sacred Truths of God, and therefore there may be no punishing by death or other bodily punishment for holding any Doctrines or Opinions in Religion, suppose contrary to admonition, which for aught the said inflicters know, except they make themselves infallible, may be the sacred Truths of God, I say, and am ready to prove it against him, that he overthrows the Scriptures, all Christian Religion, all Faith, yea all the comfort and salvation of Christians, he is a Sceptic, an Antiscripturist, a Neutral in Religion and an Atheist: He justifies the worst of the Papists in all they have written against the Scriptures, calling it a nose of wax, a dumb judge, inky Divinity, etc. for to hold nothing can be known certainly and infallibly by the Scriptures, is to make them a nose of wax, an imperfect weak rule, a doubtful Oracle, like that of Apollo's; For if the Trumpet give an uncertain Sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? so likewise, except the Spirit of God have by the holy penmen uttered words that may be understood, how shall it be known what is written? for this would make the Scriptures be as a speaking into the air; but as concerning that point of the Church under the new Testament knowing infallibly and certainly the Christian Religion, and matters necessary to salvation both in faith and worship, as the Church under the old by Vrim, I shall speak fully to it in the seventh answer to this Reason; only for a conclusion of this third Answer, I add, I much wonder seeing under the new Testament according to Hagiomastix Doctrine, no Magistrates nor Synods can be certain in doubtful cases about matters of Religion, but the best Oracles Magistrates have to consult with, are every way obnoxious unto error and mistake, and that the wisest and most learned of them are not able clearly or demonstratively to inform the Magistrate what blasphemy, or what idolatry it was which was by God sentenced to death under the Law (though by the way I must check Master goodwin's confidence, for I who am the least of all the Ministers of Christ and not to be named with the wisest and most learned of them, am able clearly and demonstratively out of Deut. 17. 2. 3. 4. 5. to inform the Magistrate and Master Goodwin too, if he will be informed, what Idolatry it was which was by God sentenced to death under the Law, viz for a jew to go serve and worship the Sun or Moon) how Master Goodwin and divers Members of his Church come to be in many controverted points, doubtful cases about matters of Religion, so confident and certain as they make themselves, 
☞  certain that Presbyterial Government is not Jure Divino, certain that Christian Magistrates may not exercise their coercive Power in any matters of Religion, no, not to the restraining of Blasphemy, Idolatry, Heresy, Schism, most certain that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere faith in a proper sense is imputed to justification, and not Christ's Righteousness, certain that the way of the Congregation is the truth, and so I might instance in divers other points: To be confident, as confidence itself can make a man, to be as sure as twice two makes four, to have abundant satisfaction from God for what a man holds in pregnant, strong, clear and rational demonstrations on the one hand, and distinct clear and home Answers to all objections to the contrary on the other hand, that if light be light, reason reason, sense sense, Scriptures Scriptures, than such a Doctrine is truth, that though the whole world should rise up as one man to oppose, yet that should not shake nor unsettle a man in it, is to attain to a high measure of certainty and infallibility; Now whoever hath but read with due consideration Mr. goodwin's writings cannot but take notice in them of many high strains and professed solemn 
* 
Anapologesiates Antapologias, The Preface to the Reader. But for those opinions wherein I descent from Mr. Edward's, and the generality of those whom he calls his godly Orthodox Presbyterian Ministers, I have bestowed so much labour and travel of soul several ways to satisfy myself in the truth of them, and withal have received such abundant satisfaction from God for what I hold in them, in pregnant, strong, clear and rational demonstrations on the one hand, in distinct, clear and home Answer to all objections to the contrary that ever I met withal on the other hand, that if light be light, reason reason, sense sense, Scriptures Scriptures, I suppose I shall never be unsettled or shaken in them, though the whole world should rise up as one man to oppose me. And therefore being fully persuaded, resolved, and possessed in my judgement soul and conscience that the way of the Congregation is the Truth.  
A Quere concerning the Church Covenant, pag. 1. First, confident we are (as confidence itself (an make us) that there is no commandment given to the Churches for exacting any such Covenant to those that are to be admitted into Church Fellowship with them. A Letter of Master John goodwin's scent to Master Thomas Goodwin, pag. 12, 13. Confident I am that there is a light beyond your light in these matters, and which you are very capable of if your eyes by your long slumber be not over heavy to open. I profess in the sight of God, and in as great singleness and simplicity of heart as ever n● an in this world spoke word unto you, that I do as clearly apprehend Error and mistake throughout the greatest part of your way, as I do in this conclusion that twice two makes four. The necessity of your Covenant, Prolix confession of faith, putting men to deliver their judgements in points of doubtful disputations upon and before their admission into your Churches, the power of the Keys and of Ordination of Pastors to be the right and inheritance of the whole body of the Congregation, and of every member indifferently, and promiscuously the divine institution or peremptory necessity of your Ruling Elders, the necessity of Widows as Officers in the Church, the absolute necessity of one and the same governmant or Discipline in all particulars whatsoever for all Churchès in all times and places, a full and peremptory determination of all things whatsoever appertaining to the worship of God, with divers such like positions (which are the very life, soul, and substance of your way) I am at perfect peace in my thoughts, that you will never be able to demonstrate or prove from the Scriptures to any sober minded or considering man. Master goodwin's Appendix in his Preface to the Reader, If the souls and consciences of men have any cause at all to bless me, it is because I have clothed them with strength and confidence of the royal parentage and descent of the Scriptures, and subdued their fears and jealousies of any subornation (in that kind) under their feet. (Nay did I not verily believe the Scriptures to be the word of God, I would not for their sakes expose myself as now I do: But that belief I speak of, which hath reigned in me, and over me hitherto, and hath blessed me with such an abundance of peace of comfort in sufferings for it will not, etc. An Apologetical Account of some Brethren of the Church whereof Master Goodwin is Pastor, pag. 5. 6. The Doctrines of the Father and of the Son, the involving whereof in the clouds of uncertainty, the said Vindication most falsely and maliciously charges upon him, hath he brought into so clear and open view, that we have seen the peace and everlasting salvation of our souls in them. Every one of those fundan entail Principe● of Christian Religion, which this gangrened pen would persuade the world he denies or doubts of, hath he not only asserted in our hearing again and again, but proved them with such evidence and demonstration of the spirit, that our consciences were forced to fall flat before them, and to confess that of a truth God was in them.   Declarations of his absolute certainty, and full demonstrative knowledge of many Points of Religion, yea of some more doubtful controverted, as of Church-Governement and the way of the Congregation, and yet I suppose he hath no better Oracles to consult with, than Christian Magistrates have; There is no Priest with Vrim for him to inquire by, unless the Sectaries have set him up as their Oracle to consult with in stead of the Scriptures; and I think he will not yet plead Revelations and visions for fear of his fate, who said it was revealed to him the day of judgement should be on such a day in April last, now long since past.  
Fourthly, upon the same clear reason and ground why the old Testament Law for punishing false Prophets &c, should not now be in force, because the jews in all difficult cases about Religion might have immediate and infallible Answers from God, it follows necessarily that all Scriptures brought out of the new Testament for Magistrates punishing in cases of Heresy, Idolatry, Blasphemy, or for Church-Officers censuring by Deposition, Excommunication in points of Error, should not bind now, and so whatever is brought out of the Scriptures for punishing Errors, and Heresies, whether by Civil Punishments or Eccle●iasticall censures shall be all evaded, for the same thing may be said, and is said against the places of the new Testament, that in the time when the Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, and Epistles were written, the Churches had Apostles and Prophets who were immediately inspired and infallible, and could in all difficult cases that happened about matters of Religion declare infallibly from God, what was Heresy and Schism, and what was not; and therefore a Heretic after the first and second admonition might be rejected, and Hymeneus and Alexander delivered unto Satan, and jezabel for seducing censured, because Christ was always at hand by Apostles or Prophets to declare unto them infallibly who were Heretics and seducers, whereas now since the Apostles and Prophets are ceased, and all extraordinary ways, the best Oracles Ministers and People have to direct them in doubtful cases about matters of Religion, are men of very fallible judgements, and every way obnoxious unto error and mistake, the best Synods and Counsels being not infallible. And so whatsoever Hagiomastix speaks of the old Law, another may say the same of the new, as to this effect; I am confident that the wisest and most learned of the Ministers are not able clearly or demonstratively to inform the Magistrate what Heresy or what Schism it was, or what kind of holding the resurrection passed already it was for which the Apostles censured Hymeneus, and commanded to reject & avoid Heretics and scismatics; and therefore to go about to prove those commands in the new Testament against false Prophets, Heretics, schismatics, Troublers of the Church, to be in our days in force, because they were given in the Apostles days and practised by them, is as if one should prove that a man may safely and without danger walk among bogs, Precipices and ditches at midnight, because he may well do it at noon day. The Socinians upon this very ground plead against Excommunication, and all Church censures in matters of Doctrine, now however in use in the Primitive Churches, and answer to the commands and examples alleged out of the new Testament after this manner, 
* Anonymi Dissertatio De pace & Concordia Ecclesi●e. pag. 91, 92. Apologia pro Socinianis. Fallunt & falluntur qui ad florentis istius aetatis exemplum nostra tempora exiguut. Non iisdem remediis nunc afflicta Ecclesiae valetudo restitui potest, quibus olim poter●● aegritudo submoveri. Cum sanam esset ac robusta Ecclesia in primo illo aetatis store & Apostolorum choro superstite etiam violentis utiremediis ob vigorem suum par erat. Nunc morbis ac senio confecta & debilis superanti jam aegritudini pene succumbit ●ec magis unquam periclitatur quam cum in crudeles medicos incidit. Vide ibi plura.  For there's much difference between Heretics now, and those Heretics in the Apostles days. For grant them who now err in matters of faith, were set before that venerable company of Apostles and their equals; suppose them to be admonished and convinced; and yet nevertheless to persist obstinately though but in a light error, who would not detest their malice? In this case a light error is turned into the nature of a great wickedness; wherefore you will say? because they dare to resist the Spirit speaking by the Apostles, and when they have no cause of doubting of the Doctrine and faith of that Council, yet they would not believe nor obey. But now although we are vehemently persuaded of the certainty of our faith, who can in such aname assure us, or certify that we cannot err? What Council can we now persuade ourselves so uncorrupt, as that of the Apostles or Primitive Church? Those who deny Excommunication of Heretics, say, bring not arguments and reasons out of the new Testament, but that power of the Spirit with which the Apostles being endowed, delivered up to Satan and killed Hypocrites with a word: If you want this Powerful efficacy of the Spirit, acknowledge your rashness and iniquity in condemning those, to whom you cannot demonstrate your Interpretation of Scripture: Neither is the Spirit now so weak, but that be is able to give Testimonies of the divine Authority, and his presence in his Ministers now against his enemies. It follows not because many things were not tolerated in the infancy of the Church in the Primitive times, therefore they ought not to be tolerated now in the old age of the Church: They deceive and are deceived who would bring our times to the example of that flourishing age. When the Church was healthful and strong in that first flower of its age, and whilst the company of the Apostles were living, the using of violent remedies in respect of the Church's vigour was meet and agreeable. Now the Church with diseases and old age being weakened and spent, it now almost falls down under its prevailing sickness: neither is it any time more in danger, then when it falls into the bands of cruel Physicians. In time past its first vigour admitted of opening of veins and loss of blood; now if after strength exhausted by so many evils there remain any vital juice and moisture, it cannot but by letting blood be poured out with the life and Spirit, and therefore this remedy of the punishment of Heretics for the Preservation of the Church ought to be omitted now, when it will bring more hurt and danger, than profit to the Church. So some of our Sectaries in a late Pamphlet, put forth upon occasion of their Indignation at the late solemn Fast of the tenth of March against Heresies, plead that the Schism spoken against in the new Testament is only of separating from those Primitive Apostolical Churches, planted immediately by the Apostles and by infallible direction, but hath no reference at all to the Churches of these times; Nay further upon this clear reason why that old Testament Law about false Prophets, &c should not now bind, all the Laws and commands written in the old Testament, yea and in the new concerning the whole will of God may be as well not in force; and men may say for any thing pressed upon them out of the Scriptures of the old or new Testament, that they concern them not, because in all difficult cases that happened about matters of Religion, in Doctrine, Worship, Government, &c, the jews to whom those commands were given, and the Churches in the Apostles days to whom the Epistles were written had the opportunity of immediate and infallible direction from God himself by the high Priest, Prophets and Apostles, who could and did in all doubts from time to time infallibly declare and resolve what was God's mind and Pleasure, what was Schism, what was Heresy, what use the Law was of, how often Christians should pray, hear God's word &c, whereas now the best Oracles Christians have to direct them about matters of Religion, are men of very fallible judgements, and every way obnoxious unto error and mistake; Yea the wisest and most learned of them are not able clearly or demonstratively to inform now what the Government of the Church was in the Apostles days, what the duties of a Minister are to the People, as how oft he must preach, &c. so that upon Hagiomastixes clear reason in his 36. Section against the old Testament Law for Magistrates punishing Blasphemers, Idolaters, &c whatsoever can be brought out of the old or new Testament in matters of duty, may be evaded, and it may be said this or that was commanded or forbidden, because than they had the high Priests, Prophets, and Apostles, who were infallible and could determine all difficulties.  
In a word if some dissimilitude that may be shown either under the old Testament or the new, in the times, or state of things there, when those Commands and Rules were given, from the times and state of things now, may be a sufficient reason of the Rules and Commands themselves being now not in force, than it will follow that all moral duties laid down both in the Law and the Gospel bind not us, because the same dissimilitude, or as great may be shown in whatsoever duty upon any Ordinance of Christ or relation among men is propounded. Upon this ground the Sacrament of Baptism shall not be perpetual not universal in the Church, because of some differences between that time when Christ instituted it, and the times now, as 
* Gerard. Joh. Vossii Theses Theolog. De necessi. Baptismi Thes. 4. contra F●ust●̄ Socinun. Praeterea etsi concederetur Christum de Baptismo de. disse praeceptum, censet illud tantùm pertinuisse ad initia, quibus exrudi populo, & ceremoniis assueto, Ecclesia Christo colligebatur: Denique eo etiam concesso, ut perpetuo debeat in Ecclesia obtinere, negat tamen universale esse: nam cum aquae Baptismus nihil aliud sit quam publican & solennis quaedam professio nominis Christi, minime hunc iis necessarium esse ait qui ex Christianis, id est Christum profitentibus, nascuntur: aut qui in Christiana fide sunt educati.  Socinus thereupon held Baptism an indifferent thing belonging only to the infancy of the Church, in which out of a rude people and accustomed to ceremonies, a Church was gathered to Christ: So neither an outward calling and Ordination of Ministers shall be perpetual, because then there were Apostles and other extraordinary men, who in ordaining them could confer the gifts of the Holy Ghost, and had the gift of discerning of spirits: So all the commands given by Paul and Peter of servants obeying their Masters, and being subject to their Masters with all fear, may be evaded, and they may say they concern not us, because the servants in those times were their slaves, bought with their money, at their dispose, but we are borne free as well as our Masters; and then those servants in any commands doubtful had Apostles or other infallible men, to go to to be resolved, which we have not, they being long since ceased, and so I might go over all examples and commands both in the old or new Testament. 
* But some commands that in regard of their manner, some degrees and adjuncts may not bind, yet in respect of their substance and the things themselves are perpetual, of which I have spoken before p. 81, 82, 83, 84. & whoever does but consider the difference between the essence of a thing and the adjunct of a thing, how the essence is one thing and the adjunct another, and how some change may be in an adjunct, when not in the essence at all, will be satisfied.   
Fifthly, This clear reason of Hagiomastix in his 36. Section and 130. page why Magistrates under the old Law might exercise coercive Power, upon false Prophets, Blasphemers, &c because in all difficult cases of Religion the jews to whom this Law was given, had the opportunity of enquiring by Vrim and Thummim, of immediate consultation with the mouth of God himself by the high Priest, seems not to be any reason upon these grounds. First, that reason is never expressed in those commands or examples for putting to death false Prophets, Blasphemers, Idolaters, etc. but other reasons are alleged, viz. from the nature of the sins, drawing away from God, the putting away of the evil, and that others may fear and do no more so, with other such like, all, reasons of a common nature to the times now as well as then. Secondly, before there was a high Priest, and holy garments made for him, particularly the breast plate of judgement, the Vrim and Thummim, Exod. 28. 15. 30. the Law was given for putting to death Idolaters, Exod. 22. 20. and in Jobs time long before the high Priest, and in a Land where the high Priest was not enquired by, Idolatry was an iniquity worthy to be punished by the judges. 3. Those who were Heathens strangers in the Land of Judea, that believed not in the God of Israel, nor understood not what the judgement of Vrim was, and the sentence thereof, yet the jewish Magistrates would not suffer such whilst stayed among them, to blaspheme God, to worship strange Gods, or to offer their children to Molech, as appears in Levit, 20. 2. and in page 49. 50. of this Treatise. Fourthly, the Magistrates exercised their coercive Power in matters of Religion, as freely after Vrim and Thummim were lost, and that judgement ceased, as they did before, which clearly shows the enquiring by Vrim under the old Law, was not the cause of those Laws concerning punishing Idolaters, and false Prophets, being in force: It is the judgement of most of the learned writers both Robbins and others, that the oraculous consultation with the Breastplate continued no longer then to the captivity of Babylon, Vrim and Thummim being lost at the captivity of Babylon, and wanting at the People's return, as these Scriptures show Ezra. 2▪ 63. Nehem. 7. 65, neither do we find that ever God gave Answer by them any more divers learned men who write of the jewish Church and State, and of the first and second Temple, of Hag gai 1. 8. Haggai 2. 9 The glory of this latter House shall be greater than of the former, show the want of five things in the second Temple which had been in the first 1. The A●ke with the mercy seat and Cherubims. Secondly, the fire from Heaven. Thirdly, the Majesty, or divine presence. Fourthly, the holy Ghost, Fifthly And the Vrim and Thummim, of which the Reader may see fully in Ainsworths' Annot. on Exod. 28. 30. Now that after the Captivity of Babylon, Princes and Magistrates used a coercive Power for offences against the first Table, is plain by those instances Ezra. 10. 7, 8. of making Proclamation that all who had taken strange wives of the People of the Land, should come unto Jerusalem for the putting them away, and such as were borne of them, and that whosoever would not come within three days according to the Council of the Princes and the Elders, all his substance should be forfeited, &c Nehem. 9 38. Nehem. 10. and 13. chapters, Nehemiab and other Rulers entering into Covenant for Reformation in the matter of the Sabbath, strange wives, maintenance for the service of the House of God, and Nehemiah commanding and contending to have matters reform in the worship and house of God, yea restraining and hindering the Profanation of the Sabba●h, and smiting some for marrying wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moah; Yea the want of a Priest standing up with Vrim and Thummim, by whom the Magistrates might inquire, was so far from hindering Magistrates in punishing about matters of Religion, that the quite contrary is expressed both in Ezra and Nehemiah. Ezra 2. 63. Nehem. 7. 65. some Priests being put from the Priesthood and forbidden by the Governor to eat of the most holy things till their stood up a Priest with Vrim and with Thummim, that is for want of 
a Vid. Jun. Annot. in Ezr. 1. 65. and Eng. Annet.  Vrim and Thummim by which God might be consulted with and his mind known herein; Zerubbabel (the Tirshatha is commonly said to be Zerubbabel) would not let the Priests that knew not their genealogies eat of the most holy things, so that some Privileges are denied for want of Vrim and Thummim, in a case of genealogy, and birth after a confusion and mixture of marriages for the space of about 70. years, being a matter of fact, of what genealogy verse 62. not a matter of Law, but no restraints of punishments upon Prophaners of the Sabbath, & those who married strange wives &c for want of Vrim and Thummim. And long after the loss of Vrim and Thummim we find Artaxerxes, Darius, the King of Niniveh and Nabuchadnezzar making Laws for punishing men in cases of Blasphemy, and other matters of the first Table, and the places of Scripture relating such Edicts and Laws, speak of them by way of approbation, as I have shown before in the 15. and 16. pages of this Treatise, whereunto I refer the Reader, and shall only add one passage out of 
* Calvin Refut. E●●orum Serveti p. 598. Hujus rei illustre nobis exemplum spiritus Dei proponit in Nebuchad. Nam ejus edictum celebrat Daniel, quo capitalem paenam denunciat siquis in Deum Israel blasphemus fuerit. Honour profecto non vulgaris crudeli tyranno habetur, quum Prophetam suum Dominus ad publicandas quaet tulit leges qua si praeconem assignat, & leges ipsas in acta sua refert, sacrisque suis oraculis annumerat. Quid? an spiritus sa●cti & Prophetae elogio laudatur Nebuchadnezer, qui veri Dei gloriam pro imperio tutandam suscepit, ut ad impiam ejus prophanationem conniv●ant sancti Magistratus? an non potius his dominus sub profani regis persona quid agere ipsos deceat praescribit? Et c●rte quid magis praeposterum quam in Ecclesiae sinu impune foveri fcelestas in Deum c●nt●elias, quae in babylon paena capitali sanitae fuerunt?  Calvin upon that Edict of Nabuchadnezzar Dan. 3. 29. For this Edict Daniel celebrates and sets forth, in which, capital punishment is denounced against any man that shall speak amiss of the God of Israel. Truly 'tis no common honour that is given to a cruel Tyrant when God assigns his Prophet as the Preacher to publish the Laws he made, and puts those Laws among his acts, and numbers them among his holy Oracles. What? whether is Nabuchadnezzar praised by the Testimonial of the Holy Spirit, and of the Prophet for taking upon him according to his Power and Authority the defence of the glory of the true God, that holy Magistrates should bear with the wicked profanation of his glory, and does not the Lord rather under the Person of a Profane King show what becomes them to do? And certainly what is more preposterous then in the bosom of the Church to foster unpunished wicked contumelies against God, which was in Babylon enacted to be punished with capital punishment? Fifthly, this clear Reason of God's immediate and infallible declaring his own mind and pleasure under the old Testament, even according to Hagiomastix Principles, is so far from being any reason why Magistrates might then punish Blasphemers, Idolaters, false Prophets, &c but not now, as that the contrary seems more reasonable: for in cases of immediate and infallible Answers from Heaven, God declaring who was an Idolater, and what was Idolatry, &c convincing men so powerfully as leaving them without all subterfugies, one would think there should need the Magistrates Power a great deal less, then in a time when there are no such immediate Answers from God, nor discoveries of men from heaven; For it cannot be thought but that very bad men, when they certainly knew, that if they prophesied falsely, enticed persons to Idolatry, &c could not upon any Pretences whatsoever escape from being convicted, but should by God himself from heaven be judged Idolaters, false Prophets, and thereupon be but to death, they would either wholly forbear the outward acts, or if committed any such, they would confess them, repent, and do no more so; whereas when men know there is no such way of finding them out, of God from heaven naming persons and things, this is the man, and this is Idolatry, Blasphemy, &c they would be encouraged both to do such things and to maintain them when they have done, to bring Scripture against Scripture, and Reason against Reason, as knowing all immediate Answers and Discoveries to be ceased: Unto which if that be added, that under the old Testament God himself inflicted more outward bodily punishments upon persons for Idolatry, will-worship, Schism, &c, than he does now under the new (the judgements under the Gospel being more spiritual as many examples in the old Testament show, being a more Immediate judge, and Inflicted of bodily punishments on the Jews, as he was to them a more Immediate Legislator of which I have spoken before in page 64. of this Book) there appears less reason for those coercive commands being in force under the old Testament, than now, there being in both these respects now named without the Magistrates coercive Power, greater means for awing and restraining Violators of the first Table, viz. God's immediate discovering, and inflicting of punishment, then in our times; And for illustrating this we may observe that in the Primitive times when there were extraordinary gifts in the Church, of Miracles, &c, and immediate Answers and Revelations by Apostles and Prophets, than the Church needed not so much the help of the Magistrates and the civil sword, 
☞  God giving no Christian Magistrate all that time, but the Magistrates that were in those days were Persecutors and enemies of the Christians, but after the Planting of the Gospel and watering it, and the extraordinary Gifts and Offices in the Church ceasing, than God gave Kings and Princes to be nursing Fathers, to defend the Church and the truth by their Laws and Power, and hath continued such ever since, as a great help to the Church, as a wall to the weak Vine: So when under the old Testament there was according to this Reason of Master Goodwin, such immediate and infallible Answers from the Mouth of God himself in all difficult cases of Religion, and such immediate visible judgements by the immediate hand of God upon Idolaters, false Prophets, especially upon Despisers of the glorious Ordinance of the Oracle of God amongst them, except men had been desperately and outrageously wicked, and had with a high hand despised God himself speaking and presently striking dead in case of disobedience, they could not have been obstinate Seducers to Idolatry, false Prophets, Blasphemers, should neither so much have needed Magistrates armed with commission from God to execute those commands of the 13. and 17. chapters of Deut. &c, as in these days we do, wherein both these are wanting according to Hagiomastixs own confession, and so much for the fifth Answer. Sixthly, If this be a clear Reason why that old Testament Law for the putting of false Prophets, Blasphemers, &c to death should not be now in force, because in all difficult cases that happened about matters of Religion, the Jews to whom this Law was given, had the opportunity of immediate consultation with the mouth of God himself, who could and did from time to time infallibly declare what his own mind and pleasure was in them. So that except those that were to give sentence in cases of Religion, had been desparately wicked and set upon blood, and had despised that glorious Ordinance of the Oracle of God among them, they could not do injustice, because God himself was always at hand to declare unto them what was meet to be done; whereas now the best Oracles that Magistrates and judges have to direct them in doubtful cases about matters of Religion, are men of very fallible judgements, and every way obnoxious unto error and mistake: then 'tis as clear a Reason why the old Testament Law, for punishing Murderers and other Malefactors for offences against the second Table, should not be in force now; and whatever is said by Hagiomastix in this reason against all bodily and civil punishment for transgressions of the first Table, holds in all respects as strongly against the Magistrates punishing for killing, stealing, &c, and the Anabaptists, Socinians and other Heretics, who wholly deny the Christian Magistrates sword, or at least the use of it in point of death under the N. Testament against any transgression, viz. Treason, Murder, adultery, &c, as well as Blasphemy, Idolatry, may say the same for themselves, and among all other 
* Bulling, adversus Anabaptistas' l. 4. c. 5. c. 6. Osiandri Enchiridion c. 2. Qust. 41. De Magistratu. Politico.  Arguments brought by them against the Christian Magistrates killing, or punishing Murder, Theft, Adultery, &c they may add this new one of Master goodwin's, There is this clear Reason why the old Testament Law for punishing of Murderers, Thiefs, Adulterers, &c should not now be in force upon any such terms as it was, when, and where it was given; because in all difficult cases that happened about matters of the Second Table, the Jews to whom this Law was given, had the opportunity of immediate consultation with the mouth of God himself, who could and did from time to time infallibly declare what his own mind and pleasure was in them: So that except those that were to give sentence in cases of blood, theft, &c had been desperately wicked, and set upon blood, and had despised that glorious Ordinance of the Oracle amongst them, they could not do injustice, because God himself was always at hand, to declare unto them what was meet to be done; and what kind of manslayer was to be put to death, and whether the person killed the man casually or wilfully, &c, whereas now, the best Oracles that Magistrates and judges have to direct them in doubtful cases about matters of life, estate, &c, are men of very fallible judgements, and the Laws they are to proceed by, of doubtful Interpretation in many cases; and therefore to go about to prove that the Law for punishing Murderers, Thiefs, &c is now, or amongst us in force, because it was once given unto the Jews, is, as if men should prove that a man may safely and without danger walk among ●ogs, Praecipices, and ditches at midnight, because he may well do it at noon day. I will undertake to make it good against Master Goodwin, that whatsoever he saith in this his clear Reason for the Magistrates punishing in matters of Religion under the old Testament, but against it now, to show it was the same in matters of justice and Right among men, then, and is as strong against Magistrates coercive Power now in those things, as in matters of Religion; yea upon that head of difficult and doubtful cases, and danger of Magistrates erring and mistaking in judgement thereupon, to give several Reasons of the danger of Magistrates mistaking rather in difficult cases of the second, then of the first Table: Whoever hath but read and observed the Scriptures, yea but the five Books of Moses, must acknowledge there were many difficult and doubtful cases under the old Law, upon the commandments of the second Table as well as of the first, and therefore superior and higher Courts, divers one above another were appointed by God under the Law to which in hard matters concerning the second Table, as of the first, they might resort for advice and resolution: Whoever doth but consider the many Questions and cases handled, and written upon, by the Schoolmen, Casui●ls, Canonists, Civilians upon matters of the second Table, as well as of the first, together with the errors 
* The Errors and Controversies in matters of the second Table upon the 5, 6, 7 8 and 9 Commandments are the most exactly summed up by Danaeus in his Book De Haeresibus, of any Author in that kind that ever I met with. Index● Tertius de Decalog. Legis. De quinto Praecepto, Magistratum damnant & tollunt Manichai, Anabaptistae. Magistratus ●utoritatem in negotiis religionis negant D●n●tistae. Judicia capitalia à Christian● homine exer●●i posse negant Tertullianiss●. De sexto precepto, seipsos occiacre putant licere hominibus Patriciani, Circumcelliones. De septimo Praecepto, Vxores communes & promiscuas ess debere d●cent Simonianis, Nicolaitae, Carpocratiani. Incestus admittunt & probant Catap●●yges. De octavo praecepto, Propria quaedam à Christianis poss●deri posse negant Apostolici, Jesuitae, Anabaptistae, De nono praecepto, mentiri homini Christiano licere putant Messaliani, Priscillianistae.  and diversity of Opinions that have been in the Church from the Apostles days down to this time upon every one of the commandments of the second Table, as about Magistracy, Polygamy, Community of Wives, and Community of Goods, about Christians being Magistrates, the Lawfulness of Christians going to war, about the Lawfulness of Lying, dissimulation, and aequivocation in divers cases &c, must confess there are many Controversies and doubts about the Contents of the second Table.  
That place in Deuteronomy 17. from the vl verse to the twelfth, brought by Master Goodwin for the judgement of Vrim in difficult cases about matters of Religion, and so made the ground of Magistrates punishing for Religion then, but not now, speaks, as well of hard matters in civil things between man and man, as in the things of God: There are some Divines who understand the Place wholly or Principally of hard matters and Controversies about the second Table, so Luther upon the place labouring to free it from the corrupt Interpretation and sense put upon it by the Papists, saith, Moses doth here deal not concerning the word or Doctrine, or, as they speak, of the questions of faith which they would have referred to the Pope, but of the sentence of Public and Profane Crimes, So A●●sworth and our English Divines on the Place, by blood and blood understand Murder, of which the judges may be doubtful and unable to find out whether it were wilful which deserved death, or unwilling for which exile into the Cities of Refuge was appointede by Plea and Plea, pleading for, and against in the same cause, some accusing, some denying, as in 1 Kings 3. 16. 17. 18. by stroke and stroke, may be also meant strokes and Wounds that one man gave unto another whether of Malignity or Casualty; and Hagiomastix in Section 107. in Answer to the Vindication of the Ordinance against Heresies, which brought Deut. 17. 12. for a proof of God making controverted points in Religion a matter of death or imprisonment, carries his first and second Answers so, as if that place were understood wholly or Principally of Controversies about the second Table, between blood and blood, between stroke and stroke, Plea and Plea; and if he meant not so, those Answers are nothing to the Position of the Vindicator, affirming that God in the old Testament gave Authority to make a controverted point in Religion, (for of Religion he speaks) a matter of death or imprisonment. But all Divines generally who write upon the place by way of exposition, or who have written of the Judicatories among the Jews, and of Appeals from lower Courts to higher, and of the distinction between Civil and Ecclesiastical Courts, do understand the hard matters in judgement, and the matters of Controversy within the gates, to be meant of criminal matters in Civil things, belonging to the second Table as sixth and eight Commandment, as well as of Ecclesiastical things: the matter too hard between blood and blood, between Plea and Plea, is interpreted by learned J●nius in his Analysis upon Deuterononie, of shughter and killing, and of contention in Civil causes about such things as belong to the accommodations of life, as between stroke and stroke is of diseases as of the plague of leprosy, which was in an Ecclesiastical and ceremonial way according to the Law to be distinguished, and therefore in this place the argument that is handled is Political or Ecclesiastical: The Political is Criminal or Civil, but the Ecclesiastical is Ceremonial: So Lyra understands between blood and blood, when one part of the Judges say that this shedding of blood is to be punished with death as being voluntary murder, the other part says no, it is but casual. Master Gillespie in his Aarous rod blossoming Book. 1. chapt. 3. shows 'tis agreed upon both by Jewish and Christian Expositors that this place holds forth a supreme Civil Court of Judges, and that this text holds forth two sorts of causes, some foren●icall, between blood and blood; some ceremonial between stroke and stroke. Now this Scripture speaking how that man shall die that will do presumptuously and will not hearken unto the Judge, as well as he that will not hearken unto the Priest, and speaking of matters of the second Table as well as of the first, 
☜  and the sentence of death here spoken of, if immediate and infallible by Vrim, extending equally to difficult cases in Civil matters as in matters of Religion, or rather more, there being divers particular instances in Scripture of Answers in Civil matters, as of war and foretelling of some events in Civil affairs, but none in matters of Religion; if then the Magistrate because of his immediateness of consultation with God, might punish in matters of Religion, but not now, that immediateness being ceased, it will also follow he might then punish for blood, &c, because by Vrim he might certainly know whether it was wilful or voluntary, but now he may not, because 'tis possible and probable in doubtful and difficult cases about man's life, meum and tuum, he may run into errors and mistake.  
Sixthly, this clear Reason of Hagiomastixes making infallibility the ground of coercive Power, and Fallibility a being subject to error and mistake, the ground of the denial of such a power, is a fundamental falsity, and a grand mistake, overthrowing equally all spiritual censures and punishments in cases of false Doctrines and Heretics, and all bodily outward punishments in Criminal Civil matters, and so at once making void all the Civil Power of the Magistrate, and all the Ecclesiastical power of the Church: For the Magistrate is not infallible, absolutely free from all possibility of error and mistake in his judgement in matters of the second Table: many Magistrates in those matters have and do daily grossly mistake, many innocent persons have suffered, and do daily, and many guilty persons have and do escape; who does not see in Civil matters what mistakes there are, and may be both in point of law and matter of fact, how Lawyers and judges are divided in their Opinions, what controversies and difficulties arise upon cases, what doubts and Scruples grow upon witnesses testifying quite contrary, and other circumstances, so that what judge can say he is infallible and certain that he is not mistaken, that he saw such a fact committed, that the accusers and witnesses have deposed nothing but truth. I could Instance in a hundred particulars both in regard of the Lawmakers', the Laws, the Jewry, Witnesses, the accused party, the judges themselves, &c wherein Magistrates are as fallible and as obnoxious unto error in matters of the second Table as in the first, yea, and in divers respects more▪ but I must refer this to the second part of this subject, where the Grounds for Toleration, particularly that of no man being infallible in our days, is to be answered, Deut. 17. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. shows us there are difficultcases and Controversies in matters of the second Table, between blood and blood, &c and that among the judges themselves, so that higher Courts are appointed to go unto, and the highest of all the Council of seventy at Jerusalem. Who sees not in Kingdoms about their Laws and Civil Rights as high and great Controversies and Contestations as in matters of Religion, each party having great Lawyers and able men on their side. So the Church with the best Counsels and Synods are not infallible, but may mistake and err and in in some things have mistaken, as 
* Whites way to the Church pag. 81. 83, 84, 85. Neither can the Jesuit assign any Company or State of men, whereby the Church may be supposed to manifest her teaching but the same may be subject to error, and in experience hath erred; as we see in Counsels, Doctors and all other means which she hath used in teaching us, except that of the Scriptures only. willet's second General Controversy concerning the Church, second question whether the Church may err. pag. 69▪ 70, 71. Amesii. Bellarm. Enervat. Tom. sec●nd. cap. 2. De Eccles. visibilit. quaest. 4. An Ecclesia● possit errare. Rivet. Catholic. Orthodox. Tractat. 2. Quaest. 3. An Ecclesia possit errare. Cameron. Praelect. de Eccles. De Eccles. Infallibilit. 281, 282, etc.  many learned Protestants have shown against the Papists upon that question whether the Church may err. And therefore by this clear reason of Master Goodwin it should not be only unlawful for the Magistrates to punish for Idolatry, Blasphemy, Heresy, Schism, but for Murder, Theft, Polygamy, Adultery, &c yea as unlawful for the Church to admonish and excommunicate for Idolatry, Heresy, Blasphemy, &c as for the Magistrates to punish corporally: But now M. S. Hagiomastix, Ancient Bounds or Liberty of Conscience stated, with divers of our Sectaries who write of this question yield the Magistrates power in matters of the second Table, answering that of Rom. 13. 4. to be understood in things concerning the second Table, and the Church's power in censuring for Heresies, evading that of Revel. 2. 20. to be meant of Ministers, not Magistrates, and of spiritual censures not Civil, who yet are alike fallible and subject to error and mistake, the Magistrates in Civil judgements, and Ministers in spiritual, as they are in punishing corporally in matters of Idolatry, Heresy, &c. and indeed considering the state of the question of Magistrates coercive Power in matters of Religion, as I have laid it down in the Prolegomena, and so is to be understood viz. that the Magistrate is to do it upon advice and after advice in all difficult doubtful cases with the ablest Godliest Ministers in the Church, by the advice of Synods, with Solemn Prayers, after meant of instruction and conviction used to the parties, which means and helps being not in Civil causes nor in the censures of particular Churches, are more liable to error and mistake then Magistrates: So that if Magistrates and Churches may punish, the one corporally in matters of the second Table, the other spiritually in cases of both (as is confessed by our grand Patrons of Toleration) notwithstanding their fallibility and possibility of mistake, 
☞  then in difficult doubtful cases Magistrates may punish in matters of the first Table, notwithstanding they are men of very fallible judgements; or in case the want of the Magistrates infallibility puts a supersedeas to his coercive Power in matters of Religion, the same want deprives him of Power in Civil things, and Ministers in Ecclesiastical, because of their Possibility of erring in both: By all which the Reader may see 'tis a very rotten foundation both to build upon, or to take away the Power of censuring evil and erroneous persons upon the infallibility or fallibility of those who have Authority from God; no, certainly, this Power and duty of those who are in place both in Church and State, are founded on the Ordinance and Institution of God, in appointing such Offices, and in the nature of the Crimes and offences, and on the ends of vindicating God's Glory and Name, and preserving others from being ruined, &c, but never on that, that the persons who should exercise it were infallible and not subject to error, which that 'tis so, may be demonstrated by these following reasons. First, In the Churches of the new Testament in the Apostles days when they had men amongst them immediately inspired, who could dictate the mind of Christ infallibly, and tell them the certain meaning of any Scripture, notwithstanding all that Infallibility and immediateness of Inspiration, such Persons Tenets and Practices (though erroneous and mistakes) as by the rules of faith and love could and might be tolerated and suffered, were tolerated, and the Apostles in those things so far from giving any directions to the Churches for withdrawing or excommunicating, that they give commands to the contrary, namely to receive, bear with, please such, and not ourselves, follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another, and whereto we have already attained to walk by the same Rule, as these Scriptures Rom. 14. 1, 2, 3, 4, 13, 19 Rom. 15, 1, 2, 3. Phil. 3. 15, 16. with divers of the like kind show: The holding the day of Christ to be at hand, was an error, and Paul writes pathetically to dissuade the Thessalonians from it 2 Thes. 2. 1, 2, 3. yet for all that he accounts them brethren, and so I might instance in other such particulars; whereas on the contrary in damnable Heresies, Schisms, and such like, as denying the resurrection of the dead, holding Circumcision necessary to justification, in denying Jesus Christ to be come in the flesh, in teaching the Doctrines of Balaam and of the Nicolaitans, in separating themselves and going out from the Church, the Apostles are against all suffering, bearing with, receiving of, and for rejecting, delivering up to Satan and cutting of all such, as these Scriptures testify 1 Tim. 1. 20. Tit. 3. 10. Gal. 1. 8, 9 Gal. 5. 12. the second Epistle of john. 7. 9, 10. Judas 19, 23 v. Revel. 2. 14, 15, 20. with many more. Now in the Tenets, Opinions and Practices of the first sort, the Apostles could have resolved the Romans, Philippians as infallibly, who held the truth, and who in the error in those particulars, as in the latter of Heresies: This is acknowledged by Master Burroughs himself in page 59▪ 60, 61. of his Heart divisions, even where he pleads for a Toleration in all points doubtful and controverted among godly men, who writes thus, all these people spoken of in Rom. 14 were not in the right, for a man not to eat flesh out of conscience when the thing was not forbidden, certainly was a sin, or to make conscience of a Holy Day which God required not, was a sin: Now the Apostle did not come with his Authority, and say, I will make you leave of keeping such days, or you shall eat, or to abstain thus as you do is evil, and it must not be suffered in you. No, the Apostle lays no Apostlicall Authority upon them, but tells them, That every man must be ful●y persuaded in his own mind in what he doth; and who art thou that judgest another man's servant? the Lord hath received him. And yet the Governors of the Church in the Primitive times might upon much stronger grounds have stood upon such a Principle, than any Governors of the Church now can; there was less Reason why they should suffer any difference in Opinion or Practice amongst them, than why we should suffer differences amongst us; for they had men amongst them immediately inspired, who could dictate the mind of Christ infallibly, they could tell them the certain meaning of any Scripture; And yet we see plainly, the Apostle applies himself both in the Romans and Philippians rather to press mutual forbearance, and keeping the Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace, using all arguments of that kind, as God hath received him, be that regardeth a day regardeth it to the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day to the Lord, he doth not regard it, he that eateth eateth to the Lord, etc. Nevertheless whereunto we have attained let us walk by the same Rule; and if in any thing you be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you, then from God immediately and infallibly to declare who were in the right and truth in those particulars wherein they differed, and thereupon to command the others to be of their mind and Practise in all the particulars, or else upon such an infallible resolution to declare they ought to be cast out of the Church, and no communion hold with them: By all which 'tis evident, that Infallibility and opportunity of immediateness of consultation with God is not the formal Ground of censure, but the nature of the things themselves, being destructive to faith, Godliness, and edifying: for if the power of punishing had been founded on infallibility, seeing the Apostles were as able and infallible to give certain resolutions in the matter of days, meat, and drinks and such like, as in matters of faith, they would have given other manner of Rules than they did in Rom. 14. Phil. 3. &c. And indeed if Hagiomastize infallibility were good, what reason can be given why the Apostles did not proceed with all errors and all persons, as with Hymene●s, Alexander, and the woman jesable, which clearly shows the lawfulness of censures lay not in the infallible knowledge of the Governors of the Church but the Apostles in persons and things themselves, the one sort weak peaceable Christians holding the head, and communion with the body, the other turbulent, wilful, holding Doctrines subverting in the foundation, the precious souls of men and godliness: And certainly if infallibility were not the just ground and formal reason of censuring, but some other thing, than fallibility a possibility of mistaking in some things cannot be a just cause of taking away all power of punishing from Governors, and that in all points though never so destructive to God's glory and the souls of men. Secondly in the new Testament there are many commands given, and many ●●●les laid down both for those times wherein they were written, and for all times till the coming of Christ, unto persons, who were not infallible nor immediately inspired, concerning Heresies and Heretics, Schisms and schismatics, to beware of folk Prophets, and false Teachers, to avoid, reject, and turn away from them, not to believe every Spirit, but to try the Spirits whether they are of God, not to receive into house, neither to bid God speed those that trasgresse and abide not in the Doctrine of Christ, not to suffer those who teach false Doctrine, and seduce the servants to God, to countend earnestly the faith, to hold fast the truth and sound Doctrine show was these Scriptures to whole Churches and particular Persons, both private Christians, and Pastors, and Teachers, not Apostles and Prophets, the extraordinary Officers Rom. 1. 16, 17, 18. Phil. 3. 2. 1. Tim. 6. 5. 2 Pet. 3. 17. 1 John 4. 3. 2. Epist. John 9 10. Jud● 3. Revel. 2. 14, 20. Revel. 3. Now however the Apostles and Prophets in those Primitive times were infallible and immediately inspired (of whose immediate infallibility how far, and in what way, whether only in penning the holy Scriptures, or how else, whether 
* Chamier Panstrat. Cathol. De Canon. & summa Regula Fidei. Apostoli fuerunt infallibiles ex particulari assistentia spiritus, habuerunt particularem non habitualem assistentiam spiritus Lutherus, spirtus Sanctus non semper tangit corda Propheta●um.  ex hubituali asse●●entia Spiritus or only de particulere assistantia Spiritus I shall speak at large in the second part of my Anti-Toleration, in answering that Objection, we have now no external infallible judge) yet all those they w●●t unto in their Epistles, every particular believer, man and woman were not, neither are infallible, not the Elect Lady and her children, not all the believing Romans, nor all those Christians to whom the Epistle general of john and jude were written, nor those Angels of the Churches of Pergamus and Thyatira, nor Christians in our times to whom those commands and Rules are written and given by the Apostles, as well as those who then lived, (for the Epistles did not concern the times and the particular Churches and persons only to whom they were written as some wickedly affirm) and yet these are commanded to stand fast in the Faith, to avoid those who cause divisions contrary to the Doctrine which they have learned, to prove all things, are reproved & found fault with by the Spirit of God for not censuring of Heresy, false Doctrine, etc. which fully proves true Doctrine may be known from false, false Teachers may be discovered and censured by persons not infallible, and so the judging of what is Heresy, Scism, and who is a Heretic or a Schismatic, and the punishing, or not punishing of them depends not upon infallibility or fallibility of Spirit, infallibility is not the ground of censure, nor fallibility of non censure. Thirdly, The Apostles who were infallibly and immediately inspired, yet in cases of Controversy arising in the Church, and in censures and determinations thereupon, did not act from infallibility and immediatenes of Answers from God, but from Scripture grounds by way of reasoning and disputation deduced, and in a Synodical way by the joint common resolution of Elders as well as themselves, as is evident by Acts 15. Acts 21. 18, 19, 20, 21. In that dissension that Paul and Barnabas had with certainemen that came down from Judea about circumcision, Paul and Barnabas were able to have determined it without their and others going up to Jerusalem to the Apostles and Elders: Paul by his Apostolical infallible Spirit, could have determined as in Gal. 5. 2. Behold, I Paul say unto you that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing; but the whole business is debated, decreed, and the decrees sent forth by Synodical Authority determined according to the word of God, and not by extraordinary immediate infallible inspiration of the Spirit, the proof of which seeing the Reader may find so fully and largely in many learned 
* Whitak. Controv. 3. quaest. 6 An Assertion of the Government of the Church of Scotland, Second part cap. 8. Master rutherfurd's Due right of Presbyteries, Acts. 15. A pattern of a juridical Synod. Diodat. Annot. in Acts 15. The Divine Right of Church government, first edit. page 223, 224, 125. Because the manner of proceeding in this Synod convened was not extraordinary and Apostolical, as when they acted by an immediate infallible inspiration of the spirit, in penning the holy Scripture (without all disputing, examining, or judging of the matter that they writ, so far as we can read) 2 Tim. 3. 16, 17. 2 Pet. 1. 20. 21. but ordinary Presbyterial and Synodall by ordinary helps and means (as after shall appear more fully) stating the Question proof and evidence from Scripture what was the good and acceptable will of God, concerning the present Controversy, and upon evidence of Scripture, concluding, It seemed good to the holy Ghost, and to us Act. 15. 28. which words any Assembly, having like clear evidence of Scripture for their determination, may without presumption use as well as this Synod did. They proceeded deliberatively by discourses and disputes, deliberating about the true state of the Question, and the remedy of the Scandal: They proceeded after all their deliberative inquiries and disputes decisively to conclude and determine the matter. Master Cotton in his Tractate of the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven (though of the Independent way) page 48, 49 writes thus, of Act● 25. Neither did the Apostles determine the matter (as hath been said) by the Apostolical authority from immediate revelation, but they assembled together with the Elders to consider of the matter, verse 6. and a multitude of brethren together with them, verse 12, 22, 23. and after searching out the cause by an ordinary means of disputation, verse 7. Peter cleared it by the witness of the spirit to his Ministry in Cornelius his family, Paul and Barnabas by the like effect of their Ministry among the Gentiles: James confirmed the s●meby the Testimony of the Prophets, wherewith the whole Synod being satisfied, they determined of a judicial sentence, and of a way to publish it by letters and Messengers, in which they censure the false Teachers as troublers of their Church, and subverters of their souls, they reject the Imposition of Circumcision, a Yoke which neither they nor their Fathers were able to bear, they impose upon the Churches none but some necessary observations, and them by way of that Authority which the Lord had given them, verse 28.  Authors I shall spare to write anything of it. So upon Paul's coming to Jerusalem Acts 21. and the offence that many thousands of the jews which believed and were zealous of the Law took at him, Paul went not upon his own infallibility of Spirit or immediate Revelation, but upon the joint council and direction of james and all the Elders verse 18. 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26. Now if the Apostles in judging of false Doctrine and Schism, censuring the Authors of these and imposing upon the Churches their Decrees to be kept (all which are spoken of in A●ts 15.) proceeded not in the way of infallible immediate Revelation from God, laid it aside as it were, but in an ordinary way, by Scripture, reason, experience upon and after much debate, as is apparent from verse 6. to verse 30. then 'tis evident that immediatnesse of Revelation, with infallibility of Spirit is not the sole judge of Heresies and Errors, and the only just reason of inflicting punishments upon Heretics and scismatics.  
Seventhly, besides the other false Suppositions laid down by Hagiomastix in his 36. Sect. as the enquiring by Vrim and Thummim in cases of Idolatry, Blasphemy, as that Inallibilitie is the ground of coercive power, &c, this also is false that he supposeth under the new Testament, there is no Infallibility nor certainty to be had in difficult, doubtful matters of Religion, but that in those things we walk at midnight, in comparison of those under the old Law who walked at noon day, which assertion of the uncertainty and darkness of the Church in points of Religion under the new Testament compared with the old, is contrary to these grounds. First, to many prophecies of the state of the Church after Christ's coming, which speak that then the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the Sea, and the light of the Moon shall be as the light of the Sun, and the light of the Sun shall be seven sold as the light of seven days, and unto the manner of the Administration of the Covenant of Grace under the new Testament, which however for substance was but one and the same under the Law, and the Gospel, yet for manner of Dispensation and Application differed and is various, as many 
* Ames. medul. Theolog. lib 1. cap. 38. cap. 39 Administrati●. novi Testam. differt ab administratione priori, qualitate & quantitate. Qualitas differens qua pollet, est vel claritas, vel libertas.  Divines show, and one of the main differences between them in manner of Administration stands in this, that the Covenant of Grace under the new differs from the old in Clearness and Evidence, in that the Doctrine of grace and salvation by Christ, and of faith in him together with the Appendices is more distinct and express then before it was, not being now under a veil, but beheld with open face 2 Cor. 3. 12, 13, 17, 18. Secondly, than the Church of Christ under the new Testament should be in a far worse condition than the jews were under the old; for whereas they were sure and certain in their Religion, and had an infallible way of being resolved in all doubts, Christians now should be in continual doubts and uncertainties in matters of faith, not knowing what to do, or whether to turn themselves, which must needs be a most miserable condition, and the jews case in the time, before Christ's coming in the flesh, was to be much preferred before ours; for the burden of being under the Pedagogy of the Law, with a certainty and infallibility of knowing what to hold and believe, is a light burden in comparison of being freed from the Ceremonial Law, and in the mean time to be without all certainty and assurance in points of faith and worship: Who would not choose rather to undergo some burden with an infallibility and certainty of Religion, 
☜  then to enjoy a Liberty from a Yoke with an uncertainty and continual fears Is not the bondage of fear worse; then a bondage of ceremonies and many outward Legal observations? If the deliverance of us from the pedagogy of the Law hath brought us into this condition, out burden is greater in this thing then any that the Law laid upon the jews. Hath Christ delivered us from one burden to lay a greater upon us? Have we not cause to say, Lord let any burden of the Ceremonial Law be laid upon our necks rather than this? Thirdly unto the end of Christian Religion, and the knowledge of it as it is written in the Scriptures, particularly of the new Testament, which is that 
* Ursini Catechis. Quaest. 1. de Consolat. Quae est unica tua consolatio in vita & in morte.  Christians may have consolation and hope in life and death Rom. 15. 4. 1 Epist. John 1. 4. Now there can be no solid comfort, without certainty and assurance of the truth of the thing, in it felse at least, which we profess; but in doubts, fears, uncertainties, the soul must needs be in perplexities, anxieties, as upon the rack, Fear hath torment 1 john. 4. 18. But Secondly the infallibility and certainty under the old Testament by Vrim and Thummim of the Priest, so much spoken of and magnified by Hagiomastix, above that under the new, was as much liable to questioning and doubts by cavilling, and contentious Spirits as the way under the new, and many exceptions might be made and Controversies to arise, whether those who were to give sentence in cases of Religion, upon the Answer by Vrim did according as they received it from God, or according to their own corrupt affection and interest, which considering what many of the Priests were under the old Testament, corrupt and partial and the silent manner of God's Answer by Vrim, might give occasion of questioning, yea Hagiomastix himself supposes and implies in some cases a possibility of a wrong Answer and doing injustice after consultation with the glorious Ordinance of the Oracle of God, as these words show, So that except those that were to give sentence in cases of Religion had been desperately wicked, end set upon blood, and had despised the glorious Ordinance of the Oracle of God amongst them, they could not do injustice: Now 'tis evident there were high Priests among them and such who had power of sentence in cases of Religion that were desperately wicked, who either might pass sentence without enquiring by Vrim, or else not go according to Gods Answer by Vrim, but according to the lusts of their own hearts: Whosoever does but consider these examples following recorded in Scripture both of the Priests and other men, going flat contrary to the mind of God, and immediate Answers from him, will not wonder but be satisfied. The Priests in jeremiahs' time were desperately wicked and set upon blood, even upon having jeremiahs' blood, pronouncing sentence upon him, This man is worthy to die, and Thou shalt surely die, Jerem. 26. 8, 11. and there were many complaints by jeremiah, Ezekiel, and other Prophets, of the Priests, and chief Priests being out of the way through strong drink, erring in vision, and stumbling in judgement, saying to a stock, Thou art my Father, and to a stone, Thou hast brought me forth, &c offering violence to the Law and Profaning of holy things, putting no difference between the holy and profane, hiding there eyes from the Sabbaths: the chief of the Priests, transgressing very much and polluting the house of the Lord, which he had hallowed in jerusalem Esay 28. 7. jerem. 2. 27. Ezek. 22. 26. 2 Chron. 36. 14. Now if the Priests would do all this when they degenerated, offer violence to the Law, say to a stock thou art my Father, pollute the house of the Lord, and much more that is recorded in the Scripture of them, than there is no question to be made, but they might pervert the sentence by Vrim and give an Answer quite contrary to what they received immediately and infallibly from God, thereby condemning the innocent and clearing the guilty, making that prophesying falsely as in jeremiahs' case which was Prophesying truly, making that Blasphemy which was none: Yea, they are particularly taxed for erring in vision, and stumbling in judgement, which words probably may be meant of their judgement by Vrim, the Priest's Answers in that way being called the judgement of Vrim and judgement in divers places of Scripture as Numb. 27. 21. Exod. 28. 15, 29, 30. So that for all Hagiomastixs clear reason, if the 
* Vriah the Priest made an idolatrous Altar 2 King. 16. 11, 16. willet's Synops. Contro. of the Scriptures 2. part 6 quaest. etc.  Priests were corrupt and partial under the Law, as some good Priests in some particular cases might be, and were, as Aaron in the golden calse, Eli in the matter of his sons Hophni & Phinehas, and wicked ones would certainly be, the jews might be in danger in matters of Religion to be punished unjustly then in those days, notwithstanding their Priests had immediate and infallible Answers from God, as well as Christians now under the new Testament; besides, if we consider what the way of Answering by Vrim was and that as distinguished by 
* Unto all I have said in page 102. and page 112. of the way of answering by Vrim, I shall add as follows, Dr. Manes Sermon of false Prophet's Page 30. 31. The Priest wore two precious stones in his Breastplate, called the Vrim and Thummim, through which according as they did at times cast a bright, or di●●er lustre, God revealed his pleasure or displeasure to the People, and spoke to them by the sparkle of a jewel, as he did at other times by the mouth of a Prophet. Suppose the Priest who wore the Breastplate should have belied his Jewels, and when the People came to inquire of him should have interpreted a Pale for a bright Ray to the People; or suppose he should have taken out the true and have placed two counterfeit Iewe● in his Breast Plate, and should have taught them not to sparkle by the certainty and holiness of their own impartial fires, but according to the desires and Plots of the Consulters. Ainsworth on Exod. 28. 15, 30. Breastplate in Hebrew Choshen, it hath affinity with Chashah, that signifieth silence, as implying a silent Oracle to be seen on the Breast of the high Priest, rather than heard. The manner of ask council is recorded by the Hebrews to be thus. When they inquired, the Priest stood with his face before the A●k; and he that enquired stood behind him with his face to the back of the Priest; and the Inquirer said, shall I go up? or shall I not; And forthwith the Holy Ghost came upon the Priest, and he beheld the Breast Pla●e, and saw therein by the vision of Prophecy, Go up, or not go up in the letters that showed themselves upon the Breastplate before his face.  Rabbins and other Divines from some other ways of God's Answers, not by a loud voice that all who came to inquire might hear the Answer as well as the Priest, but in a silent way and manner, revealed only to the Priest either by inspiration, or by looking into his breastplate upon the darkness or brightness of his jewels by which he knew, or by some letters in the breastplate in which he read the will of God, and so by the Priest communicated to the judges, and standers by, but if the Priests would pretend other Answers from God than he gave, how should the jews disprove them, and what more certainty had those who in difficult doubtful cases came to the high Priest to inquire by Vrim (seeing they received the Answers not from God immediately but from the high Priest, and the Priest might possibly deceive them in cases falling out about their own children or near blood showing partiality and affection) then may be had by us now in these times; nay going according to Master goodwin's Principles, that the sentence of the high Priest was by Vrim and not by the Law, the judgement of Vrim from the Priest was the supreme and last judge, in case the Priests would be false, as in some particular cases they might, the jews were in a more uncertain and worse condition, then if to be judged by the Law, or we in these days, who if our Magistrates and judges should degenerate might appeal to the Scriptures and urge them to them whereby to convince them, but so could not the jews according to Hagiomastixs' Doctrine, the Priest by Vrim being appealed to in cases where they suppose the Law could not help; and lastly, if we consider how Prophets under the old Testament, who were as immediately and infallibly inspired, as the high Priest by Vrim, yet in all their Answers and Dictates were not without all possibility of mistake, as is evident by nathan's Answer to David 2 Sam. 7. 4, 5. &c, nor without all danger of deceiving those they spoke to, as is to be seen in that example of the old Prophet in Bethel 1 Kings 13. 11, 17, 18, 21. and divers other places of Scripture speaking of Prophets, we may easily conceive how Magistrates and judges than might be liable to error as well as now, especially if they took all the Priests and Prophets said without comparing and examining those things by the Law: So that by all this and a great deal more that might be spoken to this effect, as the Magistrates and Priests combining together, etc. the jews to whom the Law was given for putting false Prophets, Blasphemers, to death for all the opportunity of immediate consultation with the mouth of God himself by Vrim, and by Prophet's might in many cases have been deceived, mistaken, and in as great uncertainty every way as Hagiomastix supposes the Church to be in under the new Testament. Thirdly, supposing and granting there had been such a certainty and infallibility in the matters of Religion under the old Law as is contended for by Hagiomastix, and that free of all the exceptions now spoken of, yet I affirm there is an infallibility and certainty under the new also in the Doctrines of faith and worship, and Christian Magistrates may infallibly and certainly know such and such Doctrines to be false, and such true, such Practices and speeches to be Idolatrous, blasphemous as well as the jewish Magistrates did, and supposing that true which Hagiomastix saith, that the jewish Magistrates had a certainty of knowledge in all difficult cases of Relgion by the judgement of Vrim which Christian Magistrates have not, yet in another way and by other means they may have a certainty and infallibility that these and these Doctrines are of God, and other Doctrines are not of God: when there are three or four ways to come to the certain knowledge of a thing, a man may be sure and certain in one or two, though he have not all the ways, A judge who hath three or four honest witnesses and many circumstances, with the parties own confession may be certain though he might not see the fact committed, nor have all ways of knowledge that possible may be, and so may Magistrates now in this case of Religion though they should want some one way the Magistrates under the new Testament had; And for the certainty and infallibility in matters of Religion under the new Testament, it may apeeare thus, 1. Hagiomastix must confess upon his own Principles, that during the Apostles times (which was under the new Testament) in all difficult cases that happened about matters of Religion, Christian Magistrates might have had the same opportunities of immediate and infallible Answers as under the old, Apostles, Prophets then having as infallible immediate Revelations from God as the high Priests, and therefore in case there had been Christian Magistrates in the Apostles days they might by this reason have exercised coercive power on Apostates, Heretics, and Blasphemers, as well as the jewish Magistrates, by which 'tis apparent those Laws about false Prophets and Blasphemers were not only old Testament Laws proper for Moses Paedagogie, but new Testament Laws, and that for the prime flourishing state of the new Testament, the Apostles times. Secondly, the Independents and Sectaries in many of their Books, Sermon● and Discourses tell us of a time at hand wherein there will be a new and marvellous light, when we shall clearly and certainly know the truth of these things now so much doubted of and controverted, of the nature of a visible Church, of the Government of the Church, and such like. Now then upon Master goodwin's clear reason, the old Testament Law for the putting of false Prophets, &c to death, should be in force under the new Testament as well as under the old, because then in all difficult cases in worship, Doctrine, &c, the Christians that live in those times may infallibly and certainly know the mind and pleasure of God in them. Master Goodwin in his Postscript or Appendix to H●giomastix (the scope of which Discourse is to make invaled that Zach. 13. 3. from being any ground for Civil coercive Power against false Prophets) among other evasions interprets the 
* A Postscript or Appendix to a Treat. entitled Hagiomastix page 21. 22, 24, 25.  place to relate to those times of refreshing to the jewish Church and Nation, the time when God intends to build up the jews again into a Church of far more inward grace and holiness; into a Nation of far more outward beauty strength and glory, then ever was their portion since they first became a Church or Nation unto this day, either in the one kind or in the other. Now of that particular time and day of the new Testament 'tis especially Prophesied, that outward coercive Power shall be exercised upon false Prophets, And it shall come to pass that when any shall yet Prophesit, than his Father and his Mother that begat him shall say unto him, Thou shalt not live: for thou speakest lies in the name of the Lord, and his Father and his Mother that begat him, shall thrust him through when he Prophecieth. As for Hagiomast. figurative sense put upon these words against the literal and proper, and other his glosses to corrupt the text, I shall speak to them in the 19 Thesis', where I shall prove that Zach. 13. 3. to be a good proof of the Magistrates coercive Power under the Gospel. Thirdly, for that time and those days under the new Testament, between the Primitive Apostolical Churches, and the calling of the jews, into which we fall and among which our times are to be numbered, there is an infallibility and certainty to be had in Doctrines of faith and Christian Religion, and the best Oracles Magistrates have to direct them in matters of Religion now, are not fallible and every way obnoxious unto error and mistake. The Scriptures are an infallible and certain rule, the voice and word of God himself, God speaking by them as by Vrim and Thummim: Learned 
* Si de judici● divino loquantur, affirmamus extare in Ecclesia firmum & perpetuum judicium de omnibus fidei dogmatibus nimirum judicium Dei loquentis in Scriptures; non enim argumentis refellendùs, sed interal 〈◊〉 reputandu● est, qui neg●t in Scriptures de rebus fidei esse ab ipso 〈◊〉 sententiam, eamque intelligibilem, firmam & i●fallibilam pag. 104.  Bishop Davenant in his Disputation De judice ac norma fidei & Cultus Christiani, in answering that objection of the Papists, if general Counsels could err, their should be no firm judgement in the Church to compose Controversies, answers, If the Papists speak of a humane judgement we acknowledge non● so firm and infallible to which all men may safely and securely commit their faith without trial. But if they speak of a divine judgement, we affirm there is a firm and perpetual judgement in the Church of all the Doctrines of faith, namely the judgement of God speaking in the Scriptures: for he is not to be confuted with arguments, but to be reckoned among Atheists who denies in the Scriptures in the things of faith that there is a sentence pronounced by God himself, and that intelligible, firm and infallible. Were those Answers by Divine inspiration and immediate Revelation? So are the Scriptures of divine inspiration and immediate revelation also 2 Tim. 3. 16. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, 2 Pet. 1. 20, 21. No Prophecy of the Scripture is of any private Interpretation, for the Prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost, were those Answers sure and certain the Oracles of God among them? so are the Scriptures sure and certain, Psal. 19 7. The Testimony of the Lord is sure, Luke 1. 3. 4. that Gospel was written that Theophilus might know the certainty of those things wherein he had been instructed, Colos. 2. 2. there is a full assurance of understanding to know the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ, the Scriptures are called the Oracles of God Acts 7. 38. Rom. 3. 2. 1 Pet. 4. 11, as well as the judgement by Vrim, to show they are infallible and certain, Master Goodwin in his Anapologesiates page 103. saith of some Doctrines that he holds, For my part I have the grounds of God, I mean the Scripture: I would fain know of Hagiomastix what made the Answer by Vrim to be infallible, and to be believed and rested in by those who came to inquire, but that God who was true and infallible said so, and revealed it, and is there not the same in the Doctrines contained in the Scriptures? hath not God who is truth, and infallible revealed and declared them in Scriptures and thereupon propounded them to be believed: The Doctrines of faith must be laid down certainly and infallibly in Scriptures, both from the 
* Gerson in compend. Theolo. Fidei nec falsum, nec dubium subesse potest. Davenant. de judice ac norma fidei pag. 6. Omnia fidei dogmata ex parte materiae credendae debent habere certam, infallibilem & indubitabilem veritatem.  nature of faith which in respect of the matter to be believed must have certain, infallible, and undoubted truth, and not that which is false or doubtful, and from the 
* Principium & norma fidei est veritas & revelatio divina, Voet. Select. Disput. de Petribus. Davenant. de Judice ac norma fidei, pag. 7. tolle authoritatem Dei revelantis, cuicunque dogmati, poterit fortasse opinioni sive scientiae subesse, fidei autem Christianae non poterit. Baron. Apol. pro Disput. de formali objecto fidei Tractat. 3. de Revel. divina c 3. & 4.  formal reason and ground of believing which is the Authority of God who is true and infallible revealing his mind, & not the Testimony of the Church; as also from the end and use of the Scriptures to be the Canon and Rule of faith: Now the Canon of a thing, especially the supreme & chief by which all other are to be tried and judged of, had need be certain and known, and not doubtful, and unknown. Learned Rivet and other Protestant Divines writing of that question against the Papists, of the Scriptures being the Canon and Rule of faith, speak thus, the Canon and Rule of faith must be certain and known. The 
* Cloppen. Disputat. de Cano. Th●olog. Thesis' pri. Certitudinem & infallibilitatem Canoni● flagitat ipsa metaphora qua nomen translatum est a Mensura non privata quavis sed publica & authentica illa ad quam lege & Edicto Magistratus commensuratae esse debent. Rivet. Catholi Orthodox. Tract. Prim. Quaest. 17. Bellar. de Verbo Dei l. x. c. 2. Regula catholicae fidei certa notaque esse debet: nam si nota non sit regula nobis non erit: si certa non sit nec regula quidem erit. Daven. De Jud. ac nor. fidei c. 11. Regula fidei firma ac constans esse debet.  best Protestant Divines writing against the Papists of the Canon of the Srcipture show that is one principal requisite to make a Canon and Rule that it should be certain and infallible; the Metaphor itself from whence the name is borrowed viz. not from any private measure, but the public and allowed according to which by the Law all other are to be measured, demonstrates the certainty and infallibility of a Canon and Rule: that which in itself is uncertain and variable cannot be the Canon or rule of any Doctrine much less of faith: Yea * Bellarmine himself disputing for the Scriptures against Enthusiasts proves the Rule of the Catholic faith must be certain and known, for if it be not known it cannot be a rule, and if it be not certain neither shall it be a rule. Whoever is but versed in the writings of Protestant Divines upon that head of the Scriptures against Papists on the one hand, and Anabaptists on the other, or who so will consult them as 
a Whitak. Contro. 1. de Scripturae Authoritate, Interpretatione Perfectione.  Whitaker, 
b Chamier. Panstrat. Cathol. De Cano. 6 & Summa Regul. Fidei.  Chamier, 
c Rivet. Cathol. Orthod. Tract. Prim. De Scripiurae Perspicu. de judice Controvers. de Regul Infallib. controvers de Canone Scripturae.  Rivet, 
d Ames. Bellar. encrvat. De confession Bellar. circa Scripturam sacram De Scripturae perspicuitate sufficientia de Judice controversiarum  Amesius, 
e Davenant. De Judice ac norma Fidei & Cultus Christiani.  Bishop Davenant, 
f Whites way to the Church from pag. 31. to 63.  Whites way to the true Church, 
g Gerard. Tom. 1. de Scriptura.  Gerardus, 
h Baron. Apodix. Cathol. Tract. prim. Caput. 1, 2. Tract. 7. cap. 3.  Robertus Baronius, 
i Macc. loc. common. de Script. Author. Perspicuit. Interpret.  Maccovius, 
k Will. Synops. The first general controv. concerning the Scriptures.  willet's Synopsis, 
l Spanhem. Thes. de Script. contra Anabaptist.  Spanhemius, 
m Cloppenburg. Disput. de can. Theolog. Cloppen. Gangraen. Anabapt. de Scriptura sacra, & Verbo Deo interuo.  Cloppenburgius, shall find the infallibility and certainty of the Scriptures and of the Doctrines of faith contained in them under the new Testament abundantly cleared and made good, and the cavils about the interpretations of Scripture, the need of a visible infallible judge, of every man's private Spirit being judge, &c fully answered, and therefore I shall not enlarge further on it; only I shall briefly add, that God in these times of the new Testament hath left this threefold way, and means of infallible certainty in Doctrines of Faith and Worship. First, the Scriptures, and more especially since the Canon hath been sealed and completed, contains and holds forth all things necessary to salvation, and out of them they may be certainly and infallibly known: the word of God written is an inflexible golden rule (not leaden nor be bend) for all matters of faith and manners, and there is such a certainty of the Doctrines of faith laid down in the Scriptures, that 1. all poins of faith necessary to salvation are plainly therein set forth, so that all men who have spiritual ears and eyes may understand their meaning, which position besides that 'tis held generally by our most learned 
* Whitak. Contro. prim. De Scripturae perspicuit. quaest. 4. Omniae quae sunt ad salutem necessaria apertis verbis in Scriptures proponi. Daven. De Judice ac norma pag. 9 In omni controversia de doctrina fidei, aut praeceptis morum ad salutis necessariis, spiritum sanctum tam perspicue judicasse per scripturas, ut omnes intelligant ejus sententiam, quibus aures & oculi spirituales non desunt. Verbi causa, de vera Christi incarnatione sententiam de finitivameamque planam & evidentem tulit spiritus sanctus verbum caro factum John 1. 14. willet's first general controversy, quaest. 5. Whites way to the true Church, pag. 31. The Jesuit can name no one necessary Article of our Faith, but the Word teacheth it as plain as himself can: as that there is one God, three persons, a general resurrection and judgement, that Jesus is the Saviour of mankind, etc. Rivet. Cathol. Orthod. Tract. Prim. quaest. 6. Cloppenburg. Disput de Scriptura, Macco. Disput. 7. de Perspicuitate Scripturae, Ames. Bellar. Enervat. Tom. 1. De verbo Dei, cap. 4. de Scripturae perspicuitate, omnia illa quae sunt intellectu necessaria ad salutem, apertissimè in Scriptures proponi.  Divines against the Papists, may be demonstrated by these places of Scripture and reasons, as Psal. 19 7. 8. enlightening the eyes, making wise the semple, Psal. 119, 105. 2 Pet. 1. 20. compared to a candle, and a light to our feet and paths, to a light shining in a dark place, Deut. 30. 11. the commandment is not hidden, all which show the clearness and plainness of the Scriptures: the Scripture in evident places calleth us to search it and seek to it as John. 5. 39 Esay 8. 20, &c, which had been to no purpose if they could not be understood: again, the end of the Scripture is for our learning Rom. 15. 4. but now obscurity and things not to be understood ex diametro oppose learning: lastly, I might produce a multitude of pregnant quotations out of the Fathers, Justin Martyr, chrysostom, Austin, Clemens Alexandrinus, Isidorus Pelusiota, Gregorius, &c speaking of Gods fitting the Scriptures even to the capacity of Babes and Sucklins, of the Scriptures being a River wherein the Lamb may walk and the Elephant may swim, of being a common light that shineth to all men, of being easy to be understood by the Ploughman, the Artificer, the widow woman, and him that is most unlearned, but I remember I am handling the question of Toleration, and not that of the Perspicuity of the Scriptures, and do therefore conclude, affirming things necessary to salvation, to be so clearly laid down in the Scriptures, that no man who can understand the words need doubt of the sense. 2. There is not only a certainty and assurance to be had from the Scriptures of things more plainly laid down therein, the matters of faith absolutely necessary to salvation, but from the Scriptures, by comparing Scripture with Scripture, considering of circumstances, by just consequences, and such like, many hard doubtful points in Religion which to one man alone, or to weak unlearned men are very vucertaine and doubtful, yet by the help of many learned men in Synods and Counsels going God's way may from the Scriptures be made clear and certain: That place of Scripture Deut. 17. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. shows us that hard matters and matters of Controversy, too hard for a few Priests the lower Courts, may by the help● of the higher Courts be so certainly and clearly resolved from the sentence of the Law, the written word in that time, that they who will not hearken in that case deserve to die; and so in the new Testament some things in Paul's Epistles hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrist to their own destruction, learned men well settled in the faith may understand and believe certainly, and not be led away with their error to fall from their steadfastness as that place in 2 Pet. 3. 16, 17. implies. That Controversy in Acts 15. about keeping the Law of Moses and circumcision was hard and difficult considering that time and state of the Church, as appears by many passages in that chapter; and yet from the Scriptures by the means of a Synod after much disputation and debate the truth was certainly resolved on, and so received by the Churches, who when they heard it rejoiced in it Acts 15. 21.  
Secondly, The Spirit of God in and by the Scriptures doth infallibly and certainly assure and persuade the heart of the truth of the Doctrines of faith; 'tis a good saying of 
* Spiritus sanctus non est Scepticus, nec dubia aut opiniones in cordibus nostris scripsit, sed assertiones ipsa vita & omni experientia certiores ac firmiores. Lutherus.  Luther The holy Spirit is no Sceptic, neither doth it write doubts or opinions in our hearts, but assertions more certain and firm than life itself and all experience. The illumination, inward Teaching, and Persuasion of the Spirit certainly assures us of the truth of the Doctrines of faith, John 16. 13. 1 Cor. 2. 10, 11. 1 joh. 2. 20, 27. 1 John 5. 6. The Spirit of truth guides into all truth, It is the Spirit that beareth witness because the Spirit is truth, which Spirit as it seals and confirms in our consciences the truth of all the Doctrines of faith and salvation, so also it certainly persuades us those Books to be Canonical, from whence all those Doctrines of faith are drawn: But concerning these points of the Scriptures being the infallible inflexible Rule, and the Spirit of God speaking in and by the Scripture being the supreme infallible judge in Controversies of Religion, and of the plerophory wrought in the minds of the faithful concerning the Scriptures and the Doctrines of faith therein contained by the illumination and inward persuasion of the Spirit, and that every man's private Spirit is not thereby made the judge of Controversies, I refer the Reader for full satisfaction to the learned writings of Whitaker against the Papists upon that Controversy of the Scriptures, De Scripturae Authoritate, perspicuitate, & Interpretatione, of Rivet in his Catholicus, Orthodoxus, first Tract. Question 8. 17. and his Isagoge ad sacram Scripturam cap. 19 20, 21. of Davenant, De Judice ac norma Fidei, cap. 13. 30, 32, 33. and Cameron de ecclesiae constantia in retinenda veritate, 291. 292. 3. Besides the certainty and Infallibility by the Scriptures and the Spirit of God, there is a certainty in points of Religion, even points controverted, for Christian Magistrates to attain unto, by means of the Ministry of the word in the preaching of Pastors, and the Advice and resolutions of Synods and Counsels; for next after the absolute supreme judgement of the Scriptures and the Spirit in questions of faith, God hath appointed a public 
* Davenant De Judice ac norma fidei cap. 3. cap. 14.  Ministerial judgement of Pastors and Synods who have a delegated power from the supreme judge, that what the Law hath defined in general, they should according to the rule of the Law apply to particular cases, Controversies and Persons: Now however, these Ministerial judges are subject to error and mistake, Synods and Counsels may err, as the most earned Protestants hold against the Papists, yet for all that they may certainly and infallibly judge in matters of faith, yea and have: A man may certainly know some things, and yet not be infallible in all things: A Physician is not infallible in judging of the nature of all drugs, herbs, &c yet he may certainly know the nature of some drugs, and that such a thing is rank poison, of which the Reader may find more in the 
* page 4. 5.  Vindication of the Ordinance against Heresy, Blasphemy &c, to which Hagiomastix answers never a word in his pretended Answer: 'tis one thing to be subject to error, posse errare, and another thing actually to err, de facto errare: it follows not because Ministers and Synods may err, that therefore in all particular Articles of faith propounded by them they do err: 'tis a known Axiom in the Schools, Aposse ad esse non valet consequentia. And therefore Ministers and Synods in their Interpretations and Decisions going according to the word of God, which is infallible, judge infallibly, and may be said to be infallible in their determinations in those points: He that is directed by an infallible truth in his determinations, he determines infallibly, although he be a man of a fallible judgement. Thus many Orthodox 
* The general Council of Nice condemned the Opinion of Arrius, the general Council of Constantinople condemned the Heresy of Macedonius, the general Council of Chalcedon the Heresy of Eutyches; a Synod at Ancyra, and others in Asia condemned the Heretic Montanus.  Counsels and Synods in great Controversies and main points of faith have determined the truth certainly and infallibly, and so propounded them to the Churches to be certainly believed, not that they thought their judgement to be infallible, but that they knew the word of God according to which they judged to be infallible. Doctor 
* Cap. 18. Aliud est posse errare, aliud de facto errare. Possunt errare privati quilibet pastors, particularia etiam quaelibet concilia: non tamen idcirco intolerabilem errorem admittunt, queries popule sibi subdito aliquid ex verb● divino deductum tanquam articulum fidei credendam proponunt.  Davenant in his learned Tractate de judice ac norma Fidei, in answering the Arguments of the Papists that General Counsels cannot err, and among others this, that if all General Counsels can err, than it certainly follows that all Counsels have admitted intolerable error, answers, 'tis one thing posse errare, another thing de facto errare; every particular Pastor mayerre, as also every particular Council, yet therefore they do not admit intolerable error as often as they propound to the People that which is drawn from the word of God, where he 
* Qui autem ab infallibili veritate dirigitur in judicando, is judicat infallibiliter, illi etiam constat illud esse verum quod ex verb● did cit, utcunque non gaudeat judicio ●●fallibili.  further shows how a man may be said to judge infallibly, that yet is fallible: and for conclusion of this I desire the Reader to observe two things: First that Synods and Counsels however in themselves fallible and subject to err, yet being Lawful quoad id quod requiritur intrinsecus, and going according to the Scripture, their results and determinations are from the holy Ghost, and so infallibly and certainly true, as that of Acts 15. 28. demonstrates, It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us, which words a Synod having like clear evidence of Scripture, may without presumption use as well as that Council at Jerusalem did; for proof of which kind of infallibility, besides what I have already said p. 140, 141, of this Book, I shall add the judgement of learned 
* Posse alia legitima Conci●● semiliter asser●re decreta sua esse d●●rata Spiritus sancti, si huic Concilio similia fuerint, & si eandem re●ulam servaverint, quam in hoc Concilio servarunt & secuti sunt Apostoli. Si enim nihil nisi ex Scripture is statuerint & definierint quod in hoc Concilio factum est, & si omnes Quaestiones ad Scripturas examinaverint, & Scripturae vocom la omnibus fuis decretis secuti fuerint, tum possunt asserere, Spiritum sanctum sit decrevisse. Contro. 3 Quaest 6.  Whittaker upon the words: Other Lawful Counsels may in like manner lassert their Decrees to be the Decrees of the holy Ghost, if they shall be like to this Council, and shall keep the same rule, which in this Council the Apostles did keep and follow: For if they shall decree and determine nothing but from Scripture (which was done in this Council) and if they shall examine all Questions by the Scriptures, and shall follow the voice of the Scriptures in all their Decrees, than they may assert that the holy Ghost so decreed; of learned 
* Nos vero facile concedimus Concilia legitima quoad id quod requiritur intrinsecus, id est concilia vere fine fuco & fallacia congregata in nomine Christi, non posse errare in iis quae sunt alicujus momenti. Nam nos quidem fatemur ultro multa concilia non errasse imo fatemur concilia legitima (quomodo illud a nobis supra explicatum est) hoc est vere congregata in Deinomine non errarei● rebus necessarii●. Cam Praelect. De Eccles. p. 289 293  Cameron in his Tractate De Infallibilitate Ecclesiae, We do easily grant Lawful Counsels, Lawful, in respect of what is inwardly required in them, that is Counsels truly gathered together without all fallacy and deceit in the name of Christ cannot err in those things which are of any great moment: For we truly willingly confess many Counsels not to have erred, yea we confess Lawful Churches (as in the sense above is explained by us) that are truly gathered in the name of Christ, not to err in necessary things; and of 
* Baron. Apodix. Cathol. Tractat. 5. De Authoritat. Eccles. cap. 17. Non 〈◊〉 simpliciter & absolute id quod Parisienses de Conciliorum infallibilitate docent. Pie enim. & probabiliter credi potest Concilia vera generalia & legitima, hoc est legitime convocata & procedentia, ita gubernari & dirigi à Spiritu S. ut non errent in dogmatibus fundamentalib●●. Dico hoc credi posse, quia certo constat talia concilia nunquam hactenus errasse in dogmatibus fundamentalibus. Vide ibi plura.  Baron, in that acute and learned Reply of his to Turnbull the jesuit, we do not simply and absolutely condemn that which the Doctors of Paris do teach of the infallibility of Counsels. For it may be piously and probably believed that Counsels truly general and Lawful, that is Lawfully gathered, and proceeding, to be so governed and directed by the holy Spirit, that they may not err in fundament all points. I say this may be believed, because 'tis certain such Counsels have never hitherto erred in Doctrines fundamental. Secondly, although the Authority and Power of Synods and Counsels is not of itself infallible, neither appointed of God that it should be the supreme and principal Rule of our Faith; and therefore cannot by itself and of its own Authority bind the faithful to believe whatever is determined in a Synod or Council, yet there is in them the supreme Ecclesiastical Power of judging and determining Controversies of Faith; and that appointed by God to avoid confusion and rents in the Church: Hence the Authority of Lawful Counsels hath a special force and singular efficacy before many other motives of faith, to beget a peswasion in the minds of men of the truth of the Doctrine, agreed on in the Council. And because in our times the best Synods and Counsels are rejected and slighted, and every private person takes upon them a boundless Liberty of contradicting all Synodical Decrees, I shall therefore lay down briefly out of divers learned Authors, what preeminency there is in Synods and Counsels towards the compounding of Controversies and doubts in Religion, above what is in private Christians or single particular Ministers. 1 There is an authority given them by God, they are an Ordinance of Jesus Christ to judge of, and determine Controversies of faith, which no man of a sound mind affirms of private Christians or particular Ministers. Secondly, they have a power of subjecting those to excommunication and other Ecclesiastical censures, who openly contradict their Decrees. Thirdly, they have a more peculiar assistance of the Spirit, & so greater than that which particular Ministers judging apart have. Fourthly, They have surer means of finding out the truth, viz. The Prayers, Fast, Disputations, etc. of the chiefest Pastors of the whole Church: For as 
* Praelect. de Ecclesia pag. 292, 293. Deinde in concilio si adsint viri pii & docti, aperiunt quae fuerunt clausa mutual 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. id quod non aeque facile possit prae stari à singulia seorsim. Id expectamus ut. i● Concilo, in Conventu doctorum & piorum virorum proferantur argumenta veritatis quae antea ignota fuere. Praelect▪ de Eccles. Tract. de Infa●●●b. Eccl. Quoties aliquid decretum est a caetu quodam hominum, qui in aliqua authoritateconstituti sunt in Ecclesia, facit hoc ut ne temere, & non adhibita accuratat & gravi observatione in rejiciatur.  Cameron speaks, In a Council, if there be present pious and learned men, they open things, which before were shut, by their mutual disquisition, which cannot be so easily done of particular men apart. Fifthly, A better ground of knowing what is the judgement of the whole Church, concerning any Question in Controversy, and what the Churches have observed in such cases. Sixthly, A more easy way of reducing the Decrees and Determinations of the Church to practice. Seventhly, greater Reverence, Respect and Obedience is owing to the Determinations and Decrees of Synods and Counsels, then of particular Persons or Churches: the Authority of Synods in their place and degree is so to be looked upon, that particular Ministers or private Christians should not lightly or easily for every probable Reason, or conjecture reject their determinations: Hence Cameron speaking of Counsels well observes, So oft as any thing is decreed by an Assembly of men, who are put into authority in the Church, that should be a ground that such a thing should not rashly nor without a great deal of accurate and serious observation be rejected. For first of all, we owe Reverence to a Synod, even then, when we judge it decrees false things. A 
* Pius Ecclesiae filius non perperam ei insilit, sed ab ea reverentiali quodam pudore percussus abscedit. Walensis Tom. 5. lib. 2. cap. 27.  pious son of the Church doth not vainly insult over her, but with a kind of Reverential shamefastness departs from her. Secondly, we owe outward obedience unless we do evidently perceive the Synod to prescribe and determine false and wicked things; for 'tis not Lawful upon light and probable Reasons to oppose the judgement of the Pastors of the Church; the certain manifest Authority of God commands us to obey the decrees of the Church; and when we have only uncertain conjectures and probable Reasons, than that common rule is to be followed, 
* Tene certum relinque incertum.  Hold that which is certain, leave the uncertain. And therefore they who doubt of the truth of the Decrees of a Synod, or upon light and probable Reasons think their Opinion false, but do not certainly know it to be such, are bound by the Synodical decrees to perform such an obedience as is agreeable to order, comeliness and peace, which obedience is nothing else but the observance of Christian humility and modesty, by which the faithful in such cases abstain both from a public open profession of their Opinion, and a condemning and confuting of the Synods Opinion, and in the mean time by diligent searching of the Scripture do inquire out the truth and pray to God to manifest his truth to men, and to discover the errors of the Synod, that so they being known, contrary Doctrine may be established in another Council: Of which seven particulars, and divers others of Synods, whoever would see more, let them read Baron against Turnbull, Tract. 5. De Authorit. Ecclesiae cap. 17. cameron's Praelect. De Eccles. Infallibilitate 292. 293. Apollon. Jus Magist. circ. sacra first part cap. 4. 247. 248, 249. Fourthly, there is a greater degree of infallibility and certainty in matters of faith and religion to be attained by means of the Scriptures, than was by the high Priests answers by Vrim, or then is to be had by miracles, by one arising from the dead and coming to us, then by an Apostle or an Angel from heaven, yea or from a voice coming from heaven, of each of which I will speak something briefly. 1. There was more certainty even under the old Testament in the word written in the Law, then in the high Priests Answer, which appears thus, because the Law was made by God himself the chief rule and measure of the high Priests Answer, and in difficult cases wherein the jews were commanded to come to the high Priest for resolution, the last reference is made to the Law: That very place Deut. 17. 9 10, 11, 12. brought by Hagiomastix page 130. to prove the sentence there spoken of, only such a sentence which the Priest did upon enquiry by Vrim and Thummim receive immediately, or however infallibly from the mouth of God himself, and by the jesuits Bellarmine, Lorinus, Bailius, &c brought to prove the Pope the supreme infallible judge of Controversies, and not the Scriptures, shows clearly whatever answers the high Priest gave in matters of judgement, they are limited expressly to the word of God, and that is made the supreme judge: The jews were not simply to rest in the judgement of the high Priests whatever they pronounced, but as it was according to the Law: There is an express limitation in the text, in verses 10. 11. thou shalt do according to the sentence of the Law which they shall teach thee; In the Hebrew text 'tis twice written juxta os legis, according to the mouth of the Law, and the ordinary Gloss upon that place, notes, that 'tis not said unto them thou shalt obey, unless they teach according to the Law; these words according to the sentence of the Law do signify a condition, not a promise, as if God did promise the Priests they should never depart from the Law, which our 
* willet's Synops. First General Contro. of the Script. Quest. 6. 2. part of the question. Rivet. Cathol. Orthod. Tract. 1. quaest. 8.  Divines observe against Bellarmine and other Papists; yea Master Goodwin himself Sect. 107. of his Hagiomastix speaking of this place to be meant only of such a sentence which the Priest did upon enquiry by Vrim receive immediately or however infallibly, from the mouth of God himself, grants it and puts in the same Section this sentence of the high Priest under the Law, and saith the command in that Scripture is with that Caution and limitation of going according to the sentence of the Law; for proof of which I shall quote his own words verbatim, Thirdly, nor doth God in this passage of Scripture (speaking of Deut. 17. 12.) expressly command without caution and limitation that even in this Controversy itself, he that would not stand to the sentence of the judge, or high Priest, should be put to death; but only then, when the Priests, the Levites, and the judge, should give sentence or inform them according to the sentence of the Law. And for the Readers further Satisfaction of the Scope and meaning of Deut. 17. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. to free it from Master goodwin's sense of only such a sentence which the Priest did upon enquiry by Vrim receive immediately, by which he would evade all punishment from the Magistrate in matters of Religion (though I have said much upon the place already) I refer him to the first Tractate, eight Question page 127. 128, 129. of Rivets Catholious Orthodoxus, 2. Then by miracles, 'tis a saying of 
* Hom. 3. de Laz Maldonate in Mat. 7. 22, 23.  chrysostom, God hath left us the Scriptures, more firm than any miracle: where the word of God is for such a thing, that thing is most true and certain, the word of God standeth and ahideth for ever; It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one title of the Law to fail: 'tis impossible for God to lie: miracles accompanying Doctrines are not always infallible proofs of the truth of them; for false Prophets, teaching false Doctrines may do miracles, and come with signs and wonders: Deut. 13. 1, 2, 3. shows that false Prophets who say, let us go after other Gods, may give signs and wonders, and the sign or wonder may come to pass, Matth. 7. 22, 23. Christ tells us that many who prophesied in his Name, plead they have cast out Devils, and done many wonderful works; were workers of iniquity, upon which place * Maldonate (though a jesuit) confesses those false Prophets of which Christ speaks wrought true miracles, truly Prophesied, truly Prophesied, truly cast out Devils; neither doth Christ answer them that they lied, but that he knew them not although they had done such miracles; and thereupon he grants there can be no necessary argument taken from true miracles to prove the truth of Doctrine. So Matth. 24. 24. 2 Thes. 2. 9 Revel. 13. 13, 14. fully set forth how false Prophets and Antichrist shall do great miracles, by means of which they shall deceive many. In Augustine's time the Donatists would allege miracles done by them to prove the truth of their Church and Doctrine, and so do the Papists now against the Protestants, making the glory of miracles a note of their Church; but Augustine against the Donatists of his time, and learned Protestants against the Papists upon that Question of the notes of the Church, do prove the word of God a surer note and Argument of the true Church and Faith, than miracles, as whoever consults the writings of * 
a August. de Vnitat. Eccles. cap. 16. Tract. 3. in John Evang. say not these things are so, because such a one did such and such miracles, but let them prove their Church by the Canonical books of the Scripture, and by nothing else these are the demonstration of our cause, these are our foundation, these are our grounds upon which we build  Augustine, 
b Whitak. Contro. 2. quaest. 5. c. 12.  Whitaker, 
c Camer. praelect. de Eccl. p. 255, 256.  Cameron, 
d Rivet. Cath. Orthod. Tract. 2. quaest. 7. p. 372, 373.  Rivet, 
e Ames. Bellar. enervat. De notis Ecclesiae.  Ames, 
f willet's Synops. 2. Gener. Controu. concerning the Church. quaest 〈◊〉. Of the power of working miracles.  Willet, 
g Whites way to the 〈◊〉 Church pag. 62, 63.  Whites way to the Church, and especially of learned 
h G●rad de Eccles. Sect. 11. from p. 448 to 467.  Gerard shall find. 3. The proof of Doctrine by the Scripture, is more infallible than the testimony of one coming from the dead Luk. 16. 29, 30, 31. Mases and the Prophets for persuading to believe are preferred before one arising from the dead: They who elude and wrest the Scriptures, interpreting them according to their own just, if one should arise from the dead, they would not believe him in what he said against their Opinions, but would put off all one way or other: Experience hath taught that as 
* Maldon. comment in luc. 16. v. 30.  Maldon●ie observes: Christ raised up Lazarus from the grave, who (as 'tis to be thought) told the Scribes and Priests many things agreeable to those which Christ taught them, and yet they were so far from believing him that they would have killed him, John 12. 9, 10, So the Scribes and Pharisees after Christ's resurrection from the dead believed him never a whit more than before. 4. Then an Apostle, for the Apostles notwithstanding the prerogative of infallibility, their certain and infallible knowledge of the Gospel by the immediate inspiration of the holy Ghost, being infallible in their writings to the Churches, and in those Doctrines of faith they preached to those to whom they were sent, were in some things at some times subject to mistakes or errors. Peter that great Apostle of the circumcision, after the holy Ghost was given Acts 2. erred and mistook in accounting the Gentiles at that time common and unclean, as Acts 10. 13. 14, 15, 18, 24, compared together fully shows, and in the Doctrine of Christian Liberty, compelling the Gentiles to live at the Jews, and not walking uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel, for which Paul withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed, Gal. 2. 11, 12, 13, 14. But the Scriptures err not at all are all fine gold without any dross, cannot deceive, be perfect and glorious: the Apostles themselves in their preachings and writings appealed to the Scriptures, made them the chief rules of their Doctrines, Acts 3. 21. Acts 4. 25, 26. Acts 17, 2, 3. Acts 26. 22, 23. Acts 28. 23, 24, 25, 26, 27. Rom. 1. 2. Rom. 3. 4. with many other places to the same purpose: The 〈◊〉 are commended for that when Paul the Apostle preached to them, they searched the Scriptures whether those things were so; John the Baptist was sent from God 1 John. 6. immediately inspired by the holy Ghost as well as the Apostles, and yet Christ prefers the witness of the Scriptures before the Testimony of John, John 5. 34, 36. 39 The Testimony of the Scriptures is greater than the record of John, of which see willet's Synops. first general Controvers. concerning the Scriptures, quest. fourth 5. Then an Angel, Gal. 1. 8. But though we or an Angel from heaven, etc. Paul prefers the Scriptures before Apostles, yea Angels, and anathematizes them, if they bring any other Gospel then what the Apostles had preached, which in many places he declares was according to the Scriptures. chrysostom saith that the Scripture is to be preferred before the Angels in the matters of faith: The word of God is the chief and highest rule of faith, for as learned Chamier writes, The word of God is God speaking, therefore look what is the authority of God speaking, the same is of the word of God, and therefore above Angels: And by the way I desire the Reader to observe against Hagiomastix who makes such a do of infallibility, that not whatsoever is infallible is the supreme rule of faith, for that is a grand mistake to make every thing that is infallible the ground of believing, or the chief rule of it; but this is the ground of being the supreme Rule of faith, that it be summae suaeque authoritatis of supreme authority, of itself, and not from another, which is apparent, because Angels are infallible, the Apostles also were ex particulari assistutia Spiritus, and yet neither of them are, nor have been the supreme Rule of the Church. This Paul hath taught us in Gal. 1. 8. how Apostles and Angels are to be anathematised if they bring any other Gospel: But these things are unworthy to be affirmed of the Rule of faith, and especially of the supreme Rule, which ought not to be so resembled to any thing that by that it should be corrected and ordered, for than it ceases to be a Rule, but rather that by the Rule, especially the highest, all things else are to be judged: wherefore, besides infallibility there is something else necessary to a thing that it should become a Rule; namely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, that it be of chief, and of its own Authority, not of a subordinate and borrowed Authority from another; but whoever would be further satisfied in this point, let him read learned 
* Pa●strat. Cathel. de Canon. & summa Regul. Fid. Neque enim quicquid est infallibile, estregula summa fidei, quiae Angeli sunt infallibiles, Apostoli etiam fuerunt infallibiles ex particulari assistentiae Spiritus. & tamen neutri sunt, aut fuerunt Ecclesiae summa regula: Hoc nor Paulus docuit. Gal. 1. 8. A● haec indignae sunt quae dicantur de regula fidei & praesertim summa regula; quae nulli rei itae comparari debet, ut ind● coerceatur, alias desinit esse regula: Sed potius ut inde sint omniae judicanda. Quare praeter infallibilitatem aliud quid dam necessarium est ut fiat regula, nimirum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hoc autem est ut summae sit suaeque authoritatis; non autem subalternae aliundeque emendicate. Summo quid praeferri potest? At Chrysostomus Angelis ipsis in negotio fidei preferandam dixit Scriptur●m: Si non summi, ergo nec fumma regula, & tamen infallibiles, non igitur quicquid est infallibile, summa est regula fidei.  Chamier. 6. Then Gods own voice from heaven, the Apostle Peter tells us 2 Pet. 1. 17, 18, 19 of that voice of God from heaven which came to Jesus Christ; This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased, which Peter, james, Iob●, heard when they were with Christ in the holy mount Matth. 17. 5, 6. and yet Peter speaking of the Scriptures and comparing them with this voice from the excellent glory writes thus, We have also a more sure word of prophecy, whereunto you do well that you take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts, upon which words 
* Oecumenius in locum. Quoniam autem rebus ipsis & experientiae cognovimus quae fuerunt à Prophetis pronunciata, firmiorem, inquit, per haec judicamus Prophetiam ipsorum: nam resipsae consequntae sunt sermones ac oracula. Aquinas in locum, vel dicit firmiorem quia visioni contraadicere poterant, quae facta fuit in secreto, sed Prophetiae nullus contradicere audebat. vid. Annot. of our Engl. Divines on the Place.  Interpreters on the Place, and other 
* Vid. Whitak. Contro. 1. De Script, Author. quest. 3. Illud verbum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad rem spectat, significat enim Scripturam firmissima maxima que authoritate esse praeditam.  learned men show however that voice from heaven being from God as the written Prophecies were, was in itself as sure, yet the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken either for a most lure, or very sure word, a comparative for a superlative, so used in other places of Scripture, & so setting forth to us the Scriptures being founded on the firmest and greaest authority; or more sure, or more firm. (So the word in the Greek properly signifies) to the Christian Jews to whom the Epistle was written, which by long use and experience were more settled in their hearts, and so sooner believed, than the voice from heaven, although that were sure also. Christ in Joh. 5. from verse 31. to the 40. speaking of the many Testimonies concerning him, as his own, Johus testimony, the Testimony of his works, instances in the voice from heaven, witnessing to him Matth. 3. 17. 17. Matth. 5. and then Christ goes to the Scriptures as the highest and chiefest, Search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me: we may observe the gradation of the witnesses, Christ's works greater than the Testimony of John, the Father's witnessing from heaven above that of his works, and the Scriptures testifying of him the last and greatest of all; and for a conclusion of this, Gods speaking to his Church under the new Testament, especially since the Canon was sealed and confirmed, (as Divines speak) that is by his Son making known the whole Evangelical Doctrine and Will of God concerning man's salvation, is by the holy Ghost preferred far before the divers manners and ways of Gods making known his will before, as that of dreams, visions, Vrim and Thummim, voice from heaven, Angels, &c, as is evident by Heb. 1. 1, 2, 3. compared with the second of Heb. 1. 2, 3, 4. In a word they who are so wicked to wrest and pervert manifest plain places of Scripture, would not (if they had lived in those days,) have rested satisfied in the Sentences of the high Priest by Vrim, in one coming from the dead, in the Doctrine of an Apostle or Angel, or in a voice from heaven, but would have made cavils, and sound pretences to have eluded and evaded all, or any of those as well as the Scriptures, in all which I might give particular instances, but for present I shall instance only in the voice from heaven, of which voice from heaven John 12. 28, 29, 30. though it was so plain and distinct, testifying Christ to be sent of God and the Messiah, yet 'tis perverted and misinterpreted as much as the Scriptures, of which voice from heaven how perverted, I refer the Reader to learned 
* Rollock in 12 Joh. 28. 29, 30. Vary sentit tubra de audita voce illa alii pejus alii melius sentiunt, utrique tamen a vero aberrant. Data fuit haec vox Coelo ut ait Dominus postea illorum causa, ut hoc quasi mi raculo & pertento admoniti, crederent eum esse missum à Deo & Messiam sed adeo excaecati sunt & indurati ut tamen de Messia● nihil cogitaverant. Vid. Calvin. & Maldon. in locum.  Rollock. Calvin, and other Interpreters on that place of Scripture, and so much for this seventh Answer.  
Eightly, Supposing all Hagiomastix saith in page. 46. 47. and 130, to be true that that sentence of the Priest or judge against which he that would do presumptuously was to be put to death, was only a sentence upon enquiry by Vrim and Thummim, and that the jews opportunity of immediateness of consultation with the mouth of God himself, was a clear reason why that old Testament Law for putting of false Prophets, &c to death was given to them, yet it follows not these Laws cannot be in force now, unless that can be made appearance to have been the only reason and ground of the Magistrates punishing, for if there were other reasons as well under the old Testament of those Laws, and that by God formally and particularly declared and expressed (as 'tis evident there were, and I have proved page 70. 76. and divers other pages of this Treatise) than they being in force still, the Laws bind though one particular reason, or more proper to that time be ceased: I might instance in many moral things commanded under the old Testament that unquestionably (I suppose in Master goodwin's judgement) are in force under the new, of which among other reasons given, there was some one particular reason proper to the jews, that holds not now, but for this I refer the Reader to page 83. of this Book: and to put an end to these eight Answers to the sixth evasion of Hagiomastix page 46. 47, 130, I shall only mind him of that known axiom A particulari ad universale non valet consequentia, and therefore though that particular reason be ceased (although I have fully shown that never was any reason of those Laws under the old Testament for punishing of false Prophets, but a mere device, and a fancy) 'tis no good consequence, all the other reasons, yea, and the commands themselves should cease also.  
Seventhly to that 
* page 45. 46.  Hagiomastix saith, that the punishments enjoined by God then under the Law to be inflicted in his Church upon delinquents, were more bodily and afflictive to the outward man, than the punishments enjoined under the Gospel, and consequently were not only carnal or bodily, but typical also, and prefignificative of those greater and more spiritual under the Gospel, cutting off from his people then, as of casting out from his people now, cutting off under the Gospel being no where found to be used but in a metaphorical and allusive sense, also to what 
* Min. Cel. Senens. Sect. Tert. pag. 189.  Minus Celsus Senensis writes that that corporal punishment in Deut. 13. was a Type of eternal damnation, and therefore that Law with all the rest given for the future signification of things by the coming of Christ ceased, I answer as follows. First, I deny the punishments enjoined by God under the Law to be inflicted in his Church upon delinquents to be bodily or afflictive at all to the outward man, as by donfiscation of goods, or by death, but they were spiritual and inflicted upon the souls by suspension, excommunication, and such like spiritual censures, as well as now under the Gospel: 'tis true, there were bodily outward punishments in the Civil judicatories inflicted then on the bodies of false Prophets, Idolaters, &c, but by the Magistrates, the Civil Governors, and not by the Priests, the Ecclesiastical Governors in the Church of the jews: For under the Law the Jewish Church and Commonwealth, the Civil Government and Ecclesiastical, the censures and punishments of Church and State were formally distinct, as Master Gillespie hath fully and excellently proved in his Aaron's rod blossoming in many places, particularly 1. Book cap. 2. 3, 4, 5, and the Church of the jews proceeded then against false Prophets, only with the sword of the Spirit, and spiritual weapons, and the State with the material Sword, and bodily punishments: Which truth is fully acknowledged also by Master Cotton (however differing from Presbyterians about a National Church) in his Answer to Master Williams Bloody Tenet, saying, I should think mine eye not only obscured, but the fight of it utterly put out, if I should conceive as he doth, that the National Church State of the Jews did necessarily call for such weapons (a speaking of a Sword of Iron or Steel) to punish Heretics more than the Congregetional State of particular Churches doth call for the same now in the days of the new Testament. For was not the National Church of the jews as completely furnished with spiritual Armour to defend itself, and to offend men and Devils as the particular Churches of the new Testament be? Had they not power to convince false Prophets as Eliah did the Prophets of Baal? Had they not power to separate all evil doers from the fellowship of the Congregation? what power have our particular Churches now, which their National Church wanted? or what efficacy is there found in the exercise of our power which was wanting to them. It is therefore a Sophistical imagination of man's Brain to make a man's self, or the world believe that the National Church State of the jews required a Civil Sword, whereas the particular State of the Gospel needs no such help. And was not the National Church of Israel as powerfully able by the same spirit to do the same? surely it was both spoken and meant of the National Church of the Jews, not by might nor by Power, but my Spirit saith the Lord of Hosts Zach. 4. 6. So that by what I have already said Hagiomastix must either (I suppose) recall what he hath written of carnal bodily punishments enjoined by God then to be inflicted, in his Church upon delinquents, or else must join with the Erastians' in holding the jewish Church and Commonwealth, their Government and Censures all one and the same. Secondly, The foundation upon which Hagiomastix rears this building of outward punishments under the old Testament being typical of spiritual under the new, (viz the Land of Canaan with the external happiness and peace there being typical, and therefore reasons a compara●is and from the Analogy) is sandy and unsound: for the Land of Canaan with the external happiness and long life in it, whatsoever it was typical of, was from what God had put into the Land, being a Land healthful, pleasant, flowing with milk and honey, abounding in excellent precious fruits, the immediate blessings of God upon it, and not from what came to it by the Magistrates Laws and their good Government, for further satisfaction of which I wish Master Goodwin to resolve me this question, whether the Land of Canaan were not typical as well in times of wars and troubles and under bad Princes, as in days of peace, and under good Princes and so to reason a comparatis (to use his own Phrase and adidem,) if temporal threatenings and bodily punishments inflicted upon delinquents under the old Testament, were typical and Praesignificative of greater under the Gospel, they must be threatenings and bodily punishments inflicted from God upon false Prophets, &c, not thee executed by the Magistrates on them. Thirdly, Granting both Hagiomastixs' foundation and the building reared upon it to be good, yet they no whit prove bodily and outward punishments to be wholly taken away under the new Testament; for suppose the temporal happiness and the temporal punishments had typified more spiritual happiness, and less of the earth, more spiritual judgements, and less of outward or bodily sufferings under the Gospel, yet it follows not, they take away all outward happiness and blessings, and all outward bodily punishments: there may be greater or lesser degrees of things under the old and new Testament suitable to some difference in the manner of Administration between the old and the new, and yet not the substance of the things taken away: These are known axioms, Gradus non tollunt substantiam, Magis & Minus non variant speciem: 'tis apparent by sense and experience that how much soever spiritual blessings, and spiritual judgements in the days of the Gospel abound above the times under the Law, yet they take not away all temporal outward blessings, nor all temporal outward judgements, but God for all that gives many outward blessings, and sends many temporal judgements on the earth, So supposing God should inflict more spiritual judgements on the souls of men under the new Testament, and the Church greater spiritual censures then under the old, it no way follows the Magistrates may inflict none at all, especially when all spiritual judgements on the soul are slited, and with a high hand contemned. Fourthly, Whereas punishment by the Magistrate and cutting off by death under the old Testament, in cases of Apostasy, Blasphemy, &c, is made a Ceremony and type of excommunication under the new Testament, cutting off of casting out, and of eternal damnation, I may truly Answer this is gratis dictum, said, but not proved, and therefore might deny it without giving any reason, and bid the Patrons of Toleration prove it, but that the Civil Magistrates punishing delinquents under the old Testament, was no Ceremony nor Type, I shall give these reasons. 1. Ceremonies, shadows 
* Zepper, Mosai. Leg. Explanas'. lib. 1. cap. 7. ceremonialia Typica rerum fuerunt aut praeteritarum recordationes ent futurarum praefignificationes, Rerum praeteritarum ut anima Paschatis celebratio, manna in arca foederis asservata, aneus Scrpens. Futurarum ut Sacrificia, etc.  Typical things under the old Law, were either of things past, or things to come, the remembrances of things already done, or the Praesignifications of future things, but Ceremonies and Types were not the signification of things present and existent: Now excommunication and eternal damnation were at that time under the old Law when those commands of punishing with death the Apostate, faise Prophet, &c, were given and in use. That excommunication and cutting off from the Church were in the Church of the Iewe● in the times of the good Kings and Magistrates punishing Idolaters, &c with the Civil sword, let the Reader Consult Aaron's Rod blossoming 1 Book 4. 5, 6, 7. chapt. That there was Hell and eternal damnation under the old Law, as well as the new, both before those commands in Deut. 13. 17. were given, and all along after, many places of Scripture show, as Isaiah. 30. 33. 2 Pet. 4. Judas 5. 6, 7, that mention Hell for the evil Angels, Sodomites, the unbelieving Israelites that came out of Egypt, and the wicked Kings of Israel and Judah; and therefore that which Hagiomastix saith, that cutting off from his People under the Law, it exchanged for casting out from his people under the Gospel, is very false, for there was casting out from the Church as well then as now, yea cutting off spoken of in the old Testament in many places, means nothing else but casting out of the Church by excommunication, for full proof of which I refer the Reader to Aarens rod blossoming 1. Book cap. 5. pag. 55. 56, 57, 58, 59; As also that passage is not true, that the expression of cutting off, where ever 'tis found in the Gospel, is m●tephorical and allusive only, for cutting off is used in the new Testament for cutting of by bodily death, as in Gal. 5. 12. and else where: the proof of which I refer to the 20. Thesis where I shall handle it fully. Secondly, The same things may be said with as much reason against bodily outward punishments for breaches of the second Table, Adultery, Murder Theft, as against outward punishing for Apostasy, &c, and if they hold not good against the second Table, neither do they against the first. Thirdly, The Civil Magistrates punishing for moral transgressions is no Ceremony nor Type, acts of moral justice, though they may sometimes be extraordinary, yet they never were accounted Typical or Figurative, but by such as would transform all the Scriptures into an Allegory, and Master 
* Bloody Tenet washed and made white in the blood of the Lamb, p. 177. 179.  Cotton answering such a like evasion in the Bloody Tenet, saith, Did ever any Apostle or Evangelist make the judicial Laws of Moses concerning life and death, ceremonial and Typical Time was when humane inventions in God's worship were accounted superstition; But now humane inventions in Doctrine may pass for currant Evangelical Divinity. And in another 
* A Reply to Mr. William's his Examin●●. 〈◊〉 43.  place, To make a judicial Law a figure without some light from some Scripture, is to make a man's self wise above that which is written. Fifthly, the making these express commands of God concerning punishing Idolaters, false Prophets, Blasphemers, types and figures of spiritual and eternal punishments, of excommunication, damnation, &c is, by turning the Scriptures into an Allegory, and forsaking their literal sense against the rules of interpretation given by the most Orthodox 
* Walaeus De sacr. Script. Per spy. pag. 145. Synops. purior. Theol. pag. 62. Weems Christian Synagogue, p 225. It is a dangerous thing when the words are properly to be taken, for to take them figuratively.  Divines as Augustine and others, a making them utterly void, and as opening a wide door to all errors and foolish conceits, that as often as men know not how to answer the Scriptures that cross their Opinions and lusts, and yet have a mind to keep their Opinions, they may still fly to this, and say, This Scripture is not to be taken literally, but mystically and Allegorically: Beza in that judicious Tractate of his De Haereticis a Magistratu puniendis, in Answer to Montfortius a grand Patron of Toleration in those times, who in many places of his writings, made use of this Invention, that corporal punishment under the old Law, as stoning, was no figure of any bodily punishment to be now inflicted, but of eternal, to which we ought to leave Heretics, or else of that punishment which is inflicted not by a corporal sword, but a spiritual, the lively word of God, writes thus, 
* Fuit enim haec elim Satanae infignis versutia, quam tamen nemo prorsus ex veteribus, quod eorum pace dix erim, satis animadvertit, ut, quumnon posset Scripturam ex Ecclesia prorsus ●●●cere, vanis tamen allegoriis totam redderet inutilem & mythologicam, adeo ut ne unus quidem sit in Scripturia apex qui non sit istis allegor●● contaminatus: quod etiamnum iter body Libertin: & Anabaptistae ingrediuntur. Sed hoc velim isti nobis often daunt, ex quo tandem Scripturae loco commentum istud de judicialium legum umbris & figuris didicerint. Name in ceremoniis, atque adeo in quibusdam etiam bistoriis. ex Scripturae auctoritate hac agn●sco.  For this was the special subtlety of Satan of old, which yet not one almost of the ancient Fathers observed, that when he could not cast the Scripture out of the Church wholly, yet by vain Allegories, he made the whole Scripture unprofitable and fabuloùs, so as truly there was not one piece of Scripture left free of being contaminated with these Allegories, which very course also the Anabaptists, and Libertines take at this day. But this I would that they should at length show us, out of what place of Scripture they have learned that invention and device of the shadows and figures of the judicial Laws. Per in Ceremonies and so in some Histories from the Authority of Scripture I acknowledge these things: But of judicial Laws, or corporal Idolatry, which might shadow out spiritual, I remember not that I have ever read any thing: But for further satisfaction in this particular, I refer the Reader to the Tractate of Beza page 156. 167. Sixthly, supposing all Hagiomastix saith were true, that those bodily punishments commanded by God under the old Law to be inflicted upon false Prophets, Idolaters, Seducers, Blasphemers, had been in some sense typical and Praesignificative of those greater and more spiritual under the Gospel, yet it follows not that they are ceased now, and may not be lawfully practised, for they may remain and be made use of, though the other sense intended be fulfilled too: there is a compound sense of some Places of Scripture literal and historical, figurative and spiritual, as Weems in his Christian Synagogue second Book page 223. 224, 225, 226, 227, 228 shows, in which cases when the spiritual is fulfilled eminently, the literal is not abolished, of which I might give many instances, but shall only name one, viz. that of Deut. 25. 4. Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the Ox which treadeth out the Corne. Now though the spiritual sense of that place, be the not muzling the mouth of the Ministers who labour in the Gospel 1 Cor. 9 9 yet the literal sense holds still that a man should forbear to muzzle the mouth of the Ox which treadeth out the Cor●●, or at least 'tis not unlawful to forbear; besides by the same reason, the Decalogue the whole ten commandments are overthrown too, for both in Moses his giving the moral Law, and in the commands themselves with the preface from the second verse of the 20. of Exod. to verse 18. there are divers particulars typical and figurative of things under the Gospel, temporal corporal things of spiritual and heavenly, of which I having spoken before in this Book pag. 24. 25, 83, 85. and many learned Divines giving instances in this kind * as 
a Zepper. Mosaic. leg. Forens. explaxat. lib. 1. cap. 6.  Zepperus 
b Rivet. Explic. Decalog▪ pag 10. 11, 12.  Rivitus 
c Burgess vindic. legis pag. 158, 164, 165.  Master Burgess, I shall enlarge no further, but refer the Reader to those Books.  
Having laid down divers reasons to prove the commands under the old Law for Magistrates punishing false Prophets, Apostates, Blasphemers, to be of common reason and equity given to all Nations, and for all Ages, and having answered the most material grounds brought by the Patrons of Toleration to make void those commands, as not binding under the new Testament, I come in the third place to answer those evasions and shifts brought by 
* Stratagem. Satan lib. 3. pag. 158, 159. 160.  jacobus Acontius, Minus Celsus Senensis, and Hagiomastix, `that if it should be granted that all and every the Laws contested about, 
Min. Cells. Disput. De Heretic. coercend. Sect. 3. 171, 172, 173, 174. Hagiom pag. 52, 53.  as well that for putting to death the false Prophet, as those for inflicting punishment upon the Idolater and Blasphemer were moral, and still in force under the Gospel, yet these could not reach unto Heretics, and false Teachers among us, at not being those false Prophets, Idolaters, Blasphemers, spoken of in the old Law. If it can be proved that Heretics are those Blasphemers, false Prophets, Apostates, which Moses commands to be killed, than it shall be acknowledged Heretics are to be killed; but there is a large difference between a Heretic and such a false Prophet or Apostate, as the Presbyterians in their own definition of Heretics make. A Heretic does not deny God the Creator of heaven and earth, neither doth he teach that other gods are to be worshipped; a Heretic does not deny the name of Christ. a Heretic does not deny the word of God which an Apostate does: So that the word of God may be used as a weapon against Heretics, which against an Apostate, cannot. A Heretic therefore is not mentioned nor touched in any one word of these Laws: But if any will go about to draw these Laws unto an Heretic, that cannot be done by the proper force of the words, but (as the Lawyers speak) per extensionem latamque interpretationem, by stretching of them and far fetched interpreation. And it would first be well considered of, whether every Law does admit of such extensions, and if not every one, which of them then does admit, and wherefore? and whether in this Law there are those things for which an extension is to be made. By the false Prophet who was commanded to be put to death Deut. 13. 5. was not meant every Heretic or erroneous person, nor yet those who taught or published any false Doctrine though of dangerous consequence; but only those who endeavoured to persuade men to the worship of a false god; & that by affirming that they spoke by the inspiration of some deity, and that their sayings were to be esteemed Oracles. What Doctrine it was which made the Prophet or Teacher of it guilty of death, is expressly determined in the Law itself, and asserted to be this; Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them. And that the Law of God made against false Prophets and worshippers of false Gods, was not intended against those who otherwise held that the Law of God was to be kept, but were infected with some other error, is sufficiently evident from hence, because in former times among the jews, who were affected with a vehement love and zeal towards their law, Heretics notwithstanding were tolerated, and particularly the Sadduces. These although the greatest part of the people, and the Rulers believed them to err exceedingly, nevertheless they were not expelled the City, neither exempted from being Magistrates, or bearing any other Civil office: yea they were not hindered from coming to the Temple or the Synagogues. The Scribes and Pharisees also both held and taught many most dangerous and erroneous Doctrines; yet were they also in great honour and esteem in this Church and state. And though our Saviour upon occasion reasoned against; yea and reproved them all for holding and teaching these errors, and gave warning to take heed of them; yet did he never charge this Church or State, or those that bare office in either, with sin, or unfaithfulness in their places for not proceeding against them in regard of their errors, either by imprisonment or death. And yet we know that the Zeal of his Father's House, did eat him up, and that he attempted a reformation amongst them; yea Christ did teach and press upon men, all, and all manner of duties from judgement, mercy, and faith, even to the paying tithe of Mint, anise, and Cummin.;  
Now unto these and other such like, besides some hints I have already given upon the 14. Thesis', which may serve in part for satisfaction to some of these evasions, I desire the Reader to mind these following Answers.  
First, there are other places of Scripture both of commands, or else examples approved by God, concerning the punishing with death or restraining by Civil power, (the last of which makes good the point in hand against Hagiomastix and other Libertines, as well as that of death) for other faults in matters of Religion, besides Blasphemy, Apostasy, and false Prophesying in the sense now alleged by Hagiomastix and his Compeers, which these following instances prove First in Deut. 13. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, that very chapter verse 5. brought by Hagiomastix to prove only those were to be put to death, who endeavoured to persuade men to the worship of a false God; and that by affirming, that they spoke by the inspiration of some deity, and that their sayings were to be esteemed by Oracles, the Holy Ghost lays down the contrary, giving a distinct Precept and command from that of the false Prophet, or dreamer of dreams, who publicly and openly solicits to Apostasy, concerning the kill of such who in a hidden and clancular way seduce: 'tis observed by learned Junius in his Analytical explication on Deut. 13. that there are two sorts of Seducers to Apostasy commanded to be put to death, the one of such who publicly and boldly solicit, who are spoken of in the 5 first verses, the other of such who secretly entice in verse 6. and the five following: Now however the false Prophet or dreamer of dreams might pretend to speak by the inspiration of some deity, for which the 5 verse of the 13. is quoted by Hagiomastix, yet the private enticers to Apostasy, as the daughter, the wife of the bosom, the Son, besides that they are made a different sort from the Prophet and dreamer of dreams, and those six verses from the sixth to the twelfth contain a distinct command from the five first verses about false Prophets, neither do they give out signs or wonders to confirm their calling, the parties instanced in the text, being of daughters to Fathers, Wives to Husbands, &c, were not likely so much as to pretend to them the name of Prophets speaking by inspiration of some deity, but rather drawing by their nearness of relation, intimateness of affection, opportunities of private and constant converse (which many phrases in those verses, the wife of the bosom, thy friend which is as thy own soul, entice thee secretly, thou shalt not censent unto him, neither shall thine eye pity, and such like imply) and yet these are commanded to be put to death, as well as those Prophets who openly and bodily gave out signs and wonders to confirm their being Prophets, of which the Reader may be further satisfied, by reading Junius his Analytical explication on Deut. 13. And as Moses in that former part of the chapter shows plainly, contrary to the affirmation of Hagiomastix and other Libertines, that others who persuade men to the worship of a false god besides those who pretend themselves Prophets, are to be killed, so in the latter part of this chapter from v. 13. he lays down how they are to be put to death also that are guilty of Apostasy, that have suffered themselves to be drawn away from the true worship of God to other gods, who are so far from coming under the notion of false Prophets, endeavouring to persuade men to the worship of a false God, and that by affirming they spoke by the inspiration of some deity, as that they fall not under the Title of Seducers at all, but the seduced; and therefore 
* Francis. Jun. Analys. cap. 13. Duo argumenta ad Apostasiam pertinentia in hoc capite exponuntur. Prius est de auctoribus sollicitantibus ad Apostasiam v. 11. Posterius est de reis Apostasiae, qui se abducia vero Dei cultu perpessi fuerint reliquo capite.  junius writing upon this Deut. 13. analyzes the whole chap. concerning Apostasies into two, First, the Author's enticing to Apostasy in the first 11. verses. Secondly those who are guilty of Apostasy, who suffer themselves to be withdrawn from the worship of God, in the latter part of the chapter, and he shows this is another part of the chap. in which Moses speaks not of those seducing false Prophets, nor the clandestine Seducers, but of those who yielded to their Seducements, particularly of those who publicly to the view of all are Seduced, and being in public Order as a City, rest in that Apostasy, by the public authority of men falling from God, and openly defending that impiety. So Deut. 17. from verse 2. to verse 8. sets down a Law for putting to death those who are Idolaters and Apostates simply, though they never went about to entice others: 
* Jun. Analyt. Expl. in Deut. 17. Differt. autem haec lex ab ea quam supra cap. 13. exposuimus, quod illic agitur de Apostatis (ut vulgo loquuntur) dogmatizantibus, & ad Apostasiam sollicitantibus; hic vero de Idololatris simpliciter.  junius upon this 17. c. observes that this Law differs from that in the 13 chapt. the eleven first verses, because there Moses speaks of Apostates who are Dogmatists and enticers to Apostasy; but here of Idolaters simply. In Deut. 17. from verse 8. to verse 13. there is a Law that in ecclesiastical cases in matters of Religion, as well as Civil, upon going from the lower judicatories to the supreme to the high Priest with the College of Priests, the man that would do presumptuously and would not hearken unto the Priest, even that man should die, which was in other cases than Blasphemy, Apostasy, Prophesying falsely: for it appears by the scope of that place and the stream of all interpreters, that in too hard matters for inferior Courts, they should go to the High Ecclesiastical Synedrion, and whoever presumptuously disobeyed their sentence according to the Law, though in other things than the forenamed Blasphemy, &c as appears by this place verse 11. 12. speaking of the Law indefinitely with that 
* Walaei Oper. fol. de Script. Interpret. pag. 164.  2 Chr. 19 8, 9, 10, 11. compared together, mentioning what cause soever shall come to you of your brethren that dwell in their Cities between Law and commandment, statutes and judgements, should be put to death, the ground of which putting to death here commanded, was not only from the nature of these sins against the first Table of the highest form as Apostasy Blasphemy and such like, but for other sins in points of Religion, though lesser, when the sentence and resolution of the high Priest with his Colleges was presumptuously disobeyed, so that the punishing of wilful scornful contempt of supreme Ecclesiastical Government, determining doubts and Controversies according to the word of God, though in other cases, than Apostasy, Blasphemy, Prophesying falsely, is here commanded: But having spoken so much of this Deut. 17. already in p. 101. 102, 103, 104, 105, 135, 159, 160. I shall not enlarge further, only I shall take my leave of this Scripture by adding a passage out of Master Cottons late Book against Mr. Williams in way of answer to an evasion of his, that the capital punishment prescribed against the presumptuous rejection of the sentence of the highest Court in Israel, was a figure of excommunication in the Church of Christ: Unto which Master 
* Reply to Mr. William's Examination. p. 43.  Cotton replies, That Law is of moral equity in all Nations and in all Ages: He that shall presumptuously appeal from, or rise up against the chiefest or highest Court in a free state, is guilty, laesae Majestatis publicae, and therefore as a capital offender to be censured in any free commonwealth; And certainly if that part of the Law in Deut. 17. of presumptuously appealing from, or rising against the sentence of the chiefest and highest Court in a free State being punished with death, be of universal and perpetual equity, then punishing so far at least, as to restrain those who presumptuously rise up and contemn the sentence of the highest Ecclesiastical judicature in a Church going according to the word of God, is of universal and perpetual equity too, and the command of God in that text for punishing, is against the man that will not hearken unto the Priest, as well as he that will not hearken unto the Judge. Deut. 18. 20. sets down a Law, that the * Prophet which shall presume to speak a word in God's name, which he commanded him not to speak, shall die, as well as he that shall speak in the name of other gods: which place of Scripture proves expressly against Hagiomastix that other Prophets, besides those that came in the name of false gods, and with other false Doctrine then that, let us go after other gods which thou hast not known and let us serve them, were to be put to death. The command is indefinite concerning speaking any word in God's name which he commanded not to speak, which must needs extend further than a Prophet prophesying only of turning to another God: for there were many false Doctrines and false worships against the Jewish Religion, besides that of Apostasy to other gods: Again the scope of the words and several phrases, as if the thing follow not nor come to pass, thou shalt not be afraid of him, show 'tis meant of other Doctrine then saying, let us go after other gods, namely of Doctrine foretelling of some things to come; whereas enticing to go and serve other gods is the praesenti. Learned * junius writing on this place, shows that the Prophecies here spoken of are different from those in Deut. 13. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. they being of faith, but these of facts and events, which are not foretold particularly from the Canon of the Scripture, but only from the special revelation of God. Ainsworth in his Annotations upon the Place shows v. 22. the Prophet there speaking of things, is meant of predictions foretelling things to come, as also he reckons up several sorts of false Prophets, others then the false Prophet spoken of Deut. 13. 1, 5. The false Prophet is to be strangled to death, although he Prophesy in the name of the Lord, and neither addeth nor diminisheth, whether he Prophecieth that which he hath not heard by prophetical vision, or who so hath heard the words of his fellow Prophet and saith that his word was said unto him, and he prophesieth thereby; he is a false Prophet, and is to be strangled to death. And 'tis evident by Jerem. 26. 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 16. in the Priests and Prophets proceeding against Jeremiah pretending him to be a false Prophet, and therefore to be put to death, for saying this house shall be like Shiloh, and this City shall be desolate without an inhabitant; Whereas Jeremiah still makes his defence, The Lord sent me to prophesy against this house, and against this City all the words that ye have heard, that other false Prophets were to be put to death, than those who taught men to worship other gods, upon which law they would have put Jeremiah to death, against whom they never so much as suggested that he caught revolt from the Lord, and worshipping strange Gods. Deut. 19 16, 17, 18, 19 gives a ground in case of private seducing to revolt, upon proof, to punish with death, or in case of perjury, testifying falsely upon oath against one for seducing, a sin against the first Table too, to do the like, both which shows other persons for matters of Religion may be punished, than the false Prophet spoken of in Deut. 13. 1●5. viz. private Seducers to Apostasy and perjured persons, of which place of Scripture, let the Reader see what I have said before in this Tractate, page 108. and further consult Junius in his Analytical explication of Deut. 19 where we shall find that both ways the matter here spoken of, is belonging to the first Table and Religion: If the accusation be true, 'tis enticing secretly to Apostasy; if false 'tis matter of Religion because the oath of God is set to it, especially in the cause of Apostasy, and therefore the Priests in that an oath is a point of Religion, are commanded to be present, and to take cognizance of it. And by the way lest this place may be thought to favour the Priests enquiring by Vrim, for the resolving of the controversy, because 'tis said, Then both the men between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the Lord, before the Priests and the judges, I shall to what I have already answered to this place pag. 108. add a passage out of 
* Jun. Analyt. expl. Deut. 19 17. Consistent due illi viri quibus est controversia, coram Jehova, id est, non coram templo. Domini, sed coram Judicibus à Domino datis, coram quibus quum homines comparent dicuntur sistere sese coram Domino, & quos c●nsulentes dicuntur Dominum consulere, Exod. 18. Deut. 1.  Junius to show the contrary, The parties between whom the controversy is, are commanded in these words to stand before Jehovah, that is not before the Temple of the Lord, but before judges given of the Lord, before whom when men appear they are said to stand before the Lord, and whom consulting with they are said to consult the Lord, Exod. 18. Dent. 1. The verse also next following shows it cannot be meant of the judgement of Vrim, for the resolution of it depends upon the judges making diligent inquision verse 18. that is their questioning and searching into the parties and all circumstances, whereas if it had been by Vrim, it would have been attributed to the Priests, rather than the Judges, and it would have come from God, without that diligent inquisition and exact enquiring of men, as the words imply. So Junius on the place saith. But the knowledge and judgement of this thing properly belongs to the Judges, and therefore to the Judges only the diligent enquiring, and through searching, out is principally commanded. Lastly, Zach. 13. 2, 3. God by the Prophet shows that in the days of the Gospel prophesying falsely as distinct from Idolatry (for so 'tis made and also I will cause the Prophets) is to be punished bodily (which text that 'tis both meant of the time under the Gospel, and to be understood literally of civil outward punishment by those in Power and Authority, and not figuratively and spiritually, that I may not anticipate myself, nor create trouble to the Reader to read the same thing twice, I shall by the grace of God prove in the 19 Thesis', where I shall at large speak of that Scripture and take of Hagiomastix's evasions, and whither I refer the Reader) Now by Prophets there and those who prophecy and speak lies in the name of the Lord are not meant only Prophets whose doctrine is to go & worship false gods, but all sorts of false phets. 1. Illiterate mechanic men, who run but are not sent and that whether they preach true or false, which that they are included the fifth verse shows, because when the false Prophets spoken of shall repent and be ashamed, among the rest one is brought in, saying, I am no Prophet: I am an Husbandman, for man taught me to keep cattle from my youth. 2. Prophets who take upon them in the name of the Lord, as by revelation from God to foretell things to come, such Prophets as are spoken of in Deut. 18. 20. Ezek. 13. 6, 7. Jerem. 14. 14. 15. 3. Such who preach false Doctrines and Heresies wresting the Scriptures to maintain them, though they do not formally teach another God and Christ, neither pretend to speak by the inspiration of some deity, but only by perverting the Scriptures, which is a speaking lies in the name of the Lord: Now that Heretieks and false Teachers are understood in this place of Scripture as well as Apostates, besides the judgement of many learned and Orthodox Interpreters, as 
a Calv. in Zach. 13. 3. Jam satis clare ostendit Propheta de falsis doctoribus hoc locum debere intelligi, quia mendacium locu tus es in nomine Jehovae.  Galvin 
b Aria's Mont in Zach. 13. Nomen Nebiim non vates modo, sed stulte loguaces garrulosque significat; eos nimirum quid vanae orationis cui nulla virtutis ratio reipsa subest, artifices sunt, atque sermonis & verborum praestigiis populum capiunt.  Ari●s Montanus, 
c Gualt. in locum At de falsis Doctoribus locum debere in telligi ex sequen tibus patebit.  Gualther 
d Fabrit. in Zach. 13. 2, 3.  Fabritius, 
e Diod. The Prophets, namely the false Prophets, by which are meant all Seducers and teachers of lies  Diodate, 
f English Annot. The Prophets, namely the false Prophets, by which are meant all Seduces and teachers of lies  Annotations of English Divines, there are these Reasons. 1. all such are meant who speak lies in the name of the Lord, and that is made formalis ratio why not live, and to be thrust thorough, for thou speakest lies in the name of the Lord. Now false Doctrines and Heresies are speaking lies, called lies in many places of Scriptures 1 Tim. 4. 2. 2 Thes. 2. 11. Revel. 2. 2. and fables 2 Tim. 4. 4. and when men pretend God hath revealed them unto them by inspiration, or urge the Scriptures to make them good, this is to speak lies in the name of the Lord: hence Calvin upon this place gives this reason that 'tis clear the Prophet Zacharie speaks altogether of false Teachers, because of those words, for thou speakest lies in the name of the Lord. 2. The word in this text used viz. Nebüm, and translated Prophets, does not only signify Prophets as Arias Montanus observes upon that place, but foolish speakers and vain talkers; such namely who are the cunning devisers of vain discourses, and by the subtle illusious of words do catch the people; such as Peter speaks of, 2 Pet. 2. false Teachers among the people who with feigned words deceive, & among others such especially who when they are confuted by learned men by plain places of Scripture being destitute of all ability and means by which to defend them errors, that they may delude weak people, insolently host they have the Spirit, all their discourses being full of the boasting of the Spirit, their prayers, disputations, speeches to the People all full of that, for which they think they should be more believed then for all reason, testimonies, imitating therein Mahomet that Prince of Heretics, who when be could not prove the things he taught, than he fled to the authority of the Spirit, saying the Spirit revealed those things to him. Now all sorts of Heretics and false Teachers besides those Prophets who say let us go after other Gods, are vain talkers and deceivers as they of the circumcision and others Tit. 1. 10. 3, In this place is understood Heretics and false Teachers, as well as false Prophets who teach the following after other Gods, from the effects that follow upon the thrusting thorough in the 4. 5. 6. verses: so Gualther upon the place saith, that it ought to be understood of false Teachers, out of what follows it shall be manifest, as from saying, I am no Prophet, I am an but bandman, for man taught me to keep cattle from my youth, etc. That is they shall ingenuously confessé their ignorance that they ought to be sent to the Plaw-taile, and to keep cattle rather than to continue any longer in the Ministry of the Church: And this is fulfilled in our age in many Papists, who have left many fat Livings, and preferments to embrace the pure Doctrine of the Gospel, and ●●bet in the Church of Christ by the labour of their hands to get their living, then in the tents of Antichrist to enjoy the greatest means. Now Papists and such others however they are false Teachers & ven● corrupt unsound Doctrine, yet they are not of those who deny the true God and Christ, and persuade to serve strange Gods: So that by all these places of Scripture opened, we may see fully proved, against Hagiomastixs' assertion, by warrant of Scripture, many corruptions in matters of Religion, besides false Prophets publicly teaching Apostasy to false Gods, outwardly and bodily punished, as private Seducers (though they pretend not to be Prophets) as persons seduced not seducing, as those who would not hearken to, but contemn the sentence of the supreme Ecclesiastical Assembly, as Heretics and false Teachers; and whoever would see more of these instances of Magistrates punishing for corruptions of religion in points of will-worship, Sabbath breaking, &c, let them look back to page 27. 28, 29 of this present Tractate.  
Secondly, Supposing there had been no other commands nor examples for Magistrates under the old Testament putting to death for matters of Religion, than those named by Hagiomast. of false Prophets, Apostates, Blasphemers, which is not true (as I have now shown in this first Answer and page 28. of this present Book) yet these were sufficient grounds to justify the Magistrates punishing in like cases, and that upon these Reasons. 1. In all Laws and commands for the better knowing their nature what they require and would have, 'tis good looking into the causes and reasons of them, why such Laws were given by God: from the cause of making the Law, the mind of the Lawgiver is to be understood: 'tis a known maxim Ratio legis est mens legis, the reason of the Law, is the mind of the Law; Now the reasons and causes of both those commands, both against false Prophets as also private Seducers in 
* Jun. Analyt. Explic. in Deut. 13. p. 541. Causae hujus legis & 〈…〉 gravissimae expenunter di●●: quarum prior atque poten●ior est respe●● 〈…〉 of respect●● 〈◊〉.  Deut. 13. from 1. to the 12 are. 1. the seeking to turn men away from the Lord their God, and thrusting them out of the way which the Lord commanded them to walk in 2. The putting away the evil from the midst of them, that others may hear and fear and do no more any such wickedness among them; these are the Spirit and substance of these commands, that those are to be punished who when they fall from God themselves, tempt others to the like defection, and therefore are to be made examples, that others may not do the like; And therefore whoever seeks to turn men away from the Lord God, and thrust them out of the way which the Lord hath commanded them to walk in, they come within the compass of these commandments although they do not tempt to go after the false Gods of that time, and those Countries, which the false Prophets than enticed them to; for the reason of the Law is expressed in a universal form against those who seek to turn men away from the Lord their God, and to thrust them out of the way which the Lord commanded them to walk in, as 
* Bez. de Haeret. à magist. puniend. p. 156.  Beza observes, and therefore to be in force against those in general who do fall from the true Religion, and enticers also, which is done other ways then by falling to the strange Gods in those times that Moses writ in; yea the command itself verse 5. in the letter, mentions as speaking to turn men away from the Lord their God, so to thrust out of the way, which the Lord their God commanded them to walk in, which certainly in the Scripture sense and acception includes other apostasy and Idolatry, then of other Gods; and I ask whether Israel's worshipping the golden calf, and the ten Tribes worshipping the golden calf at Dan and Bethel, though they worshipped jehovah in and by them, 
☜  were not a going out of their way which the Lord their God commanded them to walk in. Secondly, It is common and usual, that in the commands concerning the worship of God and in other places of Scripture where the worship of God is spoken of, there are synecdochical speeches, intending and containing many other things of like kind and nature although not formally and literally expressed. Eliah when he complained of the whole Covenant of God violated by the Israelites, expresses it by a part, 
* 1 King. 19 10  thrown down thine Altars and slain thy Prophets. The Prophet Isaiah prophesying of Egypt's embracing the true religion, saith, Egypt shall swear to the Lord of hosts, under that expressing the whole worship of God. The commands of God are exceeding large and broad, comprehending many things under one: 
* River. in Decal. p. 6. In omnibus, praeceptis decalogi Synecdocben esse agnoscendam; qua specie una proposita intelliguntur omnes sub eodem genere. Vide plur.  Rivet in his explication of the Decalogue among other Rules he gives for understanding of the commandments, hath this, that in all the Precepts of the Decalogue we must acknowledge a Synecdec●e, in which one kind being propounded, all under the same genus are understood. But that that Synecdoche may be rightly explained, before all things the Scope of the Lawgiver in every Precept is to be enquired after: namely, what he signifies pleases and displeases him: for than we shall aim rightly and refer all things to their true end; Now in these commands Deut. 13. from v. 1. to the 12. if we do but well observe the scope and end of the Lawgiver, viz how teaching defection from the Lord God highly displeases him we shall plainly see the Synecdoche in these commands, under that turning away by those false Gods, other turning away by false Gods of another sort, and false worships of the true God by Images and Idols, highly provoking him. Of 
* Bez. de Haeret. à magistr. puniend. 156. Sunt autem hujus defectionis varia testimonia publica, que rum etsi praecipua tantum, & quae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accidunt in legihus commemorantur, ipsa tamen legis ratio unversali formula concepta est: itaque in genere valere debet adversus eos qui à vera religione deficiunt, & allies ad defectionem solicitant.  defection from God there are many dangerous and damnable ways, divers public testimonies of it, of which though one or two Principal of the times and places then may be only particularly named in the Laws, yet such that are worse, and other as bad must needs be meant too, especially when the reason of the Law speaking of defection is delivered in a general way, as 'tis in this instance of Deut. 13. But of this the Reader may see more in page 31. 32. of this Treatise.  
Thirdly, under the old Testament Laws, commanding Magistretes to punish false Prophets, Idolaters Blasphemers, are contained false Teachers and Heretics, who preach Doctrines destroying the foundation, and blasphemers against the glory of Christ, although they be not such false Prophets and Apostates as wholly deny God and Christ, and fall to the gods of the Heathens, which besides the judgement of many learned Divines, as Calvin, Beza, Zanchius, Bullinger, Peter Martyr, Philip Melancton, junius, Zepperus, with divers others upon that question, still quotiug those texts to prove that Heretics and false Teachers ought to be punished by the Civil Magistrate, appears further thus. 1. Among the 
* Haebreis, Pseudo-propheta quemvis falsum doctorem significare solet, Bergii Dissert. Octae de Haeres. esusque Jud.  jews a false Prophet used to signify every false Teacher as 
* Fabrit. in Zach. 13. 2, 3.  Bergius shows, and I have already shown out of Calvin, Arias Monianus and others that by the false Prophets in Zacharie are meant false Teachers, and that the word in the Hebrew Nebiim signifies foolish and vain talkers, that with feigned words make merchandise of People, as well as Prophets; and some Divines show that the name of Prophet in the general signification was taken not only for them that foresold things to come, but for such who professed themselves Interpreters of the Law and word of God, though falsely. 2. There is a great agreement and analogy made by the Holy-Ghost, between the false Prophets under the old Testament, and the false Teachers and Heretics under the new; between the Heathenish Apostasy and Idoaltrie of strange Gods under the old, and Christian Idolatry, the worshipping of the true God, by Images, Saints, and the believing of false Doctrines destructive to the faith, as these places of Scripture show 2 Pet. 1. 1. But there were false Prophets also among the people, even 〈◊〉 there shall be false Teachers among you, where Peter resembles them together, making the false Teachers under the new such men as the false Prophets under the old; hence in many places of the new Testament, 
* ride● igitur qui haeretici, etiam Pseudo-Prophetae saepe appellantur, de quibus Math. 7. 15. Math. 24. 24. Bergii Dissertat. Octa. de Haeres. 1060.  Heretics and false Teachers who broached strange Doctrines in Christian religion, still professing to hold Christ, are called by the name of false Prophets, and Popish Teachers who hold Christ, the Scriptures, &c, called false Prophets, as Matth. 7. 15. the false Prophets there, must needs be meant false Teachers, who do not deny God and Christ, and not Master goodwin's false Prophets, as their sheep's clothing spoken of in the text shows. So Matth. 24. 11. 24. the false Prophets were such men in pretences, in so much that if it were possible they would deceive the very elect. So 1 John 4. 1. Christians are called upon to try Doctrines, because many false Prophets are gone out into the world, that is, false Teachers broaching strange Doctrines, and thus the Antichristian faction is called the false Prophets in divers places of the Revelation of Saint john, hence called dreamers jude 8. as those in Deut. 13. 1. compared to Janues and jambres, to Balaam that false Prophet and such like, 2 Tim. 3. 8. 2 Pet. 2. 15. jude 11. and thus Rome after turned Christian, but worshipping the true God after a false manner, being corrupt in the faith of Christ, is called by the same name and the same things affirmed of it for worshipping Devil's and for Plagues, as of Heathenish Babylon that worshipped false gods, as many places in the Revelation of Saint john show. 3. Heretics and false Teachers who yet profess to believe in God Creator of heaven and earth, and in jesus Christ, to hold also the Scriptures the word of God, may yet ●each such Doctrines that they may be justly styled false Prophets, Apostates, Idolaters, Blasphemers, as divers of the ancient Heretics, Mevandrians, Gnostics, Manichees, with others, and sundry of the later sort, Papists, the Libertines against whom Calvin writes, Socinians, Familists. The Apostles in many places of their writings speaking of Heretics and false Teachers in their times, and Prophesying of those in after times, both the Popish faction and the Sectarian, speak of them as Apostates, Anti-christs', false Prophets, Seducers, Deceivers, Idolaters, Blasphemers, and their Doctrines and ways as Apostafie, Idolatry, Blasphemy, worshipping of Devils, Seducing and such like, as these and many other such like places of Scripture show, 2 Thes. 2. 3. 1 Tim. 4. 1. 2 Tim. 2. 17. 18. 1 Tim. 1. 19 20. 2 Pet. 2. 1. 1 john. 2. 18, 19, 22, 23, 26. 1 john. 4. 1, 2, 3. 2 Epist. of john 7. 9, 10. jude verse 4. Revel. 2. 20. Revel. 9 20. Revel. 13. 5, 6. Revel. 16. 13, 14. Revel. 13. 3, 5. Revel. 18. 4, 9 Revel. 19 20. It were easy for me to show how many of the Heretics in the three first Centuries that professed the name of Christ, and therefore not called infidels, might justly be termed Apostates, false Prophets, Idolaters, Blasphemers: Junius observes upon Deuteronomy 13. that Heretics are distinguished divers ways, Heresy is either total as that of the Menandrians, Gnostics, &c, or partial departing only in part from the Doctrine of faith: Now I suppose total Heresy, will easily be acknowledged Apostafie; but I will only instance in some Heretics and false Teachers of the latter times, Papists, Socinians, Antitrinitarians, Anabaptistis. Are not Papists gross Idolaters in several particulars, as our Divines have unanswerably shown in their writings against them? Are not Socinians also Apostates, gross Idolaters, who make the Christian faith in the object of faith and worship not to be distinguished from the faith and worship of Heathens, jews, and Mahumetans, and besides one God Maker of all things, worship Christ with divine worship whom yet they hold to be but a mere man: out of the Apostasy, Impiety, and base Idolatry of the Sociaians', in what respects Apostates overthrowing all fundamentals of faith, and agreeing with jews, Turks, and the old Heretics Pault●ni and others, by Epiphanius called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; worse than Papists and their Idolatry more evident and gr●sse then the Papists, I refer the Reader to the Theses of learned 
* Voer. pars prim. alte a, De necessit● Tranitat. Sequeretur fidem Christia nam objecto fidei & caltus sai non distingui, à Gentili, Judaica, Mahumedistica. Sienim necessario non credat in Vnitate Trinitatem, in Trinitate Vnitatem, jam redigitur ad Theologiam naturalem, & Symbolizat cum pseude-religionibus modo memoratis. Addimus nunc tantum de Mahumedica, eam ex vagis & incertis Neo-scepticorum ●ypothesibus vix posse convinci apostasiae absolute exitialis; ca enim praeter pietatem & probitatem, statuit fidem unius Dei & Christi tanquam magni Prophetae & legati Dei ex virgine nati, immo tanquam Messiae: ita ut in his fundamentalibus non admodum dissentire videantur ab Anti-Trinitariis Francisci Davidis sectatoribus. Et Socinianos esse Idololatras, & quidem turpissimos, quip qui ex formula religionis suae praeter unum illum solum natura Deum conditorem omnium, divine cultu adorant Christum natura 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, contra Gal. 4. 2. coll. cum Jer. 10. 11. Libertas exercitii seu caetuum ecclesiasticorum celebratio publica aut privato publica non est concedenda Socinianis, quia est idololatria multo evidentior, & magis theoret●ca ac crassa quam ex grataest invocatio Mariae & Sanctorum in Papatu. Voet. Disputat, de Gentilismo. Videlii Tractat. de Deo Synagog.  Voetius De necessitate & utilitate Dogmatis de sa●st● Trinitate, who fully and excellently proves all these particulars. In the ancient Constitutions of Gratian, Valentinian, Theodosius, Martian, justinian, Antitrinitarians, are said jewishly and Apostatically to contradict the Trinity and the name of Christians is denied them; Are not Anti-trinitatians as Paul Best that hath belched out so many reproachful speeches against Christ and the Holy-Ghost, Blasphemers in a high measure? Are not they who do not only speak evil of the Trinity, but teach others so to do greater Blasphemers than those spoken of in Levit. 24. 16? Are not divers Anabaptists who have broached false Doctrines, and foretold divers things to come as the day of judgement to be on such a day, such a City or Country to be destroyed on such a day, such a City or Kingdom to be given them of God, and that by affirming they spoke by Revelation and immediate inspiration of God, false Prophets as well as those in Deut. 13. 2. Deut. 18. 20, 22? In a word I shall conclude this with a passage out of * Beza De Haereticis a Magistratu puniendis, brought by way of Answer to a like objection against Deut. 13. &c, Those Laws are not now in force, because there is no man now a false Prophet, according to Moses definition, that is, who foretells any thing to come and teaches to worship other gods: I answer that the mind of the Lawgiver is to be understood from the cause of making the Law, Because he hath spoken to turn away from the Lord your God: Now there are divers public Declarations of this defection, of which although the Principal only, and those which most commonly fall out be named in the Laws, yet the very reason of the Law is expressed in a universal form, and therefore in the general oúght to be in force against those who do fall from the true religion and solicit others to defection, whom in a general word we call now Heretics, not false Prophets or dreamers of dreams, or Sacrificers to other gods: because that those out ward ceremonies and those gifts of Prophecy are ceased. But though they be ceased, notwithstanding neither defection, nor the punishment of it is ceased. Moreover I say, those who interpret the holy Scripture wrongfully, withdraw men from the true worship of God, and so persuade them to the worship of other gods. For 'tis necessary that all Doctrine which speaks of the worship of God, if it be not of God it proceeds from the Devil; Therefore he that receives it intertains the Devil, and he that persuades the receiving it draws away from God; For Paul calls the Doctrines of forbidding meats and marriage the Doctrines of Devils.  
Fourthly, In the commands given by God either against such and such sins, or for punishing in such and such sins, without any stretching of the commands at all, or interpretations at large, many things not named must necessarily be contained, as under generals the particulars, as under one kind other kinds of a higher nature, or of the like nature, as under the male, the female also, and other such, or else many common received Rules given by Divines for interpretation of the Decalogue and Scripture are to be rejected; Yea many things that are evil and abominable are not forbidden in the Law of God: There are many things may be instanced in out of the new Testament of which God shows his dislike, which yet in the letter and particularly by name are not forbidden in any of the commands of the old Testament, as Rom. 1. 26. with divers others that might be named; and there are many abominations that have been, are, and may be committed even of things against the light of nature that are neither in the old Testament, nor new forbidden particularly; and yet certainly these things are forbidden directly and properly in the commandments, and the commandments are not stretched, nor wyre-drawn by those who allege such commands against such Practices: If the Scriptures must set down particularly by name all the kinds and degrees of evils, with the particular manner and way of doing them, which the corrupt nature of man is capable of committing, and all particulars of all kinds and manner of duties, with all particular cases about punishments, and all kinds and degrees of punishment belonging to all kind of offences that may fall out, and that both in Civil and Ecclesiastical censures, with the particular way and manner of proceeding in them all, I suppose some hundreds of great volumes would not contain them all, but that it might be said in this case as 'tis john 21. the last verse of the things which jesus did, that if they should be written every one the world itself could not contain the Books that should be written. And if there must not be an extension and interpretation of commands, so as to hold such commands and places of Scripture, forbid or enjoin some things not particularly named, how will Hagiom. prove many things practised by Papists and Prelatical men to be against the second command or against any command, as the making Crosses for Religion, Holy-Water, Saints, Relics, bowing at the name of Jesus, Holy-days, Surplices, Altarclothes, with a hundred other Ceremovies and Inventions of men in the worship of God, are these literally and by name forbidden in the second command or any other? and may not the Papists and Prelates in all the texts of Scripture brought against their Will-worship, and Inventions of men, say the very same to Hagiomastix and his fellows, that Crosses, Holy-days, bowing at the name of jesus, &c, are not mentioned nor touched in any one word of those Laws under the old Testament given against Idolatry: But if any one will go about to draw these words unto their Crosses, &c, that cannot be done by the proper force of the words, but as Law●ers speak per extensionem latamque interpretationem. And it would be first well considered of, whether every Law does admit of such extensions, and if not every one, which of them then does admit, and wherefore, and whether in the second commandment there are those things for which an extension is to be made? Again, I desire Hagiomastix and his compeers to resolve me these questions, seeing there must be no extension of that command in Deut. 13. 1, 5. nothing else commanded but what is in the letter of the Law, Whether a false Prophetess that should arise and endeavour to persuade to the worship of a false God; and that by affirming she spoke by the inspiration of some deity, and that her say were to be esteemed Oracles, were not to be put to death by virtue of this command, as well as the false Prophet? and yet a Prophetess is not in the text. Whether that command Exod. 21. 33, 34. of the owner of the pit into which his neighbour's Ox or Ass fell, making good the Ox or Ass and giving money to the Owner of them, did not bind as much if a Horse or a Sheep fell, into it? and yet the words of the Law are only the Ox or the Ass, and not a Horse or Sheep. Whether that command concerning the putting to death those children that did curse or strike their Parents, though it expressed not in the letter death for killing of them, did not include much more death upon those who killed their Parents? and so I might instance in many more particulars; But for a conclusion of this fourth Answer, I shall end with a passage out of 
* Macco. Disputt 14. De lege Jud. Thes. 15 Perfectio legum Judicialum requirit ut statuamus nullum casum accidere posse, qui non posset ex illius analogia (nam de similibus idem est judicium) de finiri. Exempli gra●ia Exod. 21. 33 34. habetur haec lex: Quum retexerit quis foveam, autquum foderit quis foveam, deinde non operuerit ●am, itaque ceciderit illuc bos aut asinus. Dominus ille foveae rependito, pecuniam restituito domino illius, quod autem mortuum fuerit ejus est●. Hactenus verba legis, sed quid si in soveam talem indicerit ●vis aut equas, fecile est intelligere ex ipsa analogia & similitudine rerum, idem juris hic observandum.  Maccovius in a Disputation of his De Lege judiciali, that the perfection of the judicial Laws require, that we should hold no case can fall out, which cannot from the analogy of the Law (for of like there is the same judgement) be determined. From the analogy and similitude of things 'tis easy to understand, that the same Law and Right is to be observed, referring the Reader for more satisfaction to page 31. 32, 33. of this present Tractate.  
Fifthly, as to that brought by Hagiomastix and the rest, that the Law of God made against false Prophets and worshippers of false Gods was not intended against those who otherwise held the Law of God was to be kept, but were infected with some error, because in former times among the Jews who were affected with a vebement love and zeal towards their Law, Heretics notwithstanding were tolerated, and particularly the Sadduces, these were not exempted from being Magistrates: The Scribes and Pharisees also that taught many dangerous errors, yet were in great honour in this Church and State, I answer, 1. Hagiomastixs' foundation upon which he raises this argument is unfound, for the Scribes Pheri●ees and others in place, in the time of tolerating the Sadduces, Herodians and other Heretics (which was in Christ's time) were not zealous of the Law of God, as is evident by many of Christ's Sermons reproving them for want of love and zeal to the Law, and the true worship of God, Matth. 5. from the 19 verse to the end of the chapter, Matth. 15. from verse 3. to the 10. Matth. 23. from verse 3. to the 29. verse. They were zealous indeed of the traditions of the Elders, and of their own Superstitions and Devices, but not of the Law of God, they corrupted and transgressed the Laws of God by their traditions and hypocrisies, but had no true love nor zeal to the Law nor the Jewish Religion, and therefore no wonder they tolerated Sadduces, Herodians, &c, but of this point how religion was then mightily corrupted and all things out of order, I have spoken before in p. 30. of this Treatise, and so will not tautologize. 2. Can Hagiomastix upon second thoughts think the Practice of the Rulers of the Jews and the people that followed them in a time so desparately corrupt as that was, when Church and State hastened to destruction, and all things were amiss, a safe Ground for Christian. Magistrates to walk by, and not rather judge they did amiss in that as well as in other things, and that their Practice is not a probable Rule to be followed: I shall mind him of one particular instanced in by himself viz, their not hindering the Sadduces and other Heretics, from coming to the Temple or the Synagogues, which if it were well done 'tis by this argument as unlawful for the Church to censure her members with Ecclesiastical censures for any Heretical Tenets, as for the Civil Magistrate to punish, and so all Church Censures for Heresies and false Doctrines are overthrown as well as civil; whereas I took it for granted, Church censures in matters of Religion had been Lawful, viz. A spiritual weapon suitable, by their own confession, for a spiritual evil Heresy, and M. S. a good Friend of Hagiomastixes in answer to that Argument against Toleration, Revel. 2. 20. yields it, saying, that's meant of Church censures, but not of bodily outward punishment by the Magistrate; and therefore I think the practice of the People and their Rulers suffering Sadduces and all other Heretics to be no better argument for Justification of a Toleration, than their practice of crucifying Christ a Justification of that. 3. Besides that all may see what you and your party aim at in speaking of the Pharisees and Saducees being in honour in the Jewish State Magistrates and bearing civil offices, not a bare Toleration of your consciences, but that you may be in places of honour, government and profit: This gives us a clear reason of the Toleration of Errors in those times, namely that Scribes, Pharisees and Saducees were in places of power and government, had a great interest in Church and State, and therefore no wonder if they would tolerate themselves and their own Opinions: can you think it a good argument that Adulterers and thiefs ought to be tolerated, because Adulterers and Thiefs having power, suffer such to go unpunished: Or can you think it reason to say many Papists, Anabaptists, being in places of Government suffered Papists, Anabaptints, therefore 'tis the duty of the godly Magistrate to suffer them and all other Heretics: Pray Master Hagiomastix resolve me this question, seeing Scribes, Pharisees, and such like were Magistrates and in places of power and honour, who should punish Pharisees and Saducees for their Errors and dangerous Opinions?  
Sixthly, as to that last clause that Christ did never charge this Church or State, or those that bore office in either with ●in or unfaithfulness for not proceeding against the Sadduces, Pharisees, etc. in regard of their Errors, either by imprisonment or death, and yet Christ did teach and press upon men all and all manner of duties. I answer, First, how is that proved he never did: Can the Patrons of Toleration Minus Celsus Senensis, Hagiomastix, &c make it follow by saying 'tis no where written in the Gospels, and therefore he never reproved them, can they reason from the Scriptures negatively in matters of fact, such things never were, because the● are not spoken of? what thinks they of that Axiom, Anon dicto ad non fact●● no● valet consequentia, were not there many things that Christ did which were not written, john 21. the last verse? But if they will reply, yes in some things, but not in matters of judgement, righteousness such a weighty matter as this is made to be; I rejoin that in many weighty matters of the Law and justice, Christ either spoke not particularly of them, or if he did, they are not written, neither can be found in the Gospel's more than this of punishing Sadduces and other Heretics in matter of Religion: I might instance in many things unquestionably forbidden or commanded by God in the Moral Law, that are not particularly spoken of in the Gospels, which yet from hence to reason against them weary vere bad Divinity. What instances can be given of Christ's giving any commands to those in place to punish for Murder, Adulterery, Theft, more than for Idolatry, Blasphemy, Here●ie? 2. Hagiomastix brings in the Church again, as well as the State, surely he is for a Toleration of all Heresies, Blasphemies, &c, in the Church as well as the State, to have no man punished for his religion with any censure of Admonition, Excommunication, or Non-Communion: In his M. S. he was for spiritual censures, but in these 3. years last past the man is well improved (belike) to reason against any Church censure as well as State Punishment: And by the way I desire the Reader to observe whatever reason in the wisdom of God there might be, that nothing is set down in the Gospels of Christ's charging the State with sin for not proceeding against the Sadduces, &c, that cannot be the reason to show the unlawfulness of Magistrates punishing Heretics, because Hagiom. confesses the same of the Church, that Christ charged not the Church nor the Officers with sin, for not proceeding against the Sadduces, and yet I suppose Hagiomastix will not openly profess 'tis a good Argument that no Church censures may be used against any Heretic; however I am sure many of his Compeers in handling the question distinguish of a Toleration and censures, granting Ecclesiastical censures though denying Civil, And I am sure if Christ's never charging the church nor those that bore office in her with sin, for not proceeding against the Sadduces, be no good argument to take away all Church censures, neither is it to lay waste all Magistrates punishing in such cases. 3. Christ did to the Scribes, Pharisees & Sadduces speak and reason against their errors, yea reproved and threatened them for those errors, which also is granted by Hagiomastix, in doing of which he did equivalently and really press upon them the suppressing and punishing of Heresies in persons under their power, whilst he spoke to men in Authority and denounced the judgements of God because of them: He that preaches to a Prince against Idolatry and shows the evils that will come upon a King and his Kingdom for it, preaches to him to restrain Idolatry, though he do not particularly in express words call upon him not to suffer any man to practice Idolatry; and therefore Christ speaking to the Scribes and Pharisees, the Rulers and Elders, that knew the Laws of God, how Magistrates in Israel were to punish false Teachers, in speaking so against false Prophets, Heretics and Sectaries, as Sadduces, &c, that was a charging them (such a thing being spoken to such men) to do their duties against them, which by the Law was more than if private persons, and being spoken to qua such, as Scribes, &c, was a commanding them according to their places to proceed against them: For 'tis a rule among Divines that in many things recorded in Scriptures, which are delivered only in common and in general, they are to be taken by every one according to their relations and places, by the Magistrates according to their relation, the Ministers according to theirs, and the People according to their Sphere, of which many instances may be given in the new Testament. 4. Supposing it could be proved, Christ never reproved the Jewish Church and State for suffering the Sadduces, &c, yet it follows not Magistrates therefore should tolerate Heretics, and Sectaries, and that both, because God's declaration of his mind in other parts of Scripture, though not in the Gospel is a sufficient, as also because there might be some particular reasons proper to the jewish State, as that Christ saw the jewish State and Magistracy itself that then was to be leavened and corrupted with those errors and opinions, to be either Sadduces, Pharisees, Scribes, Herodians, and such like, so that to have spoken against Toleration, and for punishing Sadduces, &c had been to have spoken to the State, not to have suffered itself, as if one should preach to the Parliament now, not to tolerate but to punish themselves: So was it for Christ to have urged those commands in Deut. 13. &c, and those examples of josiah, Nehemiah, &c upon the jewish State then. 2. That in the times of Christ's preaching, the Civil Power of the Commonwealth of the Jews, was much weakened, if not wholly taken away from them by the Romans, of which I have spoken something before page 30. and do now add, that the jews had no power at all of capital punishments then, and therefore to what end should Christ charge them with those Laws of putting false Prophets &c, to death, for full proole of which I refer the Reader to Master Gillespies Aaron's rod blossoming, Book 1. chapt. 3. page 29. 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35. who learnedly proves that point both from Scripture and the Testimonies of many learned writers, who have written of the jewish Antiquities and Customs, and Answers the contrary objections. 3. Christ knew that Church and Commonwealth were to be certainly shortly dissolved, the Christian Church to be set up, and though he warned the People of those errors and ways, and denounced the judgements of God against them, yet because he knew the purpose of God was to destroy the jewish Commonwealth, he might not speak for that and the other Reason's forenamed to the Magistrates, as otherwise he would, of which the Reader may read more in pag. 30. of this present Book.  
And now for putting a Period to this 17. Thesis', and to all the Answers given by me to those evasions brought against ●hose old Testament Laws, of Deut. 13. Deut. 17. and the rest, I shall briefly add 3 things. First, To clear a little further some passages of Deut. 13. Secondly, show the slightness and weakness of Hagiomast. exceptions against those old Testament Laws. Thirdly, Show the excessive pride and folly of the man in boasting and glorying in such poor & weak things as he brings against the Vindicator of the Ordinance for preventing the growth and spreading of Heresies, in Sect. 34. 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41.  
First, As I shall add two places more out of Moses Law before omitted in the beginning of the 17. Thesis', to prove the Magistrates power of punishing in matters of the first Table, viz Deut. 19 16, 17, 18, 19 and Numb. 15. 30, 31. the former in case of Aposta●ie, the latter in case of 
* Vid. Jun. A●alyt. Expl. Numer in cap. 15.  blaspheming God, so to all I have said of Deut. 13. I desire the Reader to observe that God having in the former chapter commanded the worshipping of the true God, and forbidden that of Idols, (which unquestionably is moral,) this 13. chap. is fitly added to it as an appendix, in which God gives direction for removing the impediments opposite to his worship commanded, particularly he commands the Authors of Apostasy, not to be harkened unto nor tolerated, but to be punished with death; and for that end that such who are obstinate and will not be amended, nor regard their own salvation, may be hindered at least from being an impediment to the salvation of others, and the common grace of God, which removal of impediments with the end laid down, cannot but be moral also. Junius in his Analysis upon this chapter shows 'tis an Appendix to the worship of God, and Zepperus in his Tractate of the mosaical Laws, saith, that this of defection by false Prophets is an Appendix of the first commandment. Now as the chapter itself clears it, and divers learned 
* Jun. Analy●. Expli. Deutero. cap. 13. Nam de docentibus agit Moses priore parte cap. sive palam, sive clam: de●is vero qui auctoritate publica tantam impietatem defendunt posteriore capite. Zepper. Leg. Mosaic. Explan. lib. 4. cap 2. Leges de Apostasia à Deo & vera religione su●t aut de pseudo propheta publice d●cente; aut de claudestino seductore vel privata solicitations ad apostasiā aut de publica defectione totius Civitatis.  Divines writing upon the chapter shows this 13. chap. is not all one commandment but there are three distinct commands in this chapter, the first of the false Prophet publicly teaching Apostasy in the five first verses, the second of the Clandestine Seducer, in the six verses following, the third of a public defection of a whole City: which being observed & well considered, besides what I have said already to Hagiomastixs' answer that the command in Deut. 13. concerning the putting of false Prophets and Seducers to death, cannot bind, because then whole Cities must be destroyed, cattle, &c, fully answers all he speaks in this kind, because that latter part of the chapter upon which he vapours so, is a distinct command quite another thing, from that in the first verse to the 5. as also from that of the 6. to the 12. So that 'tis a mere fallacy to confound Laws which are distinct, to speak all along of that 13. chapt. as one Law and command (for so he does page 48. 47. make them all one) fallacia compositionis is easily discovered by dividing and distinguishing the commands which God hath made distinct; and therefore the one command may be in force, and we neither add, nor diminish aught from it, although the other which is no part of it may not, but be more proper to the jews, and only in some particular cases (of which I shall speak more presently) and among many differences that might be observed between the two former commands in the first 11. verses and this about a City, this is plainly one, whereas these are commands founded expressly upon general reasons common to all because he hath spoken to turn you away from the Lord your God, &c, this is not spoken of at all in the case of the City, but 'tis grounded upon a reason peculiar to the jews, as some learned men observe from v. 12. If thou shalt hear say in one of thy Cities which the Lord thy God hath given thee to dwell there, the foundation of that command being ceremonial, because it hath a particular respect, to tha● Land the Lord gave them to dwell in, God being in a certain singular kind of manner the Lord of that Land: upon which place of Scripture Junius writing, shows the destroying of the City utterly, with the devoting of all things therein to destruction, to be ceremonial and so not to take place now, yea it was not of force among the jews themselves, but only in one particular case, when a City openly by public Authority defended and maintained Apostasy from God; 
☜  and therefore though in a City there had been hundreds of Apostates whether public or private Seducers, which all were to have suffered by virtue of the former Laws of the first 11. verses of this chapter, yet so long as openly by public Authority of that City these were not defended nor maintained, although these particular Apostates were commanded to be put to death, all the inhabitants among whom they lived were not commanded to be put to death, muchless the cattle and all things within it to be burnt with fire; and the Reader for his further satisfaction herein, besides what I have written of this in page 85. 86, 87. may consult with Junius in his Analyt. explication on Deut. 13. 543. 544. who resolves the question and case thus, That in this chapter there are three things concur, the moral right, the ceremonial, and the Political: That which is of moral right that according to the substance remains, and therefore it follows that who foe is guilty of so great wickedness and obstinacy as Moses describes in this chapter ought to receive the reward and punishment of his 〈◊〉, and that by the Law of God and nature, whose Minister and Helper the judicial and political Law is, 
* Jun. Analy●. Expl. in Deut. 13. 544. In hoc legis capite tria concurrere, jus moraie, ceremoniale atque politic●m. Quod juris moralis est illum secundum substantiam per manet ac pro inde sequitur tum, qui reus est tantae impietatis & contumaciae ac de scribit Moses impium esse & paenas dare impictatis oportere, ex divino & naturali jure: Quod autem ceremoniale est, id in postrema ●ujus capitis parte non habet locu●, ubi civitatem deleri & omnia devoveri anathemati p●●e cepit Dominus etc.  but that which is ceremonial and is in the last part of this chapter, where God commands to destroy the City, and devote all things in it to a curse, hath no place now, because the foundation of this command is ceremonial. For the Political and judicial Law, which hath its foundation partly in the divine and natural Law and partly in the ceremonial, it follows from thence whatsoever in the judicial Law, simply belongs to the preservation of the natural and moral Law ought according to the substance to be observed: but whatsoever things are of ceremonial right, to them the Magistrate is not bound, but the public safety and prevention of so great evils, laying aside ceremonies, according to natural and moral right aught to be procured and sought for by him.  
Secondly, I might manifest the flightnesse and weakness of Hagiomastixs evasions of those old Testament Laws, by drawing them briefly into one, and showing the several fallacies and paralogismes one after another, as arguing Falsa Suppositione, Adicto secundum quid, A particulari ad universale, Fallacia compositionis et divisionis, &c, As also had I wanted matter, I could have run out in flourishing words, and at the end of every Reply to his evasions have stood triumphing over him, as he does over the Authors of the Vindication, saying, O Independents and Sectaries, if your Teachers, yea your great Rabbi and Oracle bring such poor and weak Stuff for their Tenets and way, you had need to take heed and beware of them, lest the blind lead the blind, and both full into the ditch; But I consider I am handling a great Controversy in Divinity a point about Conscience, and that 'tis not comely to speak of it in a light and scossing way, and therefore shall not offer to contend with Master John Goodwin in that way, contenting myself to have aimed at hard Arguments and fore words.  
Thirdly, I might take occasion to set out the ●olly and horrible pride of the man in boasting and glorying in such poor weak Stuff, and that stolen out of Minus C●●su● S●●●●sis, behaving himself like à gloriosus miles, I might annex and fasten each of his vapouring insolent insultations over his three supposed Adversaries unto each Answer, by which his folly and vanity would be made manifest to all in excessive boasting when he hath performed so little, but I will forbear to deal with him in that way, and shall conclude this 17. Thesis', and all my Answers to his evasions in speaking sadly to his Conscience, (though I much fear in this Argument of Liberty of Conscience, he hath little Conscience left, or is capable of any Conviction, this being his Sanctuary and Protection to safeguard him from the trouble and danger of all his other wicked Opinions) M. Goodwin what Answer will you make to God for these pretences brought against Scripture, can you think against such express texts, such poor shifts will serve? or will hold water in the day of judgement? what if these than prove but Adam's fig-leaves, mere shifts and tricks of wit to put off the word, and be not real? what will you then do for all the dishonour of God, ruin of precious souls occasioned by your means? will not God's wrath sweep away these Cobwebs? I say no more, think upon it Master Goodwin and be not deceived, God is not mocked.   

18. THESIS  
Whereas the Patrons of Toleration commonly plead, that all places of Scripture both of examples and commands for Magistrates punishing in matters of Religion are only from the old Testament; and 'tis confessed by them that under the Law before Christ's coming good Magistrates both did and might exercise coercive power on false Prophets, Apostates, Blasphemers, but now since the new Testament 'tis otherwise, 
* Preface of the Bloody Tenet of Persecution for cause of Conscience.  It being the Will and Command of God that since the coming of his Son the Lord Jesus, a Permission of the most Paganish, Jewish, Turkish, or Antichristian Consciences and Worships be granted to all men in all Nations and Countries: and they only to be fought against with that sword, which is only (in soul matters) able to conquer, to ●it the sword of God's Spirit, the word of God; I lay down this Thesis, That all things concerning Religion and piety constantly practised by the godly, and by God commanded under the old Testament, and by him never declared to be repealed, bind as firmly under the new Testament, although there be no particular command nor example a new approving them, as they did under the old, and that in such cases the coming of Christ into the world, and his death are so far from giving any dispensation or Liberty, that quite contrary, some things before permitted to the Jews are by Christ now taken away, and all matters in reference to Religion and Holiness upon the coming of Christ into the world are spoken of by the Scriptures as to be kept and done with greater exactness and strictness. For proof of which I lay down these following grounds.  
First, That the Scripture of the old Testament is the Canon and Rule of faith and Practice, as well as the Scripture of the New, and that it equally belongs to Christians as the Books of the New: which point besides that it hath been held by the Orthodox in the Church of God, in all times since Christ, and denied only by Heretics as the 
* Irene. lib. 2. advers. Haeres. Valent. cap. 20.  Simonianis, the 
* Epiphan. Panar. Haer. 66.  Manichees, 
* Socin. Tract. de authorit. Script. Ostorod. Institut. p. 3. cap. 28.  Socinians, 
* Schlussell. Catal. Heretic. De Antinomis.  Antinomians, 
* Bulling. advers. Anabapt. lib. 4. cap. 4. Spanhem. Disput. 2. Anti-Anabapt. De usu Scriptur●● v. Testam. in Eccles. Christ▪ Thes. 50.  Anabaptists, I shall give these reasons, 1. That Christ and the Apostles all along in the new Testament prove their Doctrine by the Scriptures of the old Testament Moses and the Prophets, still referring the People in all Controversies of Faith and Practice to the Scriptures of the old Testament, as is evident by these places, Luk. 16. 29. John 5. 39 Rom. 15. 4. 2 Tim. 3. 15, 16, 17. 2 Pet. 1. 19 cum multis aliis which are all understood of the Scriptures of the old Testament, as besides many things in those texts showing as much, no Scriptures of the new Testament, being then extant, when Christ gave those exhortations to search the Scriptures, and when Timothy was a child, of which Scripture the Apostle speaks, which Timothy learned of a child, as chrysostom well expounds: Now that was the Scripture of the old Testament, because the new was not as yet committed to writing, then when Timothy was a child: Nay further all the texts by way of Scripture proole brought in the new Testament to prove any thing in matter of faith and manners are all quoted out of the old Testament, and not the new, whereupon we see how frequently Moses, the Psalms, and Prophets are cited by Christ and his Apostles; but to my best remembrance, I do not find in all the new Testament any place of Scripture brought to prove any thing from the new Testament, but that one passage out of Paul's Epistles 2 Pet. 3. 15, 16. 2. The Apostle Paul 2 Tim. 3. 16. saith All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for Doctrine, for Reproof, for Correction, for instruction in righteousness: Now if all Scripture be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, than the Scripture of the old Testament is so to, and as given by inspiration is with all reverence to be acknowledged and received by Christians: Again if all Scripture be profitable for Doctrine, for reproof, for Correction, for instruction of righteousness, therefore Doctrines of faith and Practices of life may be profitably fetched from thence, and when things are laid down in the old Testament, they are commanded in the Scriptures, (they being the Scriptures too) although not mentioned in the new: But who so desires to be further satisfied in this question of the Scripture of the old Testament being of the same Authority with Christians as that of the new, let him consult Bullingers' Books against the Anabaptists lib. 4. cap. 4. 5, 6▪ and Spanhemius his Disputations against the Anabaptists, De usu Script. V. Testaments in Ecclesia Christiana.  
Secondly, every command of God made known in the old Testament, and never afterwards repealed nor revoked by him; nor expiring in the nature of it, is perpetual and in force: whatever God once commands till he declares either particularly that 'tis not his will such a Law should any longer bind, or at least generally in equivalency, obliges: So that 'tis no good argument, to say against a Practice, as long as 'tis commanded in the old, this cannot be proved out of the new Testament, and therefore may not be done, but rather on the contrary we may infer, that the silence of the new Testament concerning a Law expressly and clearly delivered in the old Testament, is a confirmation rather than an abrogation of it or an intimation that it is expired. There are many particulars might be instanced in, some expressly commanded, and others forbidden in the old Testament, which are not spoken of at all in the new Testament (unless in general) that yet are held by Orthodox Divines, and I suppose by Hagi●mastix too, binding under the new, as many degrees of Marriages forbidden, usury, as Magistrates putting to death murderers, and some other Malefactors, with divers others that might be named: Upon which occasion 
* M. Cottons Bloody Tenet washed, p. 177.  Master Cotton answers Master Williams, If it be true that Christ g●ve no express Ordinance, Precept, or Precedent of kill men by material Swords for Religion sake: It is as true that neither did he for any Breach of Civil Justice, no not for murder, nor Adultery. And so supposing there were no new Testament proofs for the Magistrates punishing Apostates, Blasphemers, etc. yet the old Testament affording such a cloud of witnesses is testimony abundant, especially remembering what I have at large proved in divers pages of the last Thesis, concerning the nature of those commands and examples recorded in the old Testament, and indeed considering how clearly, largely, and importunately the Magistrate's power and duty in punishing in matters of Religion is set down and pressed by the Holy-Ghost in the old Testament, it had been no wonder if nothing had been said of the new, the abundant urging in the old serving for a reason of silence in the new. But because this rule is so fully and judiciously handled in a late Book, called 
* M. Caudrey, Mr Palmer, chapt. 2. pag. 17 18, 19, 20, 21. 22, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30.  Sabbatum Redivi●●um viz. A Law instituted in the old Testament, not abrogated in the new, is of perpetual obligation though it have not express ratification in the Gospel. I shall refer the Reader thither where he shall find many grounds brought to prove it, extracting only one passage out of the Book. Whatsoever Law in once delivered to the Church, and accordingly recorded in the Law Book the holy Scriptures even of the old Testament, whosoever would claim exemption from it whether particular Person or Church, must produce some what to prove that that Law is now (under the Gospel) repealed, or at least expired, more than bare saying that it is no longer in force. It is so in the statute Law of our Kingdom (and of all Kingdoms) if a man can allege for himself in point of Right or Privilege (or the King's Council for the King's Rights and P●erogatives) any statute that was once made, it stands good for all purposes, unless they who would gainsay it, can allege and prove that such a Statute is out of date by expiration or repeal: So that the proof lies originally upon the refuser of the Law, and they that would maintain it and urge it, need plead nothing more than the enacting of it once, till the abrogation of it can be verified; and if it be so in the Statutes of men, and the positive Laws of Kingdoms, much more in those of God, whose Authority in unquestionably more absolute, and whose wisdom, Holiness, Justice and Goodness, is infinitely beyond that of all Princes and States in the world.  
3. 'tis granted Princes and Magistrates under the old Law before Christ's coming, had a coercive power in matters of Religion, and did punish Blasphemers, &c Now 1. seeing they long had it, can any proof be brought how and upon what occasion it was taken from them? can any man show any text out of the new Testament where Christ and his Apostles took away this power from Princes, or declared that however under the old, Seducers and false Prophets were to be dealt with by the Civil powers, yet not under the new, but only with the word of God? Bullinger in his fifth Book against the Anabaptists chapter 3. page 169. pleading for Magistrates power in matters of Religion, speaks thus to them. Are Princes and Magistrates of the new Testament endorred with less Spirit and power then those of the old? Or in what place have Christ and his Apostles removed Christians Princes from this power of Magistrates? Whatever reasons or grounds any way or in any kind there were under the old for this power of Magistrates, the very same remain now, were errors and Heresies then deadly and damnable, so they are now? were they then spreading as a Gangrene and corrupting many so they do now? were they then hateful to God? so they are still: were false Teachers in those times unreasonable, perverse obstinate not to be convinced by words? behold they are as froward and desperate in these; were Princes and Magistrates then to be zealous of God's honour, and to serve the Lord not only as private persons, but as Magistrates? so they ought to be now, and 'tis by the Spirit of God foretold they should: Now where there is the self same reason, 
☜  there is ever the self same Law and Equity both under the Law and Gospel, for the further proof of which the Reader may consult Master Prynn● Sword of Christian Magistracy supported pag. 21. 22, 23 2. It cannot seem reasonable that all other relations, Parents, Masters, Husbands, should have the same authority over their children, servants, wives, under the Gospel, as they had under the Law, and that in spiritual things, and the Christian Magistrate should not: nay that the Power of Parents, Masters, Husbands, should be confirmed, strengthened and more largely set forth, Ephes. 5. 22, 23, 33. Ephes. 6. from verse 1. to 10. Col. 3. from verse 18. to 23. 1 Pet. 2. 18, 19 and the Power of Magistrates only taken away, 
* Muscul. loc. Commun. De Magistr. 627. 628. Ergone tantae authoritaeti ac potestati non licebit, quod cuique Patrifamilias' in do●● sua licet?  Musculus in his common places De Magistratibus speaking of the power that Fathers have over their children in matters of Religion, reasons from thence that to the Magistrate the supreme Father of all his subjects, (whose Power is far greater than that of a Father) the care of religion more belongs then to Fathers. In Magistrates there is an Authority of supereminency excelling all, than which there cannot be a greater on earth: Therefore shall not that be lawful for such an Authority and Power, which is lawful for every Father in his own House? yea by that divine command is it not required that that should belong to the greater which belongs to the less, that to the public Father of the people which belongs to the private? 3. God under the new Testament allows and approves of the calling of Princes and Magistrates, giving many express commands to Christians of subjection and obedience to them, Rom. 13. from verse 1. to 6. Tit. 3. 1. 1 Pet. 2. 13, 14, 17. 1 Tim. 2. 1, 2, 3. the 
* See M. pryn's Sword of Christian Magistracy supported. pag. 3.  ends and uses also for which Magistrates were instituted are the same under the new Testament and old, besides there is not any one text in the new Testament limiting or restraining the Power given them by God in the old, and therefore their calling and Power must needs be the same. Learned 
* bilson's second part, pag. 178, 179, 180. third part 309.  Bilson in his true Difference between Christian subjection and unchristian Rebellion, proving the Prince's power and charge by God's Law of Deut. 17. 18, 19 and by the example of the godly Kings of Israel and Judah, reaching as well unto matters of Religion as other things, that the sword is given them to provide that as well true Religion be maintained in their Realms, as civil justice ministered, that they forbid, prevent, and punish in all their subjects not only murders, thefts and such like breaches of the second Table; but also Schisms, Heresies, Idolatries and other offences against the first Table pertaining only to the service of God and matters of Religion, answers thus the Jesuits objection (the very same evasion the Sectaries have now,) 
Object.  This charge concerned none but the Kings of Israel and judah: 
Answ.  That refuge doth rather manifest your folly then satisfy my reason. Did, I pray you Sir the coming of Christ abolish the Vocation of Princes? I trow not; Then their office remaining as before, per consequens, both the same precept of God to them still dureth, and also the like power to force their subjects to serve God and Christ his Son standeth in as full strength under the Gospel, as ever it did under the Law. For Princes in the new Testament be God's Ministers to revenge Malefactors as they were in the old, and the greater the wickedness, the rather to be punished, ergo the greatest (as Heresies, Idolatries, Blasphemies,) are soon of all other vices to be repressed by Christian Magistrates, whose zeal for Christ's glory must not decrease, 
☜  Christ's care for their Sceptres being increased, and those monuments of former Kings left written for their instruction: were not this sufficient, as in truth 'tis to refute your evasion, yet King David foreseeing in Spirit, that Heathen Kings would ●and themselves and assemble together against the Lord and his Christ, extendeth the same charge to the Gentiles; which the Kings of Jury received before, and warned them all at once, Be wise ye Kings, understand ye● Judges of the world: Serve the Lord. And so in another place of this Book, the Jesuits saying these were Kings of the old Testament: and they had the Law of God to guide them, he answers, Then since Christian Princes have the same Scriptures which they had, and also the Gospel of Christ and Apostolic writings to guide them, which they had not, why should they not in their Kingdoms retain the same power, which ye see the Kings of judah ●ad and used to their immortal praise and joy. Again Christ came not to abolish or diminish the power of Kings and States, 
☜  but to save their souls; they are no way loser's but gainers by Christ's coming: Christ's Kingdom is not of this world, it altars not the Power and Preeminence God once gave to them as Kings and Magistrates. Lastly, If Magistrates under the new Testament, should have this power taken from them, the Church of God should be in a far worse condition and more uncomfortable than it was under the old Law, 
☞  the Church should lose a great help it sometimes enjoined: neither can that help the matter to say that we have now Excommunication and other spiritual weapons to supply that loss: For the Church of the Jews had excommunication and the word of God, yea, extraordinary Prophets, many miracles, answers by Vrim and Thummim in all difficult cases about religion (as Hagiomastix faith) which we have not, and yet they had need of Magistrates coercive power in matters of religion for all that: To conclude there can be no reason in the world shown or given why Magistrates under the new Testament should not have power to restrain and punish Apostasies, Blasphemies, &c as well as under the old, but many might be given why their power rather should be continued and enlarged under the new, and in this we have Master Burroughs himself a witness what a sad condition the Church of Christ would be in, if we had no external power, to restrain from any kind of Blasphemy and Seducements, which passage having quoted before, and having spoken something on that occasion, page 63. of this Treatise of Toleration, I refer the Reader thither, and to Master Burroughs Irenicum page 23. 24.  
Fourthly God is unchangeable, the Covenant of life under the old and new Testament is one and the same for the essence and substance, as our Divines show against the Socinians, Antinomians, Anabaptists; and the rule of righteousness and holiness is the same under the new, that it was under the old, and therefore God hating corruptions of Religion so as to command his Vice-gerents to punish them then, and to prevent their spreading, he being unchangeable, and the punishing of violations of Religion and impieties being acts of holiness and righteousness, must needs stand firm●, and bind Magistrates under the new Testament. And if the Magistrates restraining and suppressing the dishonours of God, ruin of souls by his sword be altered and changed by God in the times of the Gospel, than that power of punishment was either truly Ceremonial or else judicial, belonging properly to the Poli●ie and pedagogy of the Jews, but it was neither; First, Not Ceremonial, it was no type of any thing which was to come, as I have shown before page 168. 169. of this Treatise. Secondly, Not properly judicial in the sense laid down page 53. 54. of this Treatise, but moral of common right, used by other Nations, and that both before the judicial Law was given, and after, of which having spoken so much in divers pages and places of this Book, I shall only add this viz. that 
* Zepper. De leg. Mosai. lib. 4. cap. 1. cap. 3. De Pseudo Prophetis & Haereticis. Ratio ido●ea & sufficiens nulla afferri potest, cur Dei majestas & Ecclesiae authoritas minoris apud Christiaanos momenti & pondeis esse debeat, quamapud Judaeos olim fuerit. Imo quo illustrius Deus se per filium suum quam per Prophetas olim patefecit, eo minus frigiditas illa & tepedita● excusari potest, si minori religionis nostrae studio teneamur minusque eam tu●am●r.  Zepp●rus in his fourth Book de Legibus mosaicis excellently shows these Laws to be Appendices of the Decalogue, and in stead of a just Commentary upon them, particularly of the first commandment, whereupon he handles that question of punishing false Prophets and Heretics, and shows how many Errors and Opinions be Blasphemies, as Servetus Opinion against the Holy Trinity, and Opinions against the Attributes of God, &c, which abominations whosoever denies aught to be punished capitally, he overthrows all piety and shows himself to be a stranger to all Religion and faith, where among other reasons brought by him why false Teachers and Heretics should be punished by the Civil Magistrates, as the express Laws of God given by Moses, and not antiquated, he gives this, No substantial sufficient reason can be brought why the Majesty of God, and the Authority of the Church ought to be of less moment and weight among Christians, then in times past it hath been amongst the Jews. Yea by how much God hath more clearly manifested himself by his Son, then in times passed by his Prophets, by so much the less can that coldness and lukewarmeness be excused, if we be carried with a less study of our Religion, and do less defend it then they.  
Fifthly, It cannot upon any reasonable ground be presumed, that Idolatries, Heresies, Blasphemies, &c commanded by God to be punished by the Civil Magistrate under the old Testament, should by Christ's coming be set at liberty and absolutely freed from punishment: For 1. Besides that the old Testament prophesying of Christ's coming speaks of those days as times of greater holiness and strictness, and that in reference to the commands of the first Table, as these Scriptures show, Isaiah. 35. 8, 9 there shall be a way and it shall be called the way of holiness, the unclean shall not pass over it: no Lion shall be there; nor any ravenous beast shall go up thereon, that is no enemy of God, hurtful to the Church, among which false Teachers are chief, called by Christ and Paul 
* Ravenous beasts called by the Prophet, and ravening Wolves by Christ.  ravening Wolves and grievous Wolves not sparing the flock, Matth. 7. 15. Acts 20. 29. Zach. 13. 2, 3. prophecies that in the day in which the Messiah shall come into the world, he shall overthrow Idolatry, false Doctrine, and whatsoever is contrary to the word of God and true Religion: The Prophet comprehends all under three Heads, 1. I will out off the names of the Idols out of the Land; and they shall no more be remembered: 'tis a frequent thing in the Prophets, when they prophesy of Christ's Kingdom, to proclaim War to Idols and Images, as in Micah. 2, I will cause the Prophets to pass out of the Land, he denounces destruction to the Prophets which is to be understood of false Teachers. 3. I will cause the unclean Spirit to pass out of the Land, that is all the works of the Devil (the unclean Spirit often so called, by which he withdraws men from the true worship of God.) Upon which words 
* Porro ne qui hinc carnalis licentiae & impunitatis spem conciperent, ulterius ad▪ hac▪ progressurum dicit istum gratiae▪ in Christo exhibitae effectum, & per hunc simul 〈◊〉 medio auferendum fore quicquid Dei verbo & verae religioni adversatur.  Gualther writes, The Prophet having spoken in the 1. v. of a full and absolute washing by Christ's blood both from original sin and the corruption of our nature, under the name of uncleanness, and all actual sins, thoughts, words and deeds under the name of sin, lest any from hence should conceive a hope of carnal liberty and impunity, he showeth this effect of the grace of Christ is yet to proceed further, that by him also shall be taken out of the way, & from the midst of the Church whatsoever is against the true Religion and Word of God. Zach. 14, 20, 21. In that day shall there be upon the bridles of the horses Holiness unto the Lord, and the pots in the Lord's house shall be like the bowls before the Altar, etc. On which verses Gualther writes the summary meaning of all to be this. That in those days of the Gospel all things shall be turned to the worship of God, even those things which before have been employed to profane uses, and against him; Now then there shall not be Holiness unto the Lord written only on the forehead of the Priests, but it shall appear eminently on the bridles of the horses: And Horses are particularly instanced in, (Horses being in a special manner serviceable for War, the horse is prepared for the battle saith Solomon) to show that the Wars under the Gospel should not be profane and wicked, such as are made by ambitious and covetous persons, but such by which the worship and Church of God, may be defended against wicked enemies, by those whom God hath appointed nursing Fathers of his Church. And such Wars in times past Constantine made against Maxentius and Licinius, and Theodosius against Eugenius and Arbogastus. And for those words, in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in the House of the Lord of Hosts, he shows 
* Chananaei vocabulum merca torem significat & ita illud in praesenti, vetus interpres reddit, & bene quidem. Ergo de mercatoribus seu Nundinatoribus sacrorum Propheta loquitur qui vel externum cultumsibi quaestum faciunt Vel ex Spiritus Sancti donis nundinationem instituunt. Sunt hiprecul ab Ecclesia arcendi, quia & Dei cultum corrumpunt, & fidem simpliciu mevertunt, & Christi meritum evacuant. vide plura.  Canaanite signifies Merchant, and that the Prophet speaks of those who sell and make merchandise of holy things, as the false Teachers in Peter, who made merchandise of the people; These are to be driven away far from the Church, because they both corrupt the worship of God, subvert the faith of the simple, and make void the merit of Christ, these Christ sets not upon only with words, or with denouncing woes, but with a whip made of small cords, as impudent greedy dogs he c●sts out of the Temple with public disgrace: By the 
* Vid. Annotat. of Engl. Divines on the place.  Canaanite or Merchant in this place, the Prophet seems to have a special relation to the abuse of merchandizing and selling which was used in the Temple Matth. 21. 12. 2. John 15. Malach. 3. 2, 3, 4, 5, the Prophet in this chapter prophesying of Christ's coming into the world, least men in his coming should p●●●●ise to themselves an earthly Kingdom, and a lawless Liberty of doing any thing without punishment, he tells them what a one Christ is, and for what end he comes, and what kind of persons they ought to be who desire to be be saved by him, Who may abide the day of his coming? for he is like a refiners fire, and like fullers soap, and he shall fit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he shall purify the sons of Levi and purge them as gold and silver, &c, that is as those who deal in metals, do not cease to melt and purge their metals till they see all the dross taken away, nor fullers leave to wash and rub the garments till all the spots and dirt be washed out: So Christ doth not cease using his fire and fullers soap, till we be sanctified and cleansed throughout. The use of this Doctrine to us aught to be, lest we abuse our pretence of believing in Christ to a Liberty of sinning, but rather we should give ourselves to him to be purged, that we may be made such, as he would have us to be. But of the scope of the Prophet in these verses, and how severe Christ under the Gospel will be against transgressors of the first Table as Sorcerers, false Swearers, under the last of which are contained all those who abuse the name of God, that they may deceive others, not only those who in Civil matters and bargains falsely pretend the name of God, but also such who in teaching abuse it, and vent the fictions of their own brains for divine Oracle●, the Reader may find more in Gualther upon the place. So 2. The new Testament speaks of Christ's coming to destroy the works of the Devil 1 John 38. among which false Doctrines, Antichristianisme, and seducing are spoken of by the Apostle in that Epistle and the foregoing chapter as chief, and Christ is brought in Revel. 2. 18, 20. described in a most terrible manner speaking against Toleration of Heresies; Th●se things faith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet like fine brass, I have a few things against thee, because thou suffirest that woman jesabel, which calleth herself a Prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants, as also Christ and his Apostles in the new Testament in several respects, speak more against false Doctrines, heresies, false Teachers, Seducer●, then against corrupt manners: Neither can it be put off by saying that under the new Testament Christ hath brought Liberty, a part whereof is the Toleration of Heresies, &c for the Apostle in Gal. 5. 1. where he exhorts Christians to stand fast in the Liberty wherewith Christ hath made them free expressly declares verse 13. this Liberty is not to be used for an occasion to the flesh, which it must needs be if this Liberty were a Liberty of Heresies, heresies being named in the same chapter a work of the flesh verse 19 20. Master Cartwright writing of certain judicial Laws that cannot be changed, as of putting to death a contemptuous Blasphemer, and stubborn Idolater, speaks thus of this pretended Ground of Christ's coming. As for that they allege the cause of this Liberty now, they are not to be put to death, by reason of the coming of our Saviour Christ and his passion, 'tis a weak one and injurious unto the coming and death of Christ, for he appeared that he might destroy the works of the Devil; this makes our Saviour Christ to build again that Kingdom of sin which he hath destroyed. For when in common reason and by the manifest word of God the Lord giveth this blessing unto the punishment of such grievous offenders by death, that others not only which see, but which hear of them, have the bridle of fear put upon them, whereby they are kept from the like, that must needs follow that whosoever maketh our Saviour Christ Author of this looseness in punishing such offenders, maketh him forthwith to lose the bridle whereby others are afraid from running into wickedness, and what is this but to make Christ a Troubler of Commonwealths: Besides if Christ by his coming loosed these civil punishments and purchased this grace of his Father for Blasphemers, Idolaters, Heretics, that they should escape civil punishments which the Law of God adjudged them to, how comes it to pass that the Apostles to whom Christ committed the publishing of all the pardon he obtained for us, did never make mention of the releasing of these punishments: If Christ had obtained this liberty it was worth the Preaching, and therefore unless they can show out of the writings of the Apostles to warrant this Sanctuary, which they would build to the support of Blasphemers, Heretics, that follows that the Apostles have not answered the trust committed to them, but in that the Apostle puts a sword in the hand of the Magistrates, and in the use of it makes him a Minister of the justice of the Lord against sin, he confutes this opinion. 3. And Lastly we see clearly that some things that were permitted under the old Testament to the Jews, are not to Christians under the new but expressly and formally declared against by Christ, as Polygamy, men's putting away their wives giving bills of divorce and marrying others, Mat. 5. 31, 32. Mat. 19 from v. 3. to the 10. and usury, Matth. 5. 42. Luke 6. 34, 35. Learned Cameron in his lectures of divorce upon Matth. 19 3. puts this question why the bill of divorce takes not place in the times of the new Testament and why does not God permit the same thing in the new, which he suffered in the old, unto which he answers, That although there is the same reason of man's nature in the times of the old and new Testament, yet there is not the same reason of grace, 
* Cancer. Praelect. De Repudio pag. 206.  which is much more plentifully and clearly laid open and explained in these last times, then before; Therefore our lives ought to be ordered in these times, 
* Chemnit. loc. Com. De Paupert. 433, 434, 435. Deus in veteri Testamento fuit & Theologus & Legislator. Alibi enim tradit, quomodo servi endum est Deo in justitia & sanctitate coram ipso. Alibi vero pro externa societate vitae civilis in Republi Israelit. certan quasdam politicas constitutiones praescribit isti popule.  much more strictly and holily. Those Elders under the old Testment were bound truly to follow the same holiness of life, but we much more; for by how much any one hath received more than nnother, by so much he owes more. Chemnitius in his common places de paupertate cap. 6. de usura shows though there were two permissions chiefly in the old Testament, of Divorce and Usury, yet Christ under the new, opposes to either of these permissions, the perpetual rule of righteousness in God, Matth. 5. 32. & 42. also cap. 19 verse 8. Luke 6. verse 34. 35. In which place he discourses of this, how God under the old Testament may be considered as a Divine, and as a Legislator, in some places of the old Testament laying down how we must serve him in holiness and righteousness; in others prescribing certain political constitutions to that people for the external society of Civil life in the Jewish Commonwealth. Now in those political Laws which God gave the People of Israel, Holiness and Righteousness of the conscience before God was not always prescribed, but they were fitted to the preservation of outward and civil society in that Commonwealth according to the condition and dispositions and manners of that people, to whom God himself gives the Epithet of a stiff neck. So the Bill of Divorce in the Commonwealth of Israel, was permitted; but now in the new Testament though Moses suffered it for the hardness of their hearts, yet Christ declares against it 'tis not lawful to be permitted, though there were the same manners of men, there being now under the Gospel more powerful remedies of such an evil, and a fuller declaration and communication of the grace of God: This Distinction may not be allowed now under the new Testament of Theologus and Legislator, of jus fori & jus poli; for all Laws given by God, in the new Testament, prescribe the purity of conscience before God, and do not look particularly to the outward preservation of the Civil society of one Commonwealth of people peculiarly. And so much for the 18. Thesis'.   

THESIS' 19  
Besides all the old Testament proofs both of commands and approved examples before the Law, and under the Law, before the Captivity of Babylon and after, for the Magistrates coercive power in the matters of the first Table, laid down in this Treatise, together with Answers to all the evasions brought against such commands and examples, as also to that of proofs out of the old Testament, I desire the Reader to consider this Thesis, that place of Scripture speaking of the days of the new Testament and what should be then done, approves of and commends this power of the Magistrate, as among other these three places of Scripture Psal. 2. 10, 11, 12. Esay 49. 23. Zach. 13. 2, 3. That the second Psalm is a Prophecy of the days of the Gospel, after Christ's coming into the world is clearly demonstrated by Act. 4. 24, 25, 26, 27. where by Peter and John 'tis applied to those times, In which Psalm King David, foreseeing in Spirit that Heathen Kings would hand themselves and assemble together against the Lord and his Christ, extendeth the same charge to the Gentiles which the Kings of Jury received before, and warned them all at once, Be wise ye Kings, understand ye Judges of the world: Serve the Lord; and 'tis to be observed in that second Psalm that Kings and Judges quatomes tales are to serve the Lord and kiss the Son, Upon which words Austin writes thus, All men ought to serve God: in one sort by common condition as men; in another sort by several gifts and offices, by the which some do this some do that; no private persons could command Idols to be punished clean from among mert, which was so long before prophesied, Therefore Kings (Besides their duty to serve God common with all other men, have in that they be Kings how to serve the Lord in such sort as none can do which are not Kings. For in this Kings (in respect they be Kings) serve the Lord (as God by David warneth them) if in their Kingdoms they command that which is good, and prohibit that which is evil, not in Civil affairs only, but in matters also concerning divine Religion. That Esay 49. 23. is a Prophecy to the Gentiles under the new Testament, as is evident by verse 22. Behold I will lift up my hand to the Gentiles, and Kings shall be thy nursing Fathers, &c now they could not be called the nurses of the Church if they had no care of Religion; but those of whom this prophecy was meant, and in whom fulfilled, did care for Religion did care for the Faith, as Constantine, Gratian, Theodosius, and others, who by public Edicts did prohibit false Doctrines and did command all throughout the whole Empire, to embrace the true Faith; 'tis confessed by Master 
* Vid. Bulling. advers. Anabapt. 5. Book 3. chapt.  Burroughs himself, The protection of their Civil peace is not sufficient to give them such a denomination of nursing Fathers and Mothers. Upon which place 
* Barroughs Heart-Divisions. pag. 25.  B●lson writes thus with this endeavour of Christian Princes God comforteth his Church by the mouth of Esay, Kings shall be thy nursing Fathers, &c what Esay saith Princes shall do, that I conclude Princes must do, because God would not promise they should usurp another man's office but discharge their own. If you take the milk of Princes for temporal honours, Lands, and goods, the ●ery Children will laugh you to scorn. The Church of Christ is no wanton Church, She lusteth for no worldly wealth, which is rather harmful poison then wholesome food, God's provision for her is spiritual, not carnal, her delights are not outward in flesh, but inward in grace: The Prophet good man had no leisure to think on yo● farms, demeans and Revenues; no remedy, you must needs yield us that Christian Princes, in respect of their office, not of their riches, have received an express commandment from God to show themselves Nurse's to his Church. Now Nurses by nature must provide for their infants and defend them from danger, ergo Kings and Queens in the new Testament, are bound to tender the Church of Christ, and by their princely power and public Laws to defend the same from infection of Heresies, invasions of Schisms, and all other apparent corruptions of faith and good manners. Zach. 13. 2, 3. is a prophecy of the times and days of the Gospel, as the context is clear and is confessed by some Patrons of Toleration, though put off and evaded that 'tis allegorical and figurative, and meant of some one particular time only under the Gospel, with other such like, as the Posteript to Hagiomastix writes page 21. 22. all which evasions I had thought at this time to have fully taken of, and to have cleared this text by many passages and Phrases in the context, besides several reasons that it must needs be understood literally, and of all times under the Gospel, but the troubles of the times call me of from my intended thoughts and preparations in this kind, and shall reserve them (if God will) for a second part, only I shall add that divers learned Interpreters ancient and modern as Theodoret, Calvin, and others hold the Prophet here alludes to Deut. 13. where God required such strictness in maintaining pure Doctrine, that the Father should rise up against the Son whom he begat. God would have all the godly to burn with such a zeal of defending the true worship of God and Piety, that no affinity nor consanguinity, nor any other carnal respect should prevail to hinder the requiring of punishment upon their nearest friends in cases of violating the worship of God and corrupting sound Doctrine. This was the Prescript of the Law: But whereas for a time, Religion had been neglected, yea trodden under foot, Zacharie saith that when the faithful should repent, they should be endowed with such a desire of true Piety, as neither Father nor Mother should suffer wicked errors in their Sons. And here 'tis to be observed that this zeal is approved of under the Kingdom of Christ; for Zacharie does not here restrain this Doctrine to the time of the Law, but shows what shall be when Christ is come, namely that then again that zeal shall burn in the hearts of all the godly which was almost extinct. It follows therefore this Law was not given only to the Jews, as many fanatical men imagine, who would have a leave of disturbing the world, but that this Law extends to us also. 
* Muscul. de legibus Ad classem hanc moraralium pra●ceptorium pertinentia multa quidem in literis Prophetam quoque leguntur. Fuerunt enim illi in plenisque Mosaicae legis interprete  Musculus speaking of things appertaining to the Classis of moral commands, shows that many things in the Prophet's writings belong thereunto, and he gives this reason; That in most things they were Interpreters of the Mosaical Law; And therefore Zacharie does here inter ●●t that Law in Deut. 13. concerning false Prophets and Seducers, to be in force under the Gospel, The Prophets in their writings do interpret and explain Moses writings, as the Books of Moses do the Decalogue, written by God in two Tables of stone and delivered unto Moses, Deut. 5. 22. That in Deut. 13. is to be compared with this Zach. 13. 3. where we find the same things, almost the same words used in a Prophecy of the times of the Gospel, the meaning of which is not that his Father or Mother should presently run a Knife into him, but that though they begat him, yet they should be the means to bring him unto condign punishment, even the taking away of his life, and so Master Cartwright speaking of this prophecy writes thus. No power is given to one private man to kill another, nor for the Private man to kill his children, but this manner of speech is grounded on Deut, 17. 7. where 'tis proved the Witness who accused should throw the first stone against the convicted persons, ergo they ascribe the kill of the guilty person, as belonging to the duty of the Accuser.   

THESIS' 20.  
In the Scriptures of the new Test, there are clear grounds & full proofs, that Heretics and false Teachers, corrupters of Religion, deserve to be punished corporally, as well as spiritualy by excommunication, and that Magistrates ought to punish in cases of Idolatry, Heresy and such like, as well as for transgressions against the second Table; Now among many I shall lay down these following, 1. That Christ and his Apostles being accused before Magistrates about matters of Religion, as blasphemy, being against the Law of Moses, and such like, they never pleaded for themselves that it was not lawful to punish any man for matters of Religion, but they defended their causes, that they had not taught any thing against the word of God and the Law of Moses, were not guilty of Blasphemy or Heresy, so that they granted the major proposition, namely that is was lawful for the Magistrate to punish Heretics who taught against the Word of God, but they denied the minor that they were Heretics: For out of the word of God they showed they were not Heretics, in that they taught nothing against the Word of God, yea nothing but what had a proof in the Word of God. But of this the Reader may see more in Zanchits Miscellanies De Magistratu, page 173. 2. Christ in John 2. 14▪ 15, 16. made a scourge, and drove out of the Temple those that made his Father's house a house of merchandise, which now false Teachers are said to do, 2 Pet. 2. 3. and 'tis the more observable that Christ who let the woman taken in adultery go away and did not punish her; that would not divide an inheritance because his Kingdom was not of this world; yet in the matter of his Father's house did exercise coercive power with a high hand, scourging and driving out of the Temple those that sold Oxen, etc. and this he is said to do out of zeal, the zeal of thine House hath eaten me up: and though this be not recorded for Ministers to use a material whip, yet certainly this was an act of righteousness that should have been done by the Magistrates of that time, & it had been a glorious action if they had done it, and however there might be something heroical in it, yet doubtless 'tis an act of righteousness and zeal that ought to be done by some in their ordinary calling, viz. by Magistrates. 3. Rom. 13. 4. Magistrates bear not the sword in vaive for them that do evil, and they are revengers to execute wrath upon them that do evil: Now Blasphemers, Heretics, false Teachers do evil and are evil workers, Phil. 3. 2. 2 Epistle of John v. 11. Revel. 2. 2. and non distinguendum est ubi Scriptura non distinguit: upon which place Master Bilson writes thus, Princes in the new Testament be God's Ministers to revenge malefactors, as they were in the old, and the greater the wickedness, the rather to be punished, ergo, the greatest (as Heresies Idolatries and Blasphemies) are soon of all other vices to be repressed by Christian Magistrates, whose zeal for Christ's glory must not decrease, Christ's care for their Sceptres being increased. 4. 1 Cor. 12. 10. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Apostle shows us that when Christian Magistrates were wanting, besides miracles, gifts of healing, etc. Christ gave a special gift to the Church of restraining Seducers and obstinate Heretics by corporal punishment; There were some that had a special gift of coercing ungodly men; this Paul exercised upon Elym●n the false Prophet and Seducer, Acts 13. 11. upon which place Peter Martyr writes fully, The Church then had not the Sword of the Magistrate by which offences might be restrained, therefore a power was given of punishing them corporally. The best Interpreters Ancient and Modern, as chrysostom, Oecumenius, Calvin, Beza, Peter Martyr, Pareus, and divers others do understand by Powers, those who had such a Gift, upon which place I intended to have insisted largely by comparing other Scriptures with it, and to have demonstrated from it, the necessity and lawfulness of a power of punishing corporally obstinate Heretics and Seducers, but I must take off. 5. Gal. 5. 12. Paul wishes that false Teachers and troublers of the Church were cut off: which place I intended to have enlarged upon to prove it meant of bodily cutting off, but cannot now. 6. 1 Tim. 2. 2. Paul shows Kings and those that are in Authority are to be prayed for, that we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life in all godliness and honesty, in all godliness, as well as honesty: This is the end of prayers to be made for Magistrates, Now that which is the end of Prayers poured out for Magistrates ought to be the end propounded by the Magistrate in his duty, but the Apostle commands prayers to be made for Magistrates for that end, ergo it lies upon the Magistrate to see to it, of which the Reader may see more in Meisner. Polit. de Magistratu; and 'tis confessed by Master 
* Cap. 2. p. 35, 36. The prayers of the Church for 300. years in the Primitive times, that Kings might come to the knowledge of the truth, and they lead peaceable and quiet lives in all godliness and honesty (which Saint Paul in Nero● time exhorted unto 1 Tim. 2. 2) were not answered nor accomplished till Constantine's time, when the Church brought forth a manchild.  Thomas Goodwin in his Return of Prayers, this was a command to pray, that God would give Christian Magistrates to the Church, the Answer of which was in giving Constantine a Christian Emperor, who as the Ecclesiastical 
* Socrat. Scholar lib. 1. cap. 5.  Histories show, did by Laws and Edicts command the Christian Religion, as also establish the ●icen● Creed touching the Faith of one Substance, banishing by his Edict Arius and his adherents, 7. Revel. 17▪ 16. John prophecies, and speaks of it as an acceptable work to God, for Christian Kings and States by their Civil temporal power to destroy the Romish Religion: Now if the Romish Seducers and corrupters of Religion (upon that ground called the Whore) may be punished by Civil Magistrates, and dealt with by other weapons then preaching, admonition, excommunication, than such as are certinly worse than they, as Anti●rinitaria●s, Soc●nians. Libertins', may be also by Magistrates restrained. Master Robinson writing against the Anabaptists, one Helwisse who interprets this place of Spiritual weapons, answers him this is a prophecy of Kings and Magistrates whose weapons and power are other besides that of prayers which is common to all Christians, 'tis spoken what they shall do as Kings: Besides 'tis contrary to the clear meaning of the Holy-Ghost, 
Robin's. against Helwisse of Magistracy, p. 129, 130.  which is, that Kings should first use their Civil power for the Beast and Whore, and after against them to their destruction, they shall give their power to the Lamb, as they before gave it against the Lamb: Now we know they used their Civil power under Popery, as a means by which to suppress the true Religion, and therefore Princes and States shall establish the true by that means and destroy the false, of which I had thought to have enlarged further, as also upon the other New Testament quotations, to have answered the evasions brought against them, especially of Hagiomastix against Rom. 13. 4. and to have proved it cannot be restrained only against evils of the Second Table, but is to be understood of evil against the First, but I must reserve these things, and divers more to another opportunity, and for a Second Part. If God wil To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ. Amen.  
FINIS.     

GOod Reader, among many other Errata of the Press, upon running over the Book in haste since printed (not having time to read and weigh every page, much less sentence or line) I find these following,  
ERRATA.  
PAge 32 line 12, after aught to be r. also punished. p. 30. l. 13 for they r. these, p. 33 l. 28 r. four and five fold, p. 55 l. 4. for latter r. letter, The figures of the pages which should be 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64. are misprinted, p. 64. l. 6. for mens r. means, p. 78. l. 23. for others r. other Divines, p. 167. l. 12. after put r. upon and.  
Margin. Notes, p. 14. for diga r. digna. p. 61. for Egyptis r. Egyptii, bones r. boves, p. 130. r. c. 9 quae. 4. p. 189. for equas r. equus, p. 214. r. praceptorum, for Prophetam r. Prophetarum, for pl●nisqu● r. plerisque, p. 216. r. after peccata r. coercerentur.