HUGO GROTIUS  
OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE HIGHEST POWERS About Sacred things. OR, The Right of the State in the Church. Wherein are contained many judicious Discourses, pertinent to our Times, and of special Use for the Order and Peace of all Christian Churches.  
Put into English by C.B.M.A.  
The Method of every Chapter is added in the margin and collected at the end.  
LONDON, Printed by T.W. for Joshua Kirton, and are to be sold at his shop in Paul's Churchyard, at the sign of the Kings-Armes, 1651.   

Upon the Author, and his principal Works.  

He, who the Greek wise Sayings did translate,  
With equal Pen, to Latium: Vindicate  
From Jew, Turk, Pagan, our Religion's Truth;  
As learned as the Aged, in his Youth:  
He, who th' Hollandian States Piety  
Presented unto every impartial eye:  
Who, in the Laws of Peace and War, all Nations  
Hath well instructed: And, in's Annotations  
On the whole Book of God, hath made that light  
Shine to unprejudiced minds more bright:  
He, that was studious, how to reconcile  
This and that Church, in mild Cassander's slile:  
Hath shown, what doctrine was Pelagius;  
Who's older, Calvin or Arminius;  
Is ever like himself. Here (which is much.)  
He's Moderator 'twixt the State and Church;  
And clearly shows you, when you may prefer  
To th' Ancient Bishop, the young Presbyter;  
And when that new Invention may please,  
By Elders Lay, to give the Pastor ease.   

We've set it out with just Care; lest we might  
Wrong th' Author, who hath done the State such Right.   C. B.  

THE CHAPTERS.  

I. THat Authority about Sacred Things belongs to the Highest Powers.  
II. That this Authority and the Sacred Function are distinct.  
III. Of the Agreement of things Sacred and Secular, as to the power over them.  
IV. Objections against the Powers Answered.  
V. Of the Judgement of the Higher Powers in Sacred things.  
VI The manner of using this Authority rightly.  
VII. Concerning Synods, or Councils.  
VIII. Of Legislation about Sacred things.  
IX. Of Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical.  
X. Of the Election of Pastors.  
XI. Concerning Offices not always necessary.  
XII. Of Substitution and Delegation.    

To the Illustrious Pair, my Lord, and my Lady CHANDOS.  
Right Honourable,  
IT is the Great Name of the Author, not any worthiness of the Translator, that gives this Book a capacity of so high a Dedication. The Author, born in a low Country, hath, by his excellent works, both Divine and Humane, raised himself to the just Repute of the most General, and the wisest Scholar of his time; So that, it is become a character of an Ingenuous Student (as it was said, in the last Age, of his Countryman, the Great Erasmus) to be well versed in the Books of Grotius. Out of whose Magazine, our best English Writers, to their praise, have borrowed some of their best furniture. The Argument of this Work is worthy the study of Princes, and Great Persons; From whom, certainly, God expects a greater care of his Church's Peace and Order. To which purpose, the Grave Author hath here said, some things first of all; some, with a better Grace than any other; and some, that although they have been said very well by our own Men, yet perhaps will be better taken (as the English humour is) from the Pen of a stranger. The Translator's Design is, partly public, in this scribbling Age (wherein yet, we have need of more good Rooks, to Out the many bad ones) to cast in his Mite into the Treasury of the Church of England: (whom, as the Moderate Author much honoured, so He professeth himself to be one of her poor Children:) partly private, by this Dedication of it with Himself to your Honours, to leave a Grateful Monument (and a lasting Monument, he hopes) in those Gracious Hands, that have supported him, in his worst and weakest Times. May Your Honours Both live to see the Public Breaches, both of Church and State, fairly made up; and particularly, the Ruins of your Sudely: And, may Your illustrious Names and Virtues live after you, and be increased in your Children, So prayeth,  
Right Honourable, Of all your Servants the most obliged, the most humble, BARKSDALE. Sudeley, Jan. 6. 1651.   

HUGO GROTIUS, Of the Empire, or Authority of the Highest Powers about Sacred things, or, in matters of Religion.  

CHAP. I.  
That Authority about Sacred things belongs to the Highest Powers.  

1. The state of the question.  BY the Highest Power, I understand a Person, or a Company, that hath Empire, or Authority, over the People, subject to the Empire of God alone: taking the word Highest Power, not, as it is sometimes taken, for the Right itself, but for Him that hath the Right, as it is frequently used both in Greek and Latin. To call such a person, the chief Magistrate, is improper: for Magistrate is a name the Romans give only to inferior Powers. I said a Person, or Company; to express, that not only Kings properly so called, which most Writers call Absolute Kings, are to be understood in that name, but also in an Aristocracy the Senate or States, or the Best, by whatsoever other name. For although there must be Unity in the Highest Power, it is not necessary the Person be but One. By Empire or Authority, we mean the Right to Command, to permit, to forbid. We say, this is subject only to God; for therefore it is called the Highest Power, because among men it hath none above it.  

2. An Argument, from the Unity of the matter, proved by Scripture, Rom. 13 4.  That Authority about Sacred things belongs to the Highest Power thus defined, we prove, First from the Unity of the matter about which it is conversant, Paul saith, He is the Minister of God, a revenger, to execute wrath upon him that doth evil. Under the name of Evil, is comprehended also all that which is committed in Holy things; for the Indefinite speech signifies as much as the Universal, which Solomon hath expressed: 
Pro. 20.8.  A King that sitteth in the throne of Judgement scattereth away ALL evil with his eyes. This is confirmed by a Simile; for the Authority of a Father is less than of the Highest Power, yet are Children commanded to obey their Parents in all things. 
Col. 3.20.  Thus do the ancient Fathers also reason, when from that of Paul, Let every soul be subject to the Higher Powers, they infer, that the Ministers of Holy things must as well be subject to them, as other men: although he be an Apostle, although an Evangelist, although a Prophet, saith Chrysostom. Whose footsteps Bernard following, speaks in these words to an Archbishop: If every Soul, yours also: who hath excepted you from the Universal?  

3. And by natural reason.  And truly there can be no reason given why any thing should be excepted; For, if that which is excepted be subject to no Authority at all which who can prove?) there will follow confusion among the things exempted, whereof God is not the Author: or, if it be subject to some other Authority, not under the Highest Power, there must then be two Highest Powers distinct: which is a Contradiction; for the Highest hath no equal. By this same Argument the Fathers disprove the multitude of Gods, because that which is Highest is above all, and can be but One.  
This is further proved by the Effects of Empire or Authority; these are Obligation and Coaction; now if there were more Commanders in Chief than one, their Commands might be contrary about the same matter, and so impose upon the Subject a contrary obligation or coaction; which is against nature; And therefore as often as it happens that two Laws oppose each other by reason of some circumstance, the obligation of the one ceaseth. This is the reason why the Paternal Empire, which is natural and most ancient, hath given place to the Civil, and is subject to it, because that which should be Highest could be but One.  
Object If any man shall say, that Actions are divers, some Judicial, some Military, some Ecclesiastical, and so in respect of this diversity the highest Authority may be divided among many; Answ it will follow, according to his saying, that the same person being at the same time commanded by one to the Court, by another to the Camp, by the third to the Church, is bound to obey them all at once, which is impossible: or, if not to obey all, then there must be some order among them, and the inferior yield to the Superior, and then 'twill not be true, that the highest Authority is divided among them. To this purpose are those words of the Divine wisdom, No man can can serve two Masters; and, A kingdom divided cannot stand; and that common saying, All Power is impatient of a Partner.  
'Tis otherwise in Authorities which are under the Highest: for these may belong to Many, because they are exercised about divers persons; or, if about the same persons, they are so ordered by the Supreme, that they may not clash. Which ordination cannot be when many are, every one, supreme; for the ordaining must be Superior to the ordained.  
Object. To that which some object, that Kings cannot command some things without the consent of the States; We answer, Answ. where that is so, there the supreme Authority is not in the Kings, but either in the States, or in that Body, which the King and States compose. Certainly, to have the whole Supreme Authority, and not be able to command any thing, because another may forbid or intercede, are altogether inconsistent.  
From this Universality of the matter about which the Highest Power is employed, the Art of governing is justly called the Art of arts, and Science of sciences: because there is no Art, no Science, which it doth not command, and whereof it doth not teach the Use.  

4. An argument from the Universality of the end, proved by Scripture.  The Universality of the end is correspondent to the Universality of the matter, The Apostle Paul saith, the Highest Power is God's Minister for good; of every sort: For explaining himself elsewhere more distinctly, he shows, the Powers are ordained, 
1 Tim. 2.2  that we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life, not only in all honesty, but in all godliness also. This indeed is the true Happiness of a Commonwealth, to love God, and be beloved of God; to acknowledge Him their King, and themselves his people, as Augustin saith well: who also saith, The King and Rulers are happy, if they make their Power serviceable to the divine Majesty, for the propagation of his Kingdom, and increase of his Honour. Emperors themselves, Theodosius and Honorius, have professed thus, Our Labours of War, and Counsels of Peace, are all directed to this only end, that our people may serve God with true Devotion  

5. And by Philosophy.  And this that is so clearly demonstrated in holy Writ, was not altogether unseen by those that had only the light of Nature, for in Aristotle's judgement that is the best Commonwealth, which shows the way to a most virtuous and happy life; and, as the same Philosopher affirms, that is the most happy way of life, 
In fine Eudem , which leads most directly to the knowledge and service of God, the contrary whereof is most unhappy.  
Now, if this be true, that the end proposed to the Highest Powers, is not only external Peace, but that their People may be most Religious; and the things conducing to that end are called Sacred; it follows, that these things are all included within the Command and Authority of the same Power; for the End being granted, a Right is granted to all that, without which the End cannot be obtained.  

6. The right vindicated by direct authority of Scripture. Deut. 17.19. Jos. 1.8. Ps. 2.12.  To these Arguments drawn from the very nature of the thing, shall be added the most sacred and certain Authority of the Law divine. King's are commanded to Keep all the law of God, to serve the Lord, to kiss the Son. This being spoken to Kings, not as Men (for so it would not concern them more than other men) but as Kings, it follows, some royal act is required of them, that is, the use of their Authority in matters of Religion. I had rather explain this in S. Augustin's words, than my own: Herein do Kings (as they are commanded by Him) serve God as Kings, if in their Dominions they command things good, forbid evil; not only in respect of humane society, but the worship of God also. And in another place; The King serveth God, as a man, as a King; as a man, by a godly life; as a King, by godly Laws. As Ezechias, by destroying the Groves, and Temples of the Idols; and as Josias served God, in the like manner: doing those things for the honour of God, which only Kings can do. And this is that royal nursing of the Church, 
Es. 49.23.60.13.16.  which by the Prophet God hath promised.  

7. By the consent of the ancient Christians;  After the Divine Law, follows in its order the Custom of the Church, and the Examples of Emperors; whose Piety is out of question. That all They used their Authority in sacred things, will appear in all the particulars that shall be handled. In short, Socrates the Historian hath told us, Ever since the Emperors became Christian, the affairs of the Church depended upon them. For the Church, saith Optatus, is in the Commonwealth, i.e. in the Roman Empire: not the Empire in the Church. Constantine in an old Inscription is called the Author of faith and religion. Basil the Emperor, styling the Church an Universal Ship, saith, God had placed him at the Stern to govern it. In that ancient Epistle of Eleutherius Bishop of Rome, speaking of Religion, He entitleth the King of Britain, God's Vicar, in his own Dominion. And Charles the Great, is named, The Rector of true Religion, by the Council of Ments.  

8. And of the Reformed.  That the Churches reform, in our Father's time, after the ancient pattern, are of the same judgement, their Confessions witness. It belongs to Magistrates not only to be careful of Civil Polity, but to endeavour that the Sacred Ministry be preserved, and the kingdom of Christ propagated: that the Gospel be purely preached, and God served according to his holy Word. So the Belgic, Let the Magistrate hold fast the word of God, and see that nothing be taught contrary to it. So the Helvetian. This office was enjoined the Heathen Magistrate: to take care that the name of God be duly honoured, how much more belongs it to the Christian Magistrate as the true Deputy of God in his Dominion. So the Basil Confess. Yea, the English Church denounces Excommunication against them that deny the King of England that Authority in Ecclesiastical affairs, which was used by the Hebrew Kings. 'Twould be tedious to transcribe what hath been written in defence hereof. Besides the Divines, all the writers of Polity, that are worth the reading, have given account of this, not only as a part, but as the principal and best part of the Imperial Right.  

9 And of the Heathens.  Neither have only the ancient Christians and late reform, but other Nations also, delivered this with so great consent, that 'tis most manifestly the very voice of right reason, common to all mankind; and being derived from the most ancient, before the depravation of Religion, by a long Succession hath been delivered to their Posterity. The first care in a Commonwealth is about things Divine, thus Aristotle; and Plutarch, This is the first thing in making Laws: It is fit, saith he, the Best should be honoured by the best: and He that ruleth all, by him that ruleth. The most ancient Lawgivers Charondas and Zaleucus approved the same by their own example: and the twelve Tables, the Fountain of the Roman Law, derived from the Greeks, contained sundry Precepts about Sacred things. Justinian and Theodosius have Laws concerning Religion, in their Codes: and Ulpian defines the wisdom of the Law, to be the knowledge of things Divine, as well as Humane. Suarez himself confesseth, It hath been always observed among men, though particular offices, Civil and Ecclesiastical, were given to several persons, because the variety of actions required that distinction, yet the Supreme Power of both, especially as to making Laws, was seated in the Prince; and so it appears by Histories, that unto Kings and Emperors, in the City of Rome, and the Empire, this Power was ever given The same is also probable of other Commonwealths. General Custom, saith the same Schoolman, declares the institution of Nature.  

10. With respect unto crernall happiness;  Indeed Thomas and Cajetan seem to have thought, all the care of Lawgivers in those Nations to have regarded only the public Peace. But this, thus precisely taken, is very hard to be proved, and scarce credible. For the Christian Fathers do prove most evidently, that the Greeks of old believed, Rewards and Punishments after death to be reserved for men, by divine Judgement. That they thus believed, and other Heathens too, there are very many Testimonies of most faithful Authors. Why then may we not believe this end was looked upon by some of their Lawgivers? especially, when Austin saith, 'Tis not to be doubted, very many beside Abraham's Family, although the holy Scripture mention only Job, and a few more, did believe and hope in Christ to come.  

11. And unto temporal prosperity.  But besides that end (eternal happiness) the prime and principal, this also is a just cause for the Highest Powers to take Religion into their charge, the great Consequence it hath to outward felicity and concord: and that for two reasons; the first in respect of God's providence; for piety hath the promises, not only of the future, but of the present life. 
Mat. 6.33.  Seek first the kingdom of God, and all other things shall be added unto you. And in the old Law of the Hebrews, 
12. Which follows true Religion by virtue of divine Providence.  a prosperous Reign, fruitfulness of the earth, victory over enemies, are proposed to the godly; to the ungodly are threatened most grievous curses. Nor were the Gentiles ignorant of this, no not after they had departed from the one true God unto their Idols. Livy saith, All things fall out luckily to those that worship the Gods, unprosperously to the despisers of them. In Plato there is much to this purpose. For Christian writers, take only that of Leo to Martian, I rejoice that you are studious of the Church's peace: 
Ep. ●st. 42.  and this shall be your reward; the peace you give to the Church, your Empire shall partake of.  

13. And by its own nature; in respect of Moral Precepts, and doctrines, and rites.  The other reason is, from the nature and proper efficacy of Religion, which is of force to make men quiet, obedient, lovers of their Country, keepers of Justice and Equity; and where the people are so well disposed, the Commonwealth must needs be happy. Hence Plato calls Religion the fortress of Power, the bond of Laws and good Discipline; Cicero, The foundation of humane Society; and Plutarch saith, the City may more easily be built without ground, than the Citizens preserved without a persuasion of the deity. Cyrus' in Xenophon thought his household would be the further from any evil enterprise against him or one another, the more they feared God: and Aristotle notes, that Subjects do most esteem and trust the King, whom they believe to stand in awe of the divine power. Even false Religion conduces somewhat to outward peace; and the nearer it comes to truth, the more it prevails to that end; but for Christian Religion (to let pass the testimonies of her friends) the adversaries have given it this praise, That it binds men with a holy tye, not to commit stealth or robbery, not to break their word, or fail in their trust, as Pliny speaks; That it teacheth nothing but what is just and gentle, as Ammianus Marcellinus; that it is a persuasion which destroys all wickedness, as it is in Zosimus.  
Nor is this the effect of Religion, in that part only, where it prescribes a rule for manners, and strengthens it with threats and promises: the Doctrines and Rites also have no small moment to the furthering of good life, and advancing the public happiness. Xenophon perhaps thought it was a witty conceit when he said, 'Twas all one, as to manners, whether we believe God corporeal or incorporeal: but Truth itself hath taught us otherwise, when from this, that God is a Spirit, is inferred, therefore He must be worshipped in spirit. The most virtuous mind (as Seneca also acknowledgeth) is the best worship and most acceptable to God. So do even the Philosophers teach, that no foul deed is to be committed, because God is every where present: and because God knows all that shall come to pass, they show that nothing shall befall good men, but what shall turn to their benefit. Tiberius was the more negligent of religious duties (as Suetonius hath it) being persuaded, all things were carried by Fate; and it was not in vain that Plato said, If you would have the State go well, you must not suffer any one to teach, that God is the cause of Evil deeds; which to say is impious, and therefore to the Commonwealth most pernicious. The same Plato shows at large, that it is of much concernment, what rites are used, and with what mind, in the second Book of his Republic; where he setteth down the harm those Ceremonious expiations do, by the use whereof without amendment of life, men hoped for pardon of their wickedness.  

14. More reasons added.  Other causes, but less principal, might be added; for which the highest power cannot relinquish the command over sacred things, without the very great hazard of the Commonwealth; for some Priests are of such a nature, that unless they be kept under, they will be above you: & the superstitious multitude do more hearken to their Preachers, than their Governors. Kings and Emperors have learned this at their cost, and the Annals are full of examples. One thing more for conclusion; the experience of all ages tells us, that change in Religion, even in Rites and Ceremonies, if it be not with consent, or manifestly for the better, often shakes the Commonwealth, and brings it into danger. Wherefore unless that curiosity be restrained by Laws, the State will often totter. For these last reasons, there are some even in the Roman Church, that submit the Priest (though by them otherwise exempted) to the Power of the Prince.   

CHAP. II.  
That the Authority or Rule over Sacred things, and the Sacred Function, are distinct.  
ARistotle teacheth very well, that it is not the part of an Architect, as an Architect, to set his hand to the work, but to prescribe, what every one shall do, as right reason shall direct him; and what he shall rightly appoint, the workmen must rightly execute: So it is the Ruler's office, not to do the things commanded, but to command them to be done. But the Functions under command are of two sorts: 
1. All Functions are under Command.  some are subject both by nature and order, as effects proceeding from their cause; some only by order. In the former way under the Architect are the Overseers of the work; 
2. Some by Emanation.  in the latter the Carpenter, the Smith, and other Labourers. So also, to the Authority of the Highest Power are subject in the former way the offices that have in them Authority and Jurisdiction, as the office of Major, Governor of a town, and the like: In the latter way the Function of a Physician, Philosopher, Husbandman and Merchant. Wherefore they fight with their own shadow, who take great pains to prove that the Pastors of Churches, as suen, are not the Vicars or Deputies of the Highest Powers; for who knows not that, when Physicians neither can without mistake be styled so. But that the same Pastors, as they receive some Authority or Jurisdiction, beside their Pastoral office, in respect of that accession, may be called Deputies or Delegates of the Supreme Powers, shall be showed hereafter. Wherefore when the Learned Deane of Lichfield proving that Priests are not therefore Superior to Kings, because Kings are commanded to ask Counsel of them, uses this example, that Kings advise with their Counselors of State, who yet are not their Superiors: They misunderstand him, who take his meaning to be, that these do agree in all respects, when 'tis sufficient for a similitude, that there be a correspondence in the drift of the speech: otherwise even the Parables in the Gospel will be exposed to censure. Pastors are rightly compared to the Civil Officers, in respect of the subordination not the emanation of their Office. The Civil Officers are both Subjects to the Highest, and Deputies; the Pastors, as such, are only Subjects, not Deputies.  

3. The Supreme Authority, and the Sacred Function, united in the same Person, by the Law of Nature.  The Authority over the Function, and the Function itself being distinguished, we must inquire, Whether that Authority, and the holy Function may be united in the same person, Whereunto that we apply a fit answer, a difference must be made between the Law of Nature, and Positive divine Law. By the natural Law, the same person may have the highest Authority and the Priesthood too: because these have no such opposition, but they may meet in one man. Nay more, set aside the Positive Law, and some external impediments, it is in some sort, natural, that the same Person be both King and Priest; not so natural, as that it cannot be otherwise, but as those things are termed natural, which are well agreeing unto nature and right reason. For seeing Kings, whose Dominions are not of the largest, may easily join some peculiar Function to the care of their Kingdom, as we have known Kings to have been Physicians, Philosophers, Astrologers, Poets, and very many Commanders in War; and seeing, no Function is more excellent, and whence do flow down upon the people so many benefits, as the Priestly Office; it appears, that this, above all other, is most convenient and worthy of a King. 
4. It was so before Moses, and after, among the Nations.  The consent of Nations doth evince it: for in the first times, when men were governed more by Domestical than Civil Power, the Fathers of families, as all confess, did both represent some Image of Kings, and perform the Priesthood also. Thus Noah after the Flood was past, offers sacrifice to God. Of Abraham God himself saith, He would instruct his Children and Family in the course of a Godly life. 
Gen. 18.16.  We read also of the Sacrifices of Job, and other Patriarches. After the Father's decease, as the Principality of the Family, so the Priesthood too was devolved to the first borne, and that custom continued in the posterity of Jacob for as yet they had no Commonwealth constituted) until the Levits (that is, the Priests, and Ministers unto the Priests,) were surrogated and put in place of the first borne: as the divine Law doth expressly tell us. But in the mean time, in the Country of Canaan, there being a kind of Commonwealth, we read of Melchisedec King and Priest. The like was Moses before the Consecration of Aaron. Other Nations of old had the same custom, whether by the instinct of nature or the example of their Ancestors. In Homer the Hero's, that is, the Princes, Sacrifice; and, to omit other Nations, the first Kings of Rome did so too; and after the Kingdom was out, there remained yet A King of the Sacred Rites.  
It may be enquired, whether those Fathers and Kings, while the true worship of God lasted (as it is credible it lasted among many of the Fathers for some Ages after the flood) received the Priesthood by some special Title, or challenged it to themselves by their Paternal and Regal Right?  
Very learned men are of opinion, that, as some probably had the authority of the divine Oracle, so others had it not: nor is any such thing, the Law positive being set aside, required to the constitution of a Priest. Yea, when the men of those times, all the world over, were bound, as far as they knew him, to honour God, and to give him thanks, as the Apostle convinces, Rome 1. they were either bound every one to be Priests, or to commend the Priesthood to some chosen men. But it is the Father's part to assign all, in the family, their several offices; and among the rest the Priesthood, as being, by the Law of Nature, not excepted: and the function, which he may assign unto another, the same, if he be fit for it, nature forbids him not to assign unto himself. What is said of the Father, let it be understood of the King; and the rather because all confess, the free multitude, in that first state, had a right to choose themselves a Priest. Which right of the Multitude, is transferred upon the Highest Power. For such Election consists of bidding and forbidding; because one is licenced to perform Priestly actions, others interdicted the same. But to bid and forbid are acts of Authority, which he that hath not wholly, hath not truly the name of the Highest Power. That which is spoken to the Hebrews is not opposite hereto; No man taketh this honour to himself, but he that is called by God, as Aaron. For the divine writer in that place treateth of the legal Priest, not of him that was, or might have been before, or out of the Law of Moses: and he shows, whatsoever was excellent in the legal Priest, was much more eminently in Christ, in whom also there were many things illustrious, which in the legal Priest were wanting. But the Custom of joining the Empire with the Priesthood used through all the world about two thousand five hundred years, in many places longer, the Luxury of Kings, their sloth, or business of war, in other Nations; and among the people of God, the Positive divine Law did at last abrogate: that Law I mean, which gave the Priesthood not to any of the people, but only to the house of Aaron. After this, what was before a praise, became a trespass.  

5. The Supreme Authority, and Sacred Function, separated by the Law of Moses.  Why God separated the kingdom of Israel from the Priesthood, 'twere hard to find out, unless the divine writer to the Hebrews had opened us the way. 'Tis apparent the Hebrew Nation was very prone to superstition, and often fell away to Idols; To restrain them from this, when God had imposed on them a great burden of laborious Ceremonies, they began to place all their hope in them; from which most unreasonable persuasion, the holy men very often call them off; and show, that Mercy and integrity of heart is far more acceptable in the sight of God, than all their Sacrifices. Had the King himself offered their chief Sacrifices, as of old the custom was, how much more would their minds have been taken up with so great a Majesty? But now, when the Priesthood was, though still with Pomp enough, yet disrobed, as they saw, of the Royal Splendour, and brought down below the King; hereby, they were put in mind, to hope for some great Priest, who should also be a King as Melchizedec was, and to put their trust in him. What admirers the Jews were of their Priests, even in this appears, that after their return from the Captivity, they forthwith added to the Priesthood the Principality, which quickly advanced to a Kingdom, and so to a Tyranny.  
Moreover, it is worth our observation, that, after the Institution of the Priesthood, some relics of the ancient Custom still remained. For, to the Fathers of families was left, the kill of the Passeover; wherein, as the Jews rightly note, they performed somewhat of the Priest's office. Circumcision also was administered without a Priest, as all the Hebrews consent by any one that had skill to do it. And this is not to be omitted, that Prophecy, which seems to have a natural coherence with the Priesthood, was as well given to Kings as Priests; Yea, to private men, more often than to the Priests. Thus did God, many ways, bring the people to an acknowledgement of the weakness of the levitical order. Thus did the Law, as it were, by the hand lead them unto Christ; who was to be the highest Prophet, the highest Priest, and the highest King; who also should make all believers in him partakers of that threefold honour. Concerning the Prophecy, 
Est 54.13. Jo. 6.45.  we have that of Esay, cited by St. John, They shall be all taught of God: and another notable place of Jeremy, cited in the Epistle to the Hebrews. 
Heb. 8.10.  Concerning the Kingdom and Priesthood, 
1 Pet. 11.9.  Peter speaks of both at once, where he calls the faithful, a royal Priesthood. And John in the Revelation, 
Apoc. 1.6.5.10.  He hath made us Kings and Priests unto God. Yet, neither the excellency of Christ himself in his prophetical office, nor the general Communication of the gift of prophecy to the faithful, hinder, but that some in the New Testament may be called Prophets, by a singular right. So also, the Kingdom of Christ, which partly consists in his divine care of his Church against her enemies, partly in a spiritual government of the hearts of men, hath not taken away either the right, or the name of Kings, whose Empire is external, and subject both to the divine providence, and the spiritual actions of Christ: according to that of Sedulius: 
He doth not earthly Kings dethrone,  
Who gives to His an heavenly Crown.  The name of Priests is also given to the preachers of the New Testament in a special manner: but, there was some reason, why Christ and his Apostles did always abstain from that kind of speech; which ought to admonish us, that we do not commonly and promiscuously argue, from the levitical order, to the Evangelicall; seeing, there is a wide difference, both in the office, and the designing of the persons to it.  

6. And by the Christian Law.  It is enquired therefore, under the Christian Law, whether the Highest Authority, and the Pastoral office (which may be also called the Priesthood, as was noted before) can rightly be united in the same person. Many arguments are brought to prove they cannot, but all are not of the same strength; for some do more rightly prove the offices to be divers, as they always have been; and, that Pastors, as Pastors, have no Empire; rather than the conjunction of the offices to be interdicted. That is of more efficacy, that the Apostle for bids the soldier of Christ (he seems to speak of the Pastoral warfare) to be entangled with worldly business; 
Tim. 11. A.  which the most ancient Canors, entitled Apostolical, 
Can. 6.81.83.  extend even to inferior civil offices. And lest any think this only constituted for the times, they lived under heathen Emperors; the same is repeated, in the Synod of Carthage, 
Can. 16.  under Hono●i●s and Theodosius, Christian Emperors, and in that of Chalcedon too. The reason was, 
Can. 3.7.  because the Pastoral office is of such weight and difficulty, that it requires the whole man. Although this must not be taken so rigidly, as always to exclude Pastors from undertaking any secular charge (the Laws, for example, 
Novel. 123 Cap. 5.  except Tuitions) yet in sufficeth to remove from the Pastor my charge, that is difficult and perpetual; as we see the Apostles exempted themselves, for the same reason, from the care of the Widow's maintenance; an office otherwise not improper for them. But the charge of a Kingdom, is both perpetual, and more weighty, than any other. The strongest argument is, That the royal office requires far other manners and behaviour, than the Pastoral, as it is described in the Gospel, So that, even thence it sufficiently appeareth, both cannot with any convenience and comeliness be sustained by one nor without inconstant levity in passing from the exercise of one to the other.  
We have showed that the Empire is distinct from the sacred Function; and, that there are causes, why Both together ought not to be undertaken by the same person. Nevertheless, because both the Empire, and the Pastoral office (by Pastors I understand the Ministers of the Gospel; for Kings are Pastors too, and that of the Lords flock; yea, Pastors of the Pastors, as a Bishop once called King Edgar) though distinct, yet agree in this, that the same, which is the Pastor's only care, is the principal care of the Highest Powers; namely, that Divine things may be rightly ordered, and the Salvation of men procured; we need not wonder, if the Highest Powers, 
7. Sacred names & Privileges given to the Highest Powers.  for the community of the matter, and the end, receive sometimes the title of the other Function. Hence it was, that Constantine called himself a Bishop, and other Emperors had the title of Renowned Pontiffs or Priests. In the Emperor Martianus the Roman Bishop extols his Priestly mind, and Apostolical affection: and Theodoret mentions the Apostolical cares of Theodosius. As the names, so the privilege of the Function, hath been given to Emperors. The sixth general Synod forbiddeth Laics to approach the Altar, i.e. the Table of the Lord; but the Emperor is excepted. Upon which place, Balsamo Bishop of Antioch observes, how the Emperors were wont to Seal with Wax, as the Bishops of that time did, and to instruct the people in Religion.  
Now if the Emperors were called, as we have showed they were, Bishops and Pontiffs and Priests, there was then no cause of upbraiding some English writers for attributing to their King a certain spiritual power, seeing the name is often imposed not from the manner of working, but from the matter, as we call the Laws military, nautical, rural. Wherefore the King's power is also spiritual, as it is conversant about Religion, which is a spiritual thing.   

CHAP. III.  
How far sacred and profane actions agree, as to the right of having Command over them.  
FIrst let us see what kind of actions (for about them Authority is properly conversant) may be the matter of command, and then, what effect the command may have, in the several kinds.  

1. Internal actions not subject to the Higher Power, but in relation to external.  Actions are first divided into external, and internal. The external are the primary matter under humane power, the internal are the secondary; nor for themselves, but by reason of the external: and therefore, about the internal, which are wholly separated from the external, and respect them not, humane commands are not given. Hence is that of Seneca He errs, who thinks, the whole man can be subdued, for the better part is excepted: and that common saying, Thought is free. The reason is, because Government re-requires some matter, which may fall under the Governors' knowledge; but God alone is the searcher of hearts, and hath the sole Empire of them. Unto men, the internal acts of others are uknown, by their own nature: by their own nature, I therefore add, because the external, that are done in secret, are under Government: for by their nature, they may be known. I said, internal acts are subject to command, secondarily: that comes to pass two ways; either by the intention of the Ruler, or by a kind of repercussion: in the first manner, where the inward act is joined with the outward, and hath influence upon it, (for the mind is esteemed in offences, either perfected, or begun;) in the latter, when, because any act is made unlawful by the interdiction of the Ruler, (for we must be subject not only for wrath, 
Rom. 13.5.  but for conscience sake;) by thought to intend that action, is unlawful: not, as if humane Law were properly made for the thought; but because no man can honestly will that, which is dishonest to be done.  
Another partition of Actions is this, that, 
2. Actions either determined or not determined, before any humane Command.  before any thing is by men ordained concerning them, they are either morally defined, or indefinite. Morally defined, I call those, which are either due, or unlawful; those may be said to be morally necssary, those morally impossible; as, in the Law, dishonest things are all expressed by that word. 
3. Actions determined by Law Divine either natural, or positive.  This determining of Actions, before any Act of humane Authority, ariseth, either from their own nature; as, to worship God, is due; to lie, unlawful of itself; or from the Positive divine Law; Those of the former sort are referred to the Law natural; but, lest any be deceived, by the ambiguity of the word natural, not only those Action are called natural, which flow from principles known by nature; but those also, which come from natural principles, certainly, and determinately. For, natural, in this argument, is opposed, not to Supernatural, but to Arbitrary. So, when as it is certain, God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, are one true God; that the same God be worshipped, is a point of natural Law. Actions of the latter sort, that is, determined or defined by divine Positive Law, are such as were prescribed by God, some to all men, some to one people, some to single persons, namely, 
Deut. 4.8.  to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and other servants of God. Among all people, to Israel alone, God prescribed many Positive Laws, pertaining to Religion, and other things. To all mankind, some things were commanded for a time, as, the Law of the Sabbath, presently upon the Creation, as some think; the Law of not eating blood, or the strangled, after the flood: Other things to last for ever, as the Institutions of Christ, concerning Excommunication, Baptism, the Supper, and if there be any more of that kind.  

4. Actions undetermined are the matter of humane Law, and also determined, both because of their adjuncts and of a new Obligation. Eth. 5.10.  These things being understood, it may seem, that such. Actions only are the just matter about which Humane Authority is exercised, which by Divine are left indefinite, and free either way. For Aristotle describes that which is legally just to be that which from the beginning was indifferent, thus or thus; but, after the Law made, ceaseth to be so. And this is true, if we only look upon such an act of Authority, which intrinsically changeth the action; for, when as the things that ought to be done, and the things unlawful, are determined, and therefore immutable as to moral good or evil, it follows, that indefinite actions are left, as the only matter of such a change. Nevertheless when the things that ought to be done and those that ought not, are capable of a change extrinsecall, and may receive it from humane Authority, it is manifest, they are Subject to the same Authority, unless they be actions mecrely internal. Hither it pertains, to assign the time, place, manner, and per●●ns, for performing of due actions, so f●r as the circumstances are undefin'd by the nature of the thing, and the Law of God; also, to take away impediments, and sometimes to add rewards; and, to restrain unlawful actions, by such punishments as are in the Ruler's power, or else, to inflict no punishments, which is called permission of the fact, and is sometimes no fault. To him that looks more narrowly into these things it will appear, that by humane command, there ariseth a new Obligation, even in Conscience, though of less degree, in the things which men were before bound to do, or leave undone. For the divine Law of the Decalogue, saying to the Jew, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shall not steal, and the rest, not only declared, what was of the Law natural; but, by the precept, added a new Obligation to the former; so that the Jew, doing the contrary, not only offended, in doing a vicious act, but an act forbidden: because, 
Rom. 11.23.  by the transgression of the Law he dishonoureth God, as Paul speaks. As it is in the Divine Law of the Decalogue; so also it is in Man's Law, a proportion being observed. For they that resist, resist the Ordinance of God: and therefore, shall receive to themselves damnation, 
Rom. 13.2.  as the Apostle testifies.  
We have considered, how largely the matter under Humane Power is extended, and what acts belong unto it, in every kind: now, let us see what acts are not, by right, within the Command thereof. 
5. Acts not under Humane Command, are only those that are repugnant to Divine Law.  It is certain, those only are without the limits of the Supreme Power, which are repugnant either to the Natural, or to any other Divine Law; no other way, of confining the right of the Highest Power, can possibly be invented. The things defined in the Law Divine (wherein I comprehend the Natural) are of two sorts; some commanded, some forbidden. Therefore there are two acts of Empire, which belong not to the Right of him that Ruleth; To command what God forbids: To forbid what God commands. The reason is, because, as in natural causes, the Inferior have no force to work, against the Efficacy of the Superior; so it is in Moral. Wherefore such Commands, so far as they do contradict the Divine, cannot have the proper effect of Commands; they cannot Impose an Obligation. Excellently saith Austin: If the Curator Commands somewhat, is it not to be done? no; If the Proconsul forbids. Herein you contemn not the Power, but choose to obey the Higher. Again, if the Proconsul bid one thing, the Emperor appoint the contrary, without doubt you must hearken to the Emperor. Therefore, if the Emperor do require one thing, and God another, what is to be done? God is the greater Power; Give us leave, O Emperor, to obey Him.  
Yet, we must carefully distinguish, between the Act of Authority, 
6. Commands repugnant to Divine Law bind to a nonresistance, & wherefore.  which moves the Subject to work; and the Force offered, which imposes, on the Subject, a necessity of suffering. For, when the Act of Authority is without effect, and lays no obligation; yet the Force hath an effect, not only Physical, but Moral; not on the agents part, but the patients; namely, that it is not lawful, to repel that force, by force: for violent defence, being lawful against an Equal, against a Superior is unlawful. 
1. Miht. Sect. 4. D. de●ve Miht.  ●A Soldier, saith the Lawyer, who resisted his Captain going about to chastise him, was punished by the Ancients. If he laid hold on his Cane, he was casshiered: if on purpose he broke it, or laid hand on the Captain, he was put to death. This though probably it might have proceeded from Humane Law (for humane Authority binds to all things which are not unjust, and it is not unjust to forbear resistance) or also from the Law of Nature, which suffers not a part to oppose the whole, no not for self-preservation: yet is it more clearly demonstrated out of the written law of God. For Christ, when he said, He that taketh the Sword, shall perish by the sword, plainly disallows a forcible defence against the most unjust force offered by Authority. And hither is to be referred that of Paul He that resisteth, resisteth the ordinance of God. There are two ways of resisting, either by doing against the command, or by repelling force with force, as Austin interprets: Whether the Power, 
Rom. 13.2.  favouring the truth, corrects a man, he hath praise by it, who is amended: or, disfavouring the truth, rageth against a man, he hath also praise by it, who is Crowned. So Peter will have Servants subject to their Masters, not only to the good and gentle, but to the froward; which the same Austin, extending also unto Subjects, Princes must be so endured by the common people, saith he, and Masters by their servants; that they may exercise their patience in bearing temporal things, and their hope, in waiting for things eternal. So it was also in the old Law, where to use Subjects for servants, to give away their goods to others, is called the Kings Right; 
1 Sam. 8.  not, as if the King doing so, did justly (the Law divine had taught him another lesson, yea, had forbidden him to be puffed up, 
Dent. 17.17, 20.  to gather abundance of gold and silver, and a multitude of horses) but because, doing so, no man might lawfully oppose force against Him as the Romans say, 
L. ●enult. D. de Just. & jure.  The Praetor gives Judgement, even when he decrees that which is unjust. Hence was that twice spoken of a King, though most unjust, yet set up by God, 
1 Sam. 24.7.26.9.  Who can lay his hand upon the Lords anointed, and be guiltless? Neither are they by any means to be heard, who against the holy Scriptures, 
7. Subordinate Powers not exempted from that Obligation.  against right reason, against the judgement of pious Antiquity do arm certain Inferior Powers against the Highest. For, Peter teaching obedience to the King (that is, to the Highest Power) as Supreme, to Governors (that is, to Inferior Powers) as sent, and ordained by Him, manifestly shows, all the right of Inferior Powers to depend upon the Commission they receive from the Highest. Hence Austin concerning Pontius Pilate: Such power God had given him, that was contained under Caesar's Power. And, was not David a Prince, and a Leader among the people of God, who was so far from touching that Tyrant's person, 
1 Sam. 24, 7.  that his heart smote him, for cutting off the lap of his garment? Reason confirms what we have said. For, those Magistrates, in respect of their Inferiors, are Magistrates, as long as it pleaseth the Supreme Power; but, in respect of the Supreme Power, they are but private men; because all Power, and all Jurisdiction flows from the Supreme, and still depends upon it. Hence Marcus Aurelius, that most wife Emperor, said, The Magistrates judge Private men, Princes the Magistrates, and God the Princes. By the name of Princes understanding the Emperors, who were now become absolute. The ancient Christendom was of the same judgement; for no Governors, no Leaders of legions, ever attempted any thing with Arms, against the most impious, cruel, and bloody Emperors: So that, it is a very sad thing, that our Age hath brought forth men of learning, who by a new-coined doctrine, have opened a broad way for Seditions, 
8. Examples alleged to the contrary answered.  and Wars to enter in. Neither ought we to be moved by any late examples of Arms taken up against Kings. For if they were taken up against Kings, upon whom the whole Right of the people was translated; and, who therefore reigned, not by a precarious, but proper Right; whatsoever pretext or success they had, they cannot be praised without impiety. But, if any where Kings were bound by Contracts, on Positive Laws, and Decrees of some Senate or States; against these, having not the highest Authority, upon just causes, by the judgement of the same Senate or States, Arms might be taken up. For many Kings, even such as succeed by inheritance, are Kings by name, rather than by Power; as Aemilius Probus hath written of the Laconians. But, this deceives the unskilful, that they do not enough discern the daily administration of affairs obvious to their eyes, which in an Optimacy is oft committed unto one; from the interior Constitution of the Commonwealth. What I have said of Kings, I would have to be understood much more of them, who both really, and in title, were not Kings, but Princes; that is, not chiefest, but first. Whose Principality much differs from Supremacy. And again, this is to be noted, that some Lords and Cities have Supreme Authority, though they seem not to have it, being under the Trust and protection of another. But, seeing to be under protection, is not to be in subjection; and, as the Roman Lawyers note, The people ceaseth not to be free, that are fairly observant to another's Majesty; these also may be endowed with Supreme Authority, who are obliged to another by unequal League, or tie of Homage. All this I set down to that end, lest any one hereafter (as I see hath been often done) defame good causes, by an ill Defence. I would more enlarge in this Argument (for 'tis of great consequence, and here to err is dangerous) but that 'tis done already with great care by many others, and of late by the learned Arnisaeus.  
Upon these premises, let us come to demonstrate the parity of Empire over Sacred and other matters. 
9 The difference 'twixt internal actions and external.  As in all things, the thoughts are not so eafily ruled, as the words: so particularly, in Religion, Lactantius hath truly said; Who shall enforce me, either to believe, what I will not; or, not to believe, what I will? And in this sense that of Casiodor is true, Religion cannot be Commanded; and of Bernard, Faith is to be planted by persuasion, not obtruded by violence. Wherefore also the Emperors Gratian, Valentinian, and Theodosius, said concerning an Heretic, Let him think, if he will, what is hurtful for himself; let him not utter it, to the hurt of others. And, I suppose, Constantine had respect hereunto, when he called himself a Bishop or Overseer of things without: because, the inward acts, taken by themselves, are not the matter of Humane power; but are Subject to the power of God; who, by Bishops, not Commanding but Ministering, moves the minds of men with voices and signs; yet so, that the still reserves the main Efficacy to himself alone. Notwithstanding, inward acts of all sorts, taken jointly with the outward, fall under Humane Authority. The Cornelian Law lays hold on him, who carries a weapon, with purpose to kill a man: and Adrian the Emperor saith, not only the event in evil deeds, but the will is to be considered. So in Justinians Code, concerning the Catholic Faith, a Title is extant, to wit, for the Profession of Faith, which the first Law explains, All people under our Empire we require to be of such Religion, etc. Hence came those names of Kings, Rectors, Authors, Defenders of the Faith. So also of old, the King of Ninive commanded repentance, with fasting. 
10. What God commands, cannot be forbidden by by man with validity.  That things forbidden by God cannot with validity be commanded; nor things by him commanded, be forbidden by Humane power, is no less true in other actions, than in Sacred; in both, that of the Apostle hath place, We must obey God rather than men: which a Disciple of the Apostles, Polycarpus, hath expressed thus; We have learned to render to the Powers ordained by God, all the honour we can, without hurting our own souls. The King of Egypt Commands the Midwives to kill the Male-childrens of the Hebrews: They do not obey. The cause is expressed. For they feared God: who by the dictate of Nature forbids to slay the innocent. King Ahab would have Naboth sell him his Vineyard; Naboth denies; for, the Divine Law, given to the Hebrews, forbade inheritances to be alienated from the same family. Antoninus Caracalla commands Papinian the Lawyer, to defend the parricide committed by him: Papinian refuses, and had rather die; because he knew, it was against the Law of Nature and Nations, to speak false and Patronise so great a crime. By the same right, but with more holy affection, the Apostles, when the Council charged them, not to speak or teach in the name of Jesus, 
Acts 4.19. , ask, whether they must not obey God rather than men? and justly: for they had received a charge from God himself, by the mouth of the Lord Jesus, in his name to Preach repentance and remission of sin, 
Luke 24.  and that beginning at Jerusalem; for this also was specified in their Commission. What therefore the Divine Command had made necessary for them to be done, Humane command could not render unlawful. And in this sense the Authors are to be explained, who say, the Gospel, the Ministry, the Sacraments, are not subject to Humane Power; that is, to change that, 
11. How Religion is not subject to Humane Power.  which Divine Law hath introduced.  
For first, the Preaching of the word of salvation, and the exhibition of the Sacraments, being commanded by God, cannot effectually be forbidden by men. Likewise, the Nursing of Parents or Children, the relieving of the innocent, and many other duties, are so far exempt from Humane Law, that the prohibition of them is of no force or virtue. Secondly, the form by God prescribed, for the Ministry of his word and Sacrament, cannot be altered by men; nor is this proper to things Sacred. For also, the Form of Matrimony, as it consists in the unity and individual knot of two persons, is by Humane Law immutable. Thirdly, it belongs not unto Humane Power, to make new Articles of Faith, or, as Justinian speaks, to innovate the Faith; 
L. cum salut. L. de sum. Trin.  nor to institute a new worship of God, or new Sacraments; because, the nature of such things will not admit thereof: for nothing can be believed or done, in order to salvation, but what God hath declared such; neither can any thing be fit to apply unto us the Divine grace, unless God hath assigned it to that use. Yet, to speak accurately, these things which we have rehearsed, Sacred and others, may be rather said to have something in them of immutable right, than simply and altogether exempted from the Rule of the Highest Powers; seeing there be very many and very great acts of Authority concerning them; 
2 Chron. 29.15.30.12.  which acts are called in Scripture the Commandments of the King in the business of the Lord.  

12. And how it is Subject.  For first, it is the proper effect of the Highest Powers, that we have liberty and convenience to do the things which God commandeth, being freed from impediments, and supplied with helps. So Cyrus and Darius gave leave to the Jews to restaur the Temple, and to sacrifice there; and gave them moneys too, to bear their charges. So, by the edict of Constantine and Licinius, the Christians had open exercise of their Religion. Secondly, not only by permitting, but (as before was touched) Humane Law, by Commanding, what Divine Law doth Command, superadds another Obligation. Thirdly, to the actions Commanded by God, the Highest Power prescribes certain circumstances of place, time and manner, that they may be done decently and in order. Fourthly from actions forbidden by God, the matter and oceasions are by Humane Power withdrawn. So Ezechias broke the brazen Serpent; so the Emperors shut up the Heathen Temples. Fiftly, 'tis the part of the Highest Power, by proposing punishments, to draw men to the doing of that, which God Commands, and deter them from the contrary. as Nebuchadnezar made it death to speak evil of the Hebrews God; and the Emperors, to offer sacrifice to the God of the Gentiles. And in these particulars consisteth, as I take it, that Office of the Highest Powers which is called by Justinian, 
Nou. 138.  the preservative of the Divine Laws, meaning such a custody, which is also Legislative, as Austin speaketh, 
Ep. 48.  Let the Kings of the earth serve Christ, by making Laws also on behalf of Christ. And the same particulars have place in things not Sacred, which are likewise defined one way, by that Divine Law, 
Rom. 1.32.  which the Apostle calls the righteousness of God. For therefore the Civil Law is said to consist, partly of Civil institutions, partly of Natural precepts. Concerning which Natural precepts, the Civil Law gives right and liberty to do them, hindrances being removed; yea commands the same things to be done; determines circumstances; takes away, or streightens the occasions of often transgression, Lastly, adds a sanction, to them, by the constitution of punishments; which is so manifest, that we need spend no more time in this.  

13. The Highest Power may determine any Actions not a●ore determined by God.  Let us come to those things, which by the Divine Law, whether written in the hearts of men, or in the Holy Bible, are not at all determined. To determine them either way, whether they be Sacred or Profane, is the right of the Highest Power. Of profane, 'tis most known; so David, of dividing the spoil; the Roman Emperovis, made constitutions, 
15 am. 10.15.  of the solemnities and effects of Contracts and Testaments, & innumerable other matters. Of Sacred things, 'tis no less clear, if one (I say not, diligently read) but only look into the Sacred History, the Codes of Theodosins and Justinian, the Novels, the Capitular of Charles the Great. Every where examples are so obvious. It pertains hither, to institute Offices, more for convenience and ornament, than for necessity, as David did; to build or beautify temples, as Solomon and Joas, or to appoint a Law and manner of building them, as Justinian; to prescribe the manner of Electing Pastors, holding Synods, keeping order among Pastors, alienation of things dedicate to holy uses; all which very many Christian Emperors have done.  

14. Resistance under colour of Religion, unlawful, preved by Scripture & examples, and Objections answered.  Now, if the Highest Power shall exceed the due limits, by decreeing and ordaining any thing, either in Ecclesiastical things, against the Rules of Faith and Religion prescribed by God; or, in other matters, against the perpetual rule of equity (as in both kinds it sometime happons) Ecclesiastical and Civil things do again agree in this, that, as a man cannot be obliged to obey men rather than God; so if upon refusal force be offered, there remains the glory of patience, no right to oppose force to force. 
Mat. 26.52.  So Christ hath caught Peter, 
1 Pet. 2.16.  and Peter us. So saith Ambrose, Grieve I can, weep I can, mourn I can, any other way to make resistance, I cannot, I ought not. A most holy example of that patience prescribed unto us by God, is left us by those ancient Christians, that lived under the heavy yoke of the unbelieving Emperors. They were men to be feared for their number, had they chosen rather to shed others blood, than their own: for, Tertullian shows how they had filled both the Camp and City. That victorious Theban Legion, for Religion sake, was contented to lose every tenth man, at the Emperor's Command; and, it is memorable, that when there was one Christian put to death for tearing the Imperial edict, Commanding Bibles to be burnt, Churches to be demolished, and the Christians Crucified; the rest of the Christians declared, He had justly deserved that punishment. So deeply had the voice of Christ sunk into their minds, that forbids to take the sword. Every one takes the sword, who hath not received it from God. God hath given it to none, but the Supreme Powers and to such as they appoint. No examples of the old Testament evince the contrary; for when we read of the defections of people or Cities from some Kings, and the impiety of the Kings set down for the cause, therein the divine judgement is described, not the deeds of men commended. But if the Highest Power, that hath undertaken the protection of true Religion, be itself therefore opposed by the arms either of foreign or domestic enemies, it hath all the right and reason in the world, by Arms to defend its own Authority, and the lives and fortunes of the Subjects. For 'tis all one upon the matter, whether the opposition be for Religion, or any other pretence; nor is the Power being Independent, more bound to let go the use of Religion, than the possession of land, at the pleasure of any other whatsoever: For He beareth not the Sword in vain.  

15. Not so many porticula●s in Sacred things, as in Secular, under Humane Power: with the reason of it.  It hath been showed, I think sufficiently, how the Highest Power hath equal Authority over actions Sacred and Profane, over the external primarily, and in regard of them, over the internal also in the second place: I say, Authority to command and forbid, what is commanded already, and forbidden by God; to determine things left in the midst, and permitted to man's liberty; and when force is offered under pretence of right, to defend itself. I say, equal Authority over Sacred and Secular actions: which Binius also a man of the Roman religion acknowledgeth. In general there is no difference; but if we come to particulars, 'tis confessed, Authority extendeth not to so many Sacred things, because the divine Law hath determined more of them, than of the Secular, for, the secular affairs (the Institutes of the Hebrew Commonwealth, it is plain, oblige not us) are almost all circumscribed by rules of Nature, saving that it may be doubted of some connubiall Laws, whether they be Natural, or out of the Divine pleasure. But, concerning Sacred matters, much is prescribed us in the Gospel, and proceeds immediately from the will of God. This being noted, I see not any thing more, remaining in this question; for, that a more diligent enquiry, and greater care is needful in things Sacred, both because the Law of Nature is more known than the Positive, and because error in Religion is more dangerous; this pertains to the question of the Manner to use the Power rightly, and changed nothing in the Power itself.   

CHAP. IU.  
The Objections against the Authority of the Highest Fowers, about Sacred things, are answered  
THE right under standing of what is all, ready spoken, will help any one to answer all that is said against the Authority of the Highest Powers, in things Sacted or Ecolef●asticall. 
1. That Christ Instituted the Pastoral office, answered.  For first, that Christ himself, not the Highest Powers, ordained the Pastoral office; that, as to the substance of the office, Christ also hath set down the rules; and that, so far (as we have before acknowledged) Pastors are not the Vicars, or Deputies of the Highest Powers, all this diminisheth nothing of the right of Government, as will appear by the examples of other things. The power of Parems over Children, of Husbands over their Wives, hath its original, not from any Humane Institution, but from God himself: yet who will deny these Powers, though more ancient, to be subject to the Highest. The Physician's function is from God, the author of Nature, (as the Pastor's from God the author of Grace,) and from Nature and Experience he receiveth rules to execute his office, not from the Highest Powers; nor is he in their stead, when he practiseth: and yet for all this, the Physician's function is subject to the Supreme Authority. There is the same reason in other arts and professions.  
And, that Pastors are not bound to obey the Highest Powers, when their Commands or Prohibitions are contrary to Gods; herein is nothing singular. For every private man hath so much right, and that in other things, as well as Sacred. Yea, the Judge, that receives his Commission from the Highest Power, being commanded by the same to judge against right and reason, is not bound to obey, or rather, is bound not to obey; which comes to pass, not because the private man, or the Judge is not subject to the Highest Power; (none will imagine that:) but because both the Power and they are all subject unto God: and when Commands are contrary, the Superior is to be preferred.  

2. That the Magistrate is not of the essence of the Church, answered.  That which some allege, that the Magistrate (as they love to speak) is not of the essence of the Church. 1. That the Church can subsist, although there were no Supreme Power, or that Power not a friend to the Church, is very impertinent; for, that we may speak in their phrase, the Magistrate is not of the essence of any single man, not of the essence of a Merchant, or Husbandman, or Physician, yet are all these under the Higher Powers, as reason teacheth, and the Apostles authority.  

3. An objection out of Esay answered. Esay 49.23. Whether Kings are under the believing people, or Church. Nebem. 8.8  This objection hath a better appearance, The promise made to the Church in the Prophet, Kings shall bow down to her with their face toward the Earth, and lick up the dust of her feet: which words rather seem to subject Kings to the visible Church, than the Church to Kings. This Argument the Papists often use. But truly, if as Esdras and his Companions once, so we interpret the Scripture by the Scripture, comparing together what was dictated by the same Spirit, we shall easily find, the honour, of which the Prophet speaks, is proper and peculiar unto Christ, which the Psalmist expresses almost in the same words: 
Psa. 72.9.  and it is given to the Church, for Christ spiritually reigning in it; as under the old Testament, we read the Ark to have been adored. There is therefore a Trope in that prophecy, neither can the words be rigidly pressed, without transferring that Majesty to the Church, which agrees to Christ alone, 
Apos. 1.5.  the Prince of the Kings of the earth.  
That saying, which is so much cried up by the Papists, that the Emperor is within the Church, not above the Church, is most true of the Church Catholic, that never was, never will be under one King; but it must be taken warily of the visible Church of one kingdom, so as not to deny the Superiority of the Empire; for a King, that properly bears the name of King, is not only Superior to the people taken severally, but to the whole people altogether. Nor is this understood of unbelieving people only, of whom Christ hath said, 
L●. 22.25.  The Kings of the Gentiles bear rule over them; but even Gods own people Israel thus speak, A King shall be over us. 
1 Sam. 8.19.  And Christian people are taught Subjection to the unbelieving Kings, 
Rom. 13.1. 1 Pet. 2.13  by Paul and Peter. Whereupon is that of chrysostom, If this berequired under Pagan Kings, how much more ought it to be under Kings that are believers? Nor is it material, that pious Authors sometimes say, Kings do service to the Church; for they mean only, that they do consult and provide for the commodities thereof; In which sense also the old Pagans called a Kingdom Service. So doth the Shepherd serve his flock, the Tutor his Pupil, the General his Army: and yet the Flock is not above the Shepherd, nor the Pupil above the Tutor, nor the Army above the General. For they that govern serve, by the office of consulting, and graciously providing, as Austin speaks; Kings therefore may be said to serve the Church, not to be servants of the Church, in that sense, as service signifies subjection. For Saul is not the servant of Israel, but Israel the Servants of Saul: 
1 Sam. 17.8.22.12. 1 Reg. 1.32  and specially Abimelech amongst the Priests, as David among the Peers. So is Sadoc the Priest the servant of David and Solomon. Wherefore also the greatest Synods, being as it were a Compendium of the whole Church, living under the Roman Empire, salute the Emperors by the name of their Lords. Certainly, as a Father hath equally the Rule over his family, whether believing or not: so the people's right Religion diminisheth nothing of the Right of the Highest Power.  

4. That Kings are under the Pastor's function, answered.  Some think this a very strong argument against the Authority asserted to the Highest Powers, that the Sacred Function of Pastors is conversant about Kings also, not only as the Gospel is in general preached unto them among the rest, but as by the Ministry of the Keys, it is applied to them in particular. But the weakness of this Argument is convinced by like examples; for what Function is not conversant about the King? Husbandmen, Merchants and the like, the King stands in need of, but to come nearer, the Physician cures the King as well as his Groom, and prescribes to both what may conduce to their recovery; moreover, the Counsellor of State is employed about the King, not only as a man, but as a King. Yet no man hath been so unwise, to exempt either the Persons or Functions of any of them from the Highest Authority, and lose them from the bonds of Humane Laws.  

5. The Objection, taken from the Kingdom of Christ, answer d. And what that Kingdom is; and whether he hath Vicars.  We must come now unto them, who think all Authority about Sacred things so to belong unto Christ alone, that Kings cannot be partakers of it, because he is sufficient alone for the Administration of his Kingdom, and needs not the help of a Deputy. That we may satisfy these men, the actions of Christ must be distinguished. His Legislation, and his final Judgement are peculiar to him. In his Legislation is comprehended not only a more plain promulgation of the Divine Law, misinterpretations being rejected and the difference laid open between the things which God always approved, and those which he did wink at or bear with for a time; but also the constitution of the Evangelicall Ministry and Sacraments, with the abrogation of the Ceremonial Law. His final Judgement contains the condemnation of some, and the absolution of others with exhibition of the reward. Which being done, Christ shall put off the Administration of his Kingdom, and yet retain the Majesty of a King for ever. These actions therefore being done, and to be done by Christ himself; Life and Death Eternal, with the Promise, commination and adjudgement of the same, being not in the power of mere men; it is certain, that in them no man is the associate or Deputy to him. But there be other actions called intermediate: and of these again, some are about the inward, some about the outward man. Those about the inward man are partly in the man, partly concerning him. In the man, Christ works when by the virtue of his Spirit he illuminats some, others by not illuminating he blinds, he opens the heart of some, others by not opening he hardens; sometimes he affordeth greater aids against temptations, sometimes less. Concerning the man, Christ works, when he remits or reteins sin: yet for the most part in those actions also some signs of them are inwardly Imprinted in the man by Divine Efficacy. All those actions exceeding the Power of mere Man, are also so peculiar to Christ, that he admits no Fellow in them not Vicar. Ministers indeed he admits to these actions, Pastors: Private men, and Kings too, every oh in his way. But there is a difference between a Vicar, and a mere Minister; because it is the part of a Vicar to produce actions of like kind with his actions whose place he holds; though of less perfection: and to a mere Minister it perteins not to produce actions of like kind, but such as are serviceable to the actions of the principal cause. Whence it appears, that the same action is properly attributed, yet proportionably, both to the Prineipall and the Vicegerent; for the King truly Governs and gives judgement; so doth the Judge also, though not with equal Right. But, to the Principal and the mere Minister, the same action cannot be accommodated without a Trope: as Pastors are said to save men, to remit and retain their sins. There remain the actions of Christ about the outward man: which especially consist in defence and deliverance from enemies, and in the ordering and adorning of his Church; actions rightly referred unto his providence. And as the general providence of God which hath a warchfull eye over all things although by itself it be sufficient for the disposition and execution of them; yet, for the demonstration of his. manifold wisdom, He makes use of the Highest Powers, as his Deputies, to preserve the common society of men; whence also they are styled Gods: So that special providence of Christ, watching over his Church, assumes unto itself the same Powers to Patronise the true Faith; and to them Christ also imparted his own name. These are they that, as Nazianzen saith, rule together with Christ, not by equal fellowship of power (far be from as so impious a thought) but by a Vicarious and derived right, which is the meaning of that in the Bohemian confession, Magistrates have a power common with the Damn. Wherefore seding things subordinate do● no fight against one another, and seeing it doth not misbecome the Majesty of Christ to excout● the principal actions of his Kingdom by himself immediately, 〈◊〉 partly by himself, pamly by other (as ●e 〈◊〉 too the Angel's Ministry, out of question) it follows, that the earthy Empire of the Highest Power, as it takes care of Sacred things, doth not at all oppose or stand against the heavenly and divine Power of Christ.  
And here we must admonish our Opponents, that in the place of Christ, 
6. Pastoral Govemment overthrows not the Authority of the H. Powers.  the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, they may not put upon us Presbyteries and Synods; nor transfer what is proper to Christ alone, to rule over Kings, unto them, whom both the necessity of order, and divine Authority hath subjected to the Imperial Power. But, because in Scripture, and the ancient History some Government is attributed, partly to Pastors, partly to Churches, let us see how it comes to pass, that the Government of the Highest Power is not overthrown thereby.  

Distinctions of Government: Directive. Constitutive. By consent. By Command. Supreme, Inferior, Inferior, By emanation. By subjection only.  For the right understanding whereof, lest in the unlikeness of things we be deceived by the likeness of words, we must make use of some distinctions. Government is either such as may consist with the Liberty of the Governed, or such as ●●dy not consist, with it the former agrees to them, who govern (as Tucitus speaka) by authority of persuasion not by pou●●● of Command, as Physicians Lawyers, Count sellours in things not, altogether necessary. The later Government, whereby the Liberty of the Governed is taken away, is either Declarative of Law, or Constitutive: and this later, either by right of consent, or by virtue of Authority. This distinction springs from the manner of introducing an obligation. They that govern declaratively doc not oblige properly, but occasionally, as they give a man notice of that which either brings or increases an Obligation. So the Physician governs his Patient, by showing what is hurtful, what is wholesome: which being known, the sick is bound to use this, avoid that, not by any Right which the Physician hath over him, but by the Law of Nature, which commands every one to have a care of his own life and safety. So Philosophers do govern the Moral and Civil life, by showing what is honest, what the safety of the people requires. Hither are refer●●d the Annunciations which Ambassadors or Heralds sent by the Highest Powers make unto the Subjects, and as well the suasory, which we have memtioned, as the declarative, are wont to be comprehended under the one name of Directive regiment; from which differs the Constitutive, whether it ariseth out of Consent, a Command. That, out of consent, hath virtue to oblige all that have consented, by the natural law, concerning the keeping of Covenants, in those things, which were in the right and power of the Covenanters. But they, that have not consented, are not directly bound; indirectly they are, if three things concur. First, that they are a part of the whole; Second, that the major part of the whole have consented; The third, that something must be necessarily Constituted for the conservation of the whole, or the bettering of it. Upon these conditions, all and every one are bound, not by any Right which the major part hath over them, as Superior, but by that Law of Nature, which requires every part, as a part, to be ordered for the good of the whole. Which good oftentimes cannot be had without some special determination; and that determination can be of no effect, if it be lawful for a few to undo what was done by many. Hence it is, that the Companions of a journey, the partners of one ship, or of the same negotiation, & all Colleagues are bound to stand to the decree of the major part, in those things only, that need some determination, and belong to that Community, whereof themselves are members. But the Imperative regiment obligeth by the intrinsical force of its own supereminence; and the regiments of this kind, as hath been said, are either Supreme, or placed under the Supreme: and these again either derived from the Supreme, preme, or of some other original: these later, ordinary, as that perpetual and primitive Government of the Father over his, family, whence ariseth the authority of the. Pedagogue and Tutor; extraordinary, such as God gave by special Commission to some men under the old Testament. The Powers derived from the Supreme, either have received a right both to oblige and to act, as the Praetorship; or to oblige only, as the Power of a Delegate. Without a right to oblige, there is no Power, for this is as it were, the natural effect thereof.  

8. Pastors have no coactive or temporal Power: proved by Scripture and Fathers. 1 Pet. 5.3.  Let us now apply all this unto Pastors and Churches. The Apostles are forbid by Christ, the Presbyters or Pastors by the Apostle, to rule as Lords over God's heritage; the word is applied to Kings, Lu. 22.23. and that is not only forbid, but to exercise authority, which as distinct from the other is given to Great ones, Mat. 20.25. Mar. 1.42. By the name of Great ones are understood such Princes as the Ethnarches of the Jews, 
Antig. 13.2.  which were styled Euergetae, as we may see in Josephus, whence that of Luke may receive some light, They that exercise Authority over them, are called Euergetae benefactors. If therefore such right as the Highest Powers have, and such as the Inferior Powers have, be denied Pastors; it follows, that all Power is denied them. Christ himself respecting his state of a servant, 
Phil. 2.  denies his kingdom to be of this world; 
Lu. 12.14.  denies (which is lesser) that he was made a judge. And unto the same state he called his Apostles. We have not (saith Chrysostom) such power given us, that by authority of sentence we can restrain men from offences. And saith Bernard, I read that the Apostles stood to be judged, I find not that they sat in judgement. Pastors are called in Scripture by the name of Ambassadors, Messengers, Preachers; whose part it is, to declare the Authority of another, not to oblige men by their own. Their Commission is, 
1 Jo. 1.1.  to speak what they have heard, to deliver what they have received, and no more. 
1 Cor. 11.23.  The Apostle himself, concerning Virgins, 
1 Cor. 7.25  because he had no commandment from the Lord, dares command nothing; only he gives Counsel, withal declaring ●would be no sin in her that should do otherwise; and admonishing the Corinthians to help those of Jerusalem, 
2 Cor. 9.7.8.8.  by some extraordinary largesse, 
9 Their Government Suasory and Declarative. Heb. 13.7.17.  he adds, not of neceßity: the reason whereof went before, I speak not by command. The Government therefore, which is given to Pastors, when they are said to guide, 
1 Tues. 5.12.  to rule, to feed, to be set over the Church, 
1 Tim. 5.17.  aught to be referred to the declarative kind, or to that which merely consisteth in persuasion. 
Jo. 21.16. Ast. 20.28 1 Pit 3.  Where the Apostles or Pastors are read to have commanded, it is to be interpreted by that figure by which they are said to remit and retain sins, that is, to declare them remitted or retained. Nor is that to be taken otherwise, when God saith he set Jeremy to destroy kingdoms; that is, to pronounce the destruction of them. 
Act. 15.23.  So also in those Letters of the Elders and Brethren to the Churches of Sytia and Cilicia these words, to impose a burden, are to be expounded in like sort: for there is no new burden imposed upon the Christians, (than it would follow, that fornication, the avoiding whereof is a part of that burden, was lawful before this decree) but the duty of Christians is declared out of the divine Law; which would have free actions directed to the furtherance of other men's salvations, and all offences carefully avoided.  

18. The Church hath no Power of command by Divine right.  That the Church hath no Commanding Power by Divine right appears, because the Sword is the instrument of that power, (by the Sword is meant coërcive force:) but the arms of the Church are not carnal, 
2 Cor. 10.4  neither hath She received any Sword from God, 
Eph. 6.17.  but the spiritual, that is, 
Phil. 3.20.  the word of God. Besides, Her conversation is not in Forth, but in heaven; she lives on earth as a stranger, not as free; and strangers have no right to command. Yet, 
11. The Church hath a Government Constitutive, by consent: proved by reason, and examples of Scripture. Col. 2.16.  since the Church is a company, not permitted only, but instituted by Divine Law (I speak of the Church visible) it follows, that all those things, which do naturally agree to lawful Companies, do agree to the Church also; so far, as they are proved not taken away. Among those things is the Constitutive Government, which we called by consent. We will bring two examples. The law of the Sabbath being abrogated, 'twas at the Christians pleasure, keeping a just proportion, to set apart what part of time they would for the worship of God. Now, because that worship, according to the precept of Christ, required a certain Congregation of godly men, that part of time could not be determined but by corsent. So the Apostles leading the way, and the Church following, was dedicated to holy Assemblies the first day of the week; 
Act. 20.7. 1 Cor. 16.2 Apoc. 1.20.  which also, in memory of the Resurrection, is called the Lords day. Again, the Apostles being themselves not at leisure to oversee the poor, the Church, by their persuasion, Instituted the office of Deacons, and made election of persons to persons to perform it. In both places we find somewhat defined and constituted by consent, which without great fault none could gainsay. For, it was requisite that somewhat should be constituted; and that could not be, one or two dissenting, unless, either the minor part should give place to the major, or the major to the minor. This being unreasonable, that was necessary. This right of Constitution therefore, to the Church is natural. But, the Imperative Government, 
12. The Supreme Authority compatible to the Church: the Inferior only to Pastors.  we have showed above, not to follow from the nature of the Church: and yet that hindereth not, but that both the Highest, and the Inferior Authority may agree unto it. The Highest, if the faithful unmixed with others, and free from all subjection, make up a Commonwealth of themselves; This seemeth to have happened to the Jews in the times of the Maccabees; 
1 Mac. 4.59.  the Church had then the Highest Authority: yet, not properly as a faithful people, but as a free people. An Inferior Authority, and liberty to use their own Law, the same Jews, not only in their own Land, but at Alemandria and elsewhere, have often had, with some kind of coactive Power, sometimes of more, sometimes of less extent; as it pleased the Supreme Governors, under whom they lived.  
But, as for the Ministers of holy things, we have sufficiently showed, that no commanding Authority agrees to them by Divine right, that is, flowing from the Institution or nature of the Ministry itself: as also, 〈◊〉 the Highest Authority is incompatible ●ith snch a Ministry. Nevertheless, that Inferior Authority ought always to be separated from the Pastoral office, the ancient Church never believed.  

13. The Authority of the H. Powers not overthrown, by the directive & declarative regiment of Pastors.  Whatsoever we have given to Pastors, derogates nothing from the Authority of the Highest Powers over Sacred things; for the Directive regiment, consisting in the giving of counsel and declaring of the divine command, is quite of another kind. And 'tis no marvel if the same person do govern, and is governed, in a divers kind of government; for the Counsellor governs the King by persuading; He that is skilled in Natural right, by declaring divine Law; the Physician and Pastor both ways; yet hath the King command over them all, and that the Highest. 
14. Nor by the constitutive;  The Government by consent, although Constitutive, is also subject to the Empire of the Highest Powers; because no man, by consenting, can confer upon another more right, than he had himself. For this Obligation, arising from the Liberty of every one, is not larger than that liberty; but, they have not liberty, being single, to do any thing against the Command of the Highest Power, (except the things which God commands:) therefore they have no right to bind themselves so far. Besides, two Constitutive Governments ●unlesse subordinate one to the other, cannot consist, nor can any Subject be obliged to contraries, as before is said; which is the reason why the Paternal and Priestly government of the Old Testament (for the aaronical Priesthood was never without Authority) was by God subjected to the Royal. 
14. Nor by any temporal power given them by Positive Law.  Lastly, that Authority, which is allowed to Pastors by the Supreme, being both subject to it, and wholly proceeding from it, is so far from overthrowing, that it plainly confirms the right of the Supreme; for the cause is known by the effects, and that which gives Authority to another, hath itself more Authority.   

CHAP. V.  
Of the Judgement of the Highest Powers about Sacred things.  
THe Authority of the Highest Powers about Sacred things being cleared we come to that which pertains to the right use of this Authority. 
1. The word, Judgement, explained.  The Commands of Authority must proceed from Judgement. Judgement properly denotes the act of a Superior, defining what is just between two parties; and the Highest Judgement is that of the Highest Power; for the Laws and Decrees thereof cannot be nulled or repealed by any Higher: although obedience to such Laws and Decrees be not absolutely due, but so far as it may be given, without violation of God's command. Now, 
2. It pertains to the Highest Power.  as the Authority is extended to Sacred things, as well as Secular; so is the Judgement too, according to which the Authority is used. Indeed, some Kings and Emperouss have seemed to reject from themselves the Judgement concerning Religion: but, that was either because they found themselves unfit, and unable to perform that office; or else, they meant only (as the Great King of Britan interprets his own words, and some of the ancient Emperors) that they did not arrogate to themselves (as the Pope of Rome doth) a Judgement infallible. 
3. Notwithstanding, that they may e●●e.  The truth is, all Humane Judgement is subject unto error; and unless we will take away all Judgement out of the world, we must acquiesce in some Highest: whose errors are to be reserved to the Judgement of God. If you grant this Highest Humane judgement (I speak not of Directive judgement, but Imperative) it will not follow thence, that Pastors and other Christians may, upon the judgement and command of the Highest Power, omit the necessary duties of piety and charity: for (as above hath been showed) the commands of the Highest, bidding or forbidding, whether in Sacred things or Secular, bind us not, to do or omit any thing against the Law of God, either Natural or Positive; but only to suffer; and that, only where the pain cannot be avoided, but by contrary force.  

4. Notwithstanding, that Christ is Supreme Judge.  The Supreme Judgement of Christ doth no more deny this Judgement of which we speak, than his Authority the Authority of the Highest Powers. Legislation carrying with it, by its own virtue, the reward and punishment eternal; and final judgement, according to that Law, is the Prerogative of Christ alone, In the mean time, Christ speaks by his Spirit, by Divine Judgement; yet doth not Humane action follow that Judgement, unless Humane Judgement be interposed. Which, as it belongs to every Christian, in respect of his private actions; so, in respect of public, and of private, that are governed by public Authority, it belongs to the Public Powers, and to the Highest in the Highest degree. Brentius long ago● saw this, whose words are these: As a Private man hath a Private, so a Prince hath a Public Power, to judge of the Doctrine of Religion, and to decide it. They that make the Scripture Judge, 
5. How the Scripiture is Judge.  think rightly, but speak improperly: for if we speak exactly, the Scripture is the Rule of judging; and the same thing cannot be, both the Rule, and the Judge. In the same kind of speech, the Law is said to Judge no man unheard: and, 
Jo. 7.51.12.48.  The word which I speak, saith Christ, shall judge them at the last day.  

6. How the Pastors and the Church is Judge.  To the Pastors and others that have their senses exercised in the Scripture, and to the Churches, but especially, and in the Highest manner, to the Catholic Church, agrees a Judgement concerning Sacred things; for every one, as Aristotle saith, rightly judgeth of those things which helander standeth. But this Judgement is of another kind; for it leads the way to their own actions, and the actions of others, by directing, not by commanding. And, it is not absurd to grant two Highest Judgements of several sorts, such as are the directive Judgement of the Catholic Church, and the Imperative of the Highest Power; for there is no Judgement among men higher in esteem than that none higher than this in Power.  

7. Understanding is required unto Judgement.  Now seeing there are two enemies unto judgement, ignorance, and ill-affections; to the end, the Supreme Governor may rightly exercise the Judgement that belongs unto him, he hath need both of knowledge in Sacred matters, and of a mind truly Religious: things so united one to the other, that Religion increaseth knowledge, and knowledge Religion, as Lactantius hath plainly showed.  
There is in Tacitus an excellent form of Prayer for the Emperor, that God would give him an intelligent mind both in Humane and Divine Law. But as far as Divine things excel Humane, so much more glorious, more profitable, and more necessary, is the knowledge of Divine things, than of Humane. Therefore is the King so strictly charged, 
Deut. 17.8.  to write himself a Copy of the Law, to keep it with him, and read therein all the days of his life; and, to Joshuah saith God, 
Jos. 1.8.  Let not this book of the Law depart out of thy mouth, but meditate therein day and night; and in the 2 Psalm 10. verse, which evidently respecteth the times of Christ. Be wise O ye Kings, be learned ye Judges of the earth. The pious Hebrew Kings, of old, obeyed these admonitions: and so did the Chiristian Emperors. Theodosius and Valentinian: Among other cares, which our vigilant Love of the Commonwealth hath imposed on us, we perceive the principal care belonging to the Imperial Majesty is the search of Religion; by the conservation whereof, we may hope for success in all our erterprises. And saith Justinian, Our greatest sollicitade is concerning the true knowledge of God, and the honour of his Ministers. These precepts and examples prove, that the King ought to be skilful in Religion.  
Yet, there are some that Object, and say, it cannot be that one should well attend to any in particular, 
8. The Highest Powers capable of sufficient understanding.  who hath upon him the weight of all affairs. To whom we answer: there is as it were a natural coherence between the general knowledge of all, and the more exact knowledge of the most noble part. So doth the Metaphysiologer generally considers all that is, and specially things incorporeal: the Physiologer, all that moves, and Heaven above the rest. Even so, ought the Architect of a Commonwealth to have a general view of all affairs and studies, but a nearer and more curious insight into those of the Church.  

9 Divine things, that are necessary, are easy to be known.  Neither is the knowledge of Sacred things so intricate, as some would make it. Theology, saith Nazianzen, is a thing simple and naked, without any great Artifice, consisting of Divine Testimonies; which yet is depraved by some men, and turned into an art of very great difficulty. I speak of those things which are substantial points of Faith, and belong to the body of Religion; for there be other things, partly Metaphysical, partly Historical, and also partly Grammatical, which by Divines are often handled, with great contention and clamour. With these, it is not necessary, the mind of a King should be over busied; no more than with the subtleties of the Law, whereof the prime Titles are very needful to be known. There is a kind of intemperance in the desire of knowledge; and the wisest man is he not that knowest most, but that knoweth what is most useful. What the Apostle said to all, let the Highest Powers apply unto themselves, 
Rom. 12.3.  and be wise unto sobriety.  

10. Heln from God, by Prayer.  In whatsoever is expedient and sufficient for them to know, the Divine aid will not be wanting: which will easily supply the defect of time. One of the Ancients said, He had learned more by praying, than by reading. God is not deaf to these prayers of the Church: 
Ps. 72.1.  Give the King thy Judgements, O God, and thy righteousness to the Kings Son. 
Ps. 51.8.  Thou hast made me know thy secret wisdom, saith David. Solomon was very young; he knew not how to direct his steps; the multitude of his subjects, the weight of his affairs sat heavy on him; and who, saith he, can be able to Judge this so great people? Therefore he prays God to give him an understanding heart, that he might judge the people, 
1 Reg. 3.  and discern between good and evil. What answer doth God return? Because thou hast not asked long life, nor riches, nor the life of thine enemies, but understanding to hear judgement: behold, I have done according to thy words: behold, I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart. God and Nature, as they say, are not wanting in necessaries. Wherefore, since Empires are ordained by God, and that especially for the safeguard of true Religion, what can be more agreeable to the Divine goodness, than to afford unto them that humbly pray for it, whatsoever is necessary to their Function? 
Num. 11.27.25. Dent. 34.9  In the old Testament, God hath often endued the powers with the gift of Prophecy. In these last days He hath spoken to us by his Son 
Heb. 1.  In whom, God the Father hath opened all his Counsel, concerning the Salvation of men. After him, there are not more Masters now, 
M●●. 13.8.  but one is our Master, Christ, of whose fullness we have all received. No new Revelation (as of old) is now required, but only the promulgation of that which is revealed, Nor hath any man cause to complain of Obscurity or Subtlety, 
Rom. 10.8. ● Cor. 4.3, 4  the word is nigh unto us, in our mouth and in our heart. This Doctrine is hid to none, whose eyes are not blinded by Satan. And therefore all are said, taught of God, all knowing God, Christ having in some sort fulfilled that desire of Moses, 
Num. 1.29  who wished than all the Lords people might be Prophets.  
And if the understanding of the Gospel be so easy and at hand to all Christians, among whom are so many rude and busied, that get their living by perpetual labour of their hands; what is it that can exclude ●●ngs from a benefit so general? especially when the Apostle hath applied that Universal, 
1 Tim. ●. 4●  God would have all men to come to the knowledge of the truth, unto Kings especially. In this confidence, the Emperor Theodosius, being in the cause of Religion to pronounce judgement between several sects, in private implored the Divine help, and obtained it. Justinian obtained the same, in setting forth such a Confession of Faith, than which none of the Fathers or Bishops set forth any more full, or more luculent. Certainly, the things which are necessary to be believed and done, and those also, which though not necessary, are of any great moment in the Church, are but few in number, and very obvious, shining forth, first in the Sacred Scripture, and afterward in the perpetual consent of more pure Antiquity. The rest can hardly put the Highest Power to any trouble: and yet, if any sudden difficulty and unexpected shall arise (which happens more oft in Secular, than in Sacred things) time may be taken and faithful Counsels. Thus for of knowledge.  

11. Piety is also required in the Higher Powers, to enable them to judge. Deut. 17.19. Jos. 1.7, 8.  The other part, which we require in the Highest Power, is Piety. No virtue is more worthy of a King. Hence is it given in Precept to the King of the Hebrews, to learn to fear God, and observe the words of his Law: to Joshua, not to depart from that prescript, either to the right hand, or the left. The same is often inculcated to the Kings by the Prophets. Two faults there are to be avoided by the Highest Power: first; and above all, that greatest of spiritual Maladies, Atheism; Superstition next, which effeminates the mind, and overthrows all generous Counsels. 'Twill be a very good caution against both, to think often of that Apostolical speech: The end of the Commandment is Charity, 
1 Tim. 1.6.7.  out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned; from which some having erred, turn aside to vain jangling, willing to be teachers of the law, when they neither understand what they say, nor whereof they affirm.  

12. A distinction 'twixt the rectitude and the validity of an action applied.  We have showed what is required in the Highest Powers, that they may rightly exercise the Right they have: But here we must not forget to observe, the distinction between the rightness of an action, and the firmness of it. For example; a Judge unskilful of the Law, hath pronounced a wrong sentence; the Judge hath: done amiss, yet is not the Sentence null, but unless an Appeal follows, it passes into a judged Case. A privare man, that is master of his own estate, hath prodigally made away his goods, the alienation is valid, although the act be vicious. If parents be harsher to their Children, Masters to their Servants, than is fit; they are in fault, yet is obedience due unto them. There be many cases of like nature. The reason is, because many things are required to make the action right; it must proceed from an understanding well informed, and an honest purpose of mind; it must be done in due manner, and with fit circumstances. to make the action fume only one thing is needful, that the Agent have a right to do it. Now an act may be out of the Agents right, either absolutely, when the effect is unlawful, by itself, or by reason of some Law; or relatively, when the effect is not under the Agents power and authority. Naturally, and the law Positive secluded, no act can be frustrate, but whose effect hath either some viciousness annexed, or else is beyond the Sphere of the Agents power. In the former respect, the command of a Father, Master, or King, is frustrate, when it enjoins Idolatry, or a buy: In the l●to●, the command is fruit strace of a Master to the, Servant of ano● their man, of a King to one that is not his Subject, of whomsoever over) actions ●●●egly internal such as have no relation to the outward. We conclude the refore, that the fault either in the understanding, of the ●●●●ction, makes not void an act of Authority; (but the Commands of the Highest Powers are valid still (being not contrary to God's law) though they have not ●ue opinions of things Divine of senve not God alight.  

13. Insidel Princes may judge of Sacred things. Examples hereof  Examples hereof are many. Pharaoh was wicked King; yet ducst not Gods own people go forth beyond the bounds of Egypt for to Sacrifice, without his permission: for although Sacrifice was by Divine Command, and out of the royal Power, ●●t the place being undefin'd by God, was not exempted from the obedience they owed unto the King, Nebuchadnex●●, I think no man will affirm to have been throughly of the true Religion. His law of ●onowing the God of Israel was ●o●●osso●adid, than that other of worshipping the Idol vain Cyrus and his Successors, as Histories relate, were given to the worship of false Gods; yet, without their leave, might (not the) Hebrews rebuild the Temple, for the service of the true. And, although the godly chose rather to compose their controversies among themselves, yet being called before heathen Judges, they acknowledged their Power, and by necessity of the times were oft compelled to implore it: knowing, that the right of judging might belong even to them, that were, of themselves, unfit to give right judgement. The controversy about the Temple of Jerusalem, and that of Garizin, was debated and determined between the Jews and Samaritans, Ptolemy King of Egypt being judge; for although the King did not himself adhere to the Mosaical ordinances, yet was he able to judge, and he did rightly judge, which Temple of the two, which Worship and Priesthood, was agreeable to that Law, by which, it was confessed, the judgement between the parties should be given. 
Act. 14.  Felix was a wicked man; but being the Vicegerent of the Roman Emperor, Paul is accused before him by Tertullus; many crimes are objected to him, and among the rest, that he was Prince of the Sect of the Nazarenes. He denies the rest, this he confesseth, that he worshipped God, after that way which they called a Sect, or Heresy. The Question is, whether this be a Crime: and one of the particulars to be enquired of, is concerning the Resurrection of the dead, a principal point of faith. The same Controversy being after brought before Festus, Paul acknowledged his Right to judge: Here, saith he, I ought to be judged. And, fearing the Judge's partiality, He appeals to Caesar, the Highest Judge; before whom he pleaded, not his own cause only, but the Gospels. For the Question was, whether to preach the Gospel were a Crime Paul denies, upon this ground, because the Gospel was a true and saving doctrine. In this cause, the worst of Princes is acknowledged for Imperial Judge by the best Apostle. And, if according to his duty he had acquitted Paul, (as many think he did at the first Hearing) his Sentence had been firm, and had clearly given the Apostle a Right against the Jews. But having condemned him, and in him the Gospel, the Sentence was null and frustrate; that is, it could not bind Paul to cease his Preaching; yet was it firm, so far, as to bind him from resisting the Prince imposing penalty. Justin Martyr, and other most learned of the Christians, presented their Apologies to Emperors not Christians, to the end they might approve the verity of the Christian faith to those Judges. For, although a man regenerated by the Spirit of God is the fittest Judge of Spiritual things; 
14. And the reason of it.  yet, that the gift of illumination, which respects the understanding (wherein the Judgement is) is given also to many unregenerate, no man hitherto hath denied. Neither hath any man here heretofore reprehended Austin for these words, extant in that book, wherein with much pains he defendeth Grace: 
De bone persev. cap. 14.  Certainly some men have in them naturally a divine gift of understanding, whereby they are moved to believe, if they hear words, or see signs, that are congruon, to their minds. And truly, how can it be said, that none but true believers can have a true judgement concerning Sacred things, when as the Faith if self cannot be embraced, but by judgement? Wherefore 'tis said to all, Search the Scriptures: 
Jo. 5.30.  and they of Beraea are commended, that having heard Paul and Silas preach, 
Act. 17.11  they searched the Scriptures, whether those things were so. This could not be done without judgement; as the Syrian Interpreter hath well expressed the sense, Judging out of the Scripture. If then They, 
15. Catechumen not excluded from Judgement.  that do not yet believe, have some right to judge, private men for their private acts, and the Powers for public; much less is it fit to exclude from judging, such as having given assent unto the true doctrine, by some infirmity of their mind do yet abstain from participation of the Sacraments; for Constantine the Emperor, before he was Baptised, did with the approbation and praise of the Bishops, make Laws concerning Religion, call Synods, give sentence in the Synod and after, sit as Judge between the Catholics and the party of Donatus. And Valentinian, after he had enacted many Laws about Sacred things, departed this life without Baptism. 
16. Right to judge is one thing, Ability another. And this illustrated by Si●il●cs.  Much less yet, may the Highest Powers be deprived of this Judgement, upon this pretence, that they have not skill in all those things which are wont to be disputed by Divines. If this reason prevail, how many Pastors, honest and faithful, but not of learning enough to be Doctors, must be denied to judge? And, by that reason, Lawyers might intrude into the Seat of civil Judges, because they are more skilful in the Law; and the Judges in City and Country, concerning Wills, and Contracts, and such like things, are rather good men, than good Lawyers. Add further, that in the Case of Homicide, it is his part to judge, that hath not learned Physic, what wound is mortal, what is not: and whether a child may be born in the eleventh month, and many things of like sort. Whence it appeareth, the fitness and ability of judging ought not to be confounded with the right of judgement, which is public and Imperative. He that is most fit hath not always the right; and he that is unfit, doth not lose it. I conclude this with Plato's saying; Happy are the Commonwealths, wherein either Philosophers are Kings, or the Kings given to Philosophy. Yet may not the Philosopher invade the Royal throne, nor the King be thrust out of it, that is no Philosopher.  

1 Cor. 14.31.  It is objected, The spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets. Many of the ancients both Greek and Latin, 
17. The Judgement of the Prophets not privative of the Highest Powers.  understand St. Paul's meaning to be this; They that are inspired with Prophecy must not all speak to the people at once, but one expect the ending of the others speech; for they are not like the possessed, transported by the inspiration, but so far Masters of it, that they may use the gift of God without consusion, and in that order, wherewith God is best pleased, and his people edified. There is no cause to reject this Interpretation, which the series of the Apostles discourse so fairly admits. The other Interpretation, that the Prophets ought to suffer other Prophets to judge of their Prophecies, is not pertinent here. For first, seeing that singular gift of Prophecy, as of healing, and tongues, was marvellously ordained by God for the beginnings of the Church, and is long since expired, it cannot be applied by way of argument unto our times. And, grant you may compare unto that admirable gift (manifested also by the prediction of things to come) the Theological skill, 
Deut. 18.22.  what ere it be, acquired by Humane labour; yet will not they obtain their desire, who would have all Pastors, and them alone, to be knowing in Theology; for there are many Pastors not very expert; and some that are not Pastors are of good skill in things Divine. Lastly, there being divers kinds of judgement, as hath been spoken, the establishment of one is not the destruction of the other. The same disease or wound falls under the judgement of the Physician, and of the Judge, if it come in question before him, and of the sick man himself. And, when the Prophets judged in the Apostolical Church, it was said to every Christian, 
1 Jo. 4.1.  Try the spirits: yea, St. John lays down a Rule, by which every one of the faithful might discern the Spirit of God from the Spirit of Antichrist. Whereunto answers that of Paul to the Thessalonians: 
1 Thes. 5.19, 20, 21.  Quench not the Spirit: Despise not prophesyings: Try all things, hold fast that which is best. But without all question, this Trial and distinction of things is an act of judgement. And in that place of the Apostle, 
1 Cor. 14.29.  Let the Prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge; the most ancient Fathers by the word, other, understand not the other Prophets only, but all the people: not without great reason; when as elsewhere the discerning of Spirits is, 
1 Cor. 12.9.  by the same Apostle, distinguished from the gift of Prophecy. Whence it appears, he meant either some gift Common unto Christians (for Faith also is numbered among the Gifts, distinct from the gift of miracles) or a certain excellent faculty to judge of Prophecies, where with some, that were not Prophets, were endued. 
1 Cor. 11.  The Apostle Paul himself bids the Corinthians judge what he saith. And the Holy Fathers often appeal unto the judgement of all the people. 
Epist. 33.  So Ambroses Let the people judge, in whose heart is writ the Law Divine. All this we have alleged, to manifest that the judgement of things Sacred, and of the holy doctrine, did at no time belong to the Prophets only.  

18. The Kings of the old Testament judged not as Prophets only, but as Kings.  Whence also it may be understood, how poor their Evasion is, who reply to the Arguments out of the old Testament, and say, the things there done by Kings were not done by them as Kings, but as Prophets. For, if by the name of Prophet, they mean, some special Mandate of God was given them; this is, where the Scripture is silent, a mere divination, so far from certain, that 'tis not probable. What need any special Mandate, when the Law was extant, unless perhaps to incite the negligent? but, if by Prophecy they mean a clearer understanding of the Divine will, proposed but darkly in those, times; we easily confess, they did as Prophets (since they would have us say so) know more certainly what was to be commanded by them; but they commanded as Kings. And for that cause, the Scripture in the narration of those affairs, not content with the proper name, added the name of King; to signify, the Right of doing proceeded from the Authority Royal: and therefore to be imitated by Kings. Wherefore, letus also say, when Christian Kings give Commandments about Sacred matters, they have the Right to do so, as they are Kings; the skill, as Christians, as taught of God, having the Divine Law inscribed on their hearts in a clearer Print than those ancient Kings and Prophets; For many Kings and Prophets (saith Christ to his Disciples) have desired to see the things that ye see, 
Luke 10.24.  and have not seen them; and to hear the things that ye hear, but they have not heard them.   

CHAP. VI  
Of the manner of rightly exercising Authority about Sacred things.  

1. The Right, & the use of it distinct.  WE distinguish the Right of the Highest Powers, and the manner of Using their right; for 'tis one thing to invade that which is belonging to another, and an other thing to use improvidently that which is ones own. So great is the variety of things, times, places, persons, that we might here make a long discourse, but we shall briefly collect what may suffice for our purpose.  

2. Pious and learned Pastors to be consulted by the Highest Power.  First then, it behoves him that hath the Supreme Authority, both in the inquisition of that which is by Law Divine determined either to be believed or done, and in consultation about what is profitable for the Church, to lend a willing care to the judgement of eminent Pastors, for their piety and learning. That this is to be done in doubtful matters, reason and common sense demonstrates; for one man cannot see, nor hear all things; therefore said the Persians, A King must borrow the eyes and ears of other men. By the Commerce and Society of wise men, Princes become wise. Which sayings if they are true in secular affairs, how much more in Sacred, where the error is most dangerous. For the proof hereof we need not allege examples: it will be more worth our pains, to consider how far the judgement of the Supreme Governor may and aught to acquiesce and rest in the judgement of Pastors.  

3. Principles of Faith Intrinsecall Extrinsecall, Divine Humane.  We must note therefore, that all Humane judgement is founded either upon internal principles, or upon external; the Internal are either objected to the sense, or to the understanding: by the former, we judge the Snow to be white, by the later, we judge Mathematical Propositions to be true, because they are reduced to common notions. The external principle is Authority or the judgement of another; and that is either Divine or Humane: no man doubteth but that in all things he must acquiesce to Divine Authority; thority; so Abraham judged it to be his duty to offer his Son; So Noah believed the Flood would come. But, to Humane Authority no man is bound to acquiesce, unless he can find no way to fix his judgement upon Divine Authority, or upon some Internal principle. Yet may we acquiesce thereto in all things, the search whereof is not commanded us. So the sick man doth well, if he take a Medicine prescrib'd by a Physician of good fame; yea, being in peril of death, he is bound to follow the Counsel of Physicians, if himself be not of that wit and skill, to make a certain judgement upon principles of nature. 
4. Of Divine Authority proposed by men.  As to Divine Authority, God reveals some things, and proposes them himself, other things, He reveals himself, and proposes to men by others, as by Angels, Prophets, Apostles. Whensoever the thing is proposed by others, before the mind can fully rest, it is necessary we be assured, the Proposer can neither be deceived, nor deceive, in the thing that is proposed. This assurance we obtain, either by some other Divine Revelation, as Gornelius concerning Peter, Paul concerning Ananias: or else by signs of Divine Power, yielding undoubted testimony to the Veracity of the Proposer. That we must acquiesce to every Proposition thus made, no Christian doubteth.  

5. And the state of the question 'twixt Protestants and Papists.  But between the more subtle of the Romanists, and those of the Evangelicall Church, this is the true state of the Question: Whether since the age of the Apostles, there be any visible Person, or Company, all whose Propositions we may, and aught to receive, as undoubted truths. The Evangelics deny, the Romanists affirm. Hither is also brought this great controversy of Government in Sacred things; for the Romanists do not deny Kings to Govern; this Hart granted to Renolds: they do not deny all Government to proceed from the judgement of the Governor; this Suarez plainly affirms. Neither do the Evangelics deny the judgement of Kings; as well as of private men, to be determined by Divine Oracle, if there be any such, if there be any Prophets that cannot err: for all men are under God: but, whether there be any such since the Apostles, that's the Question; and that at last is reduced only to the Pope; for that single Pastors, Kings also, and private men, Synods Provincial, national, patriarchal, and even they that were gathered out of all the Roman world, are fallible, and have been in error, no man can deny.  
Wherefore, supposing that which is most true, and which some of the Romanists do grant concerning the Pope himself, That every man in the world is subject unto error, (for any thing that we know,) yea, every Congregation also, that is visible: let us see how far one is bound to follow the judgement of another that is thus fallible.  

6. When 'tis sit to ●rest in humane Authority. 2 Cor. Hom. 13.  First we say, no man is bound to follow another's Directive judgement universally. Chrysostom of old hath said the same: How absurd is it, in all things to be swayed by the sentence of other men? For, possibly we may be certain, either by internal Principles, or by Divine Authority, the judgement of sentence is, false. That any private man, grounding his sentence upon the Gospel, is to be believed before the Pope, is confessed by Panormitan and Gerson. And the pious Bishops who had learned out of the Gospel, that the Word is God, and God only One, did well in not giving place to the judgement of the Synod at Ariminum. Moreover, even when the mind doth not plainly witness the contrary, yet is no man bound precisely to follow another's Directive judgement: because it is lawful for him to inquire and try, whether himself be able to aim at the knowledge of the Truth. Then he is bound to follow, when by defect either of wit or time, or by other business, he is diverted from that inquiry. So the Lawyers teach, that a Judge is not tied to the judgement of a Physician in the question of a wound; or of a Survey or in limining the bounds, or of an Arithmetician in taking of Accounts; but that himself, upon diligent consideration of the matter, may decree that which he conceiveth most agreeable to truth and equity. But further, 
7. No man may pin his faith of salvation upon another: proved by Scripture and reason.  in the case of saving faith, no man can safely acquiesce to the judgement of another. The reason is, not only because matters of faith are plainly and openly proposed unto all, (so that Clemens of Alexandria calls it a vain pretext, taken from several interpretations, for they that will, saith he, may find out the Truth:) but chiefly, because that faith is not faith, unless it rest upon Divine Authority, as the Romanists themselves confess. Abraham believed God, 
Rom. 4.3.10.17.  and it was accounted unto him for righteousness: Also, Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. Wherefore, although men may be led unto the faith by others, 
Jo. 4.28.  as the Samaritans by that woman, yet then are they only right believers, when they believe not for the words of another, but because themselves have heard, and do know, that Jesus is the Saviour of the world. What hath been spoken of faith, is no less true of Divine worship: for, in vain, saith God, 
Mat. 15.9.  do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the Commandments of men. And Paul commends the Thessalonians, 
1 Thes 2.13.  that they received his word not as the word of man, but as indeed it was, the word of God. We conclude then, that in the things defined by Divine Law, either way, no man is bound by another's Declarative judgement (which is one kind of the Directive) nor can his conscience safely rest therein.  

8. In matters not determined by Scripture, more may be given to Human Judgement.  In the other kind of Directive judgement, which we here called Suasory, because it is conversant about things not determined by Divine Law, more may be given to the Authority of another, yet not too much. For, as we do not praise them that are too stiff in their own opinions; so neither them, that are too easily drawn by other men's. And herein consisteth the difference between Counsel and Command, that commands, not contrary to the Law of God, lay upon us an obligation, which Counsels do not. He that giveth counsel, (saith Chrysostom) speaks his own opinion, leaving the hearer at liberty to do as it shall please him.  

9 The Prince must use his own judgement, especially where Counsel lovis do not agrec.  Now, if the opinions of Counselors (which must be weighed rather than numbered) do not agree, there especially ought the Supreme Governor to interpose his own Judgement. And truly, in the knowledge of private right, in Physic, Merchandise and such like things, it is not only excusable, but oftentimes commendable for the Highest Power to be ignorant, by reason of greater and better cares. But, to neglect the knowledge how to rule the Church, than which no knowledge is more excellent, none of more importance to the Commonwealth, this at no hand is lawful. Those that have eased themselves of this duty, and cast it upon others, we find by Histories to have been circumvented by men, and punished by God; and either to have lost their kingdoms, or else being deprived of the Power, to have reserved only the name and shadow of King's.  
The Objections out of the Old Testament, to prove that Kings are bound to follow the Pastor's judgement in Sacred things, 
10. An objection out of Deut. answered.  do evince nothing less. To the first place Deut. 17. where the Israclites are commanded to do according to the sentence which the Priests shall declare unto them: we answer, that the Judge is also mentioned there, and Sacred things are not spoken of peculiarly, but any capital or pecuniary Controversies. 
Deut. 17.8  If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgement, between blood and blood, between plea and plea, etc. The Law speaks to the inferior Judges, and in things they understood not refers them to the Senate, wherein were Priests and other Judges, all most knowing in the Law; nor are those lesser Judges bound to the Authority of these, but to the Law they should explain: According to the sentence of the Law, which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgement which they shall tell thee, shalt thou do. Just as if a King should now command the Judges, to judge nothing contrary to what the Lawyers shall show them to be lawful: when yet Lawyers themselves declare, the Judge is not always tied to the declaration or opinion of the Lawyers. Pertinent is that in the Gospel: 
M●. 23.2.  They sit in Moses chair, all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; which is well explained by Stella and Maldonat, though Romanists; so far as they teach what Moses sitting in his chair hath taught, they must be heard. Only so far; for the Teacher's rashness will not excuse the over-credulous Scholar. That which follows in Deut. 
Deut. 17.12.  concerning the punishment of the man, that will not hearken unto the Priest, or unto the Judge, evidently shows, that the Priests did not only give answer upon the Law, but enjoyed also a part of the Government, as elsewhere we have demonstrated; wherefore this concerns the Priests of the Old Testament, as they were Magistrates, and cannot be extended to the Ministers of the Gospel.  

11. Another out of Numb. 27.  There is another place, wherein some do much glory. Num. 27.21. God speaks of Joshua in this manner; He shall stand before Eleazar the Priest, who shall ask counsel for him, after the judgement of Urim before the Lord: at his word shall they goc out, and at his word they shall come in, both he and all the children of Israel with him, even all the Congregation. But this place also, if it be rightly understood is far from the purpose. It is certain, the Urim, (which in other places is more fully the Urim and Thummim) was in the Ephod or pectoral of the Hebrew Highpriest. The manner of answering by Urim and Thummim, as the Jews relate, was thus; If the matter, upon which the Question was, should succeed happily, the precious stones would sparkle with a heavenly lustre: if otherwise, they would not change their native colour. And learned men have observed out of Maimonides, that the Highpriest was wont to stand before the Prince for honour sake, but the Prince stood not before the Priest, unless Urim were consulted; whereby it appears, the honour was done to the Oracle, not the Priest; and according to the judgement of Urim, that is, the judgement of God, not of the Priest, Joshua must go out and in. Compare with this, another place very like it, 1 Sam. 30.7. If the Ministers of the Gospel will make any use of this, then let them propose to Governors our Gospel-Urim, that they may there behold the Divine threats and promises; and let them require obedience not to themselves, but it; which shines by its own light, and is placed, not in the Pastors only, but all Christian hearts, being that saving Grace which hath appeared unto all men. 
Tit. 2.11.  But enough of this first admonition, That the Highest Power ought, in matters of the Church, to hear and examine the opinions of Churchmen.  

12. Care must be had of the Church's Peace and Unity.  Another general admonition pertaining to the manner of exercising the Supreme Governors Right, is this: That He must have a special care of Ecclesiastical Peace and Concord. This is as it were the very Soul and life of the Church. Hereby, saith Christ, 
Jo. 13 35.  shall men know that ye are my Disciples, if ye love one another. And it was the Divine character of the Primitive Christians, 
Act. 4.32.  The multitude of believers was of one heart and soul. Nor had Constantine, and after him the other Christian Emperors any greater care, than to prevent or heal the dissensions of the Church. Julian on the contrary, hating the Christians with an implacable hatred, could invent no way to hurt them worse, than by opening a wide way for Schisms and divisions. This he did, faith Ammianus, that the discords of the people being increased by licence, they might not be any terror to him. And, saith Austin, By this means he thought to destroy the Christian name, if out of his envy to the Church's unity, whence he had fallen, he permitted sacrilegious dissensions to be free from censure. All pious men may pity these our Times, being as sick of the same Licence, as ever was any Age. Whether it be more the Pastors, or the Prince's fault, see the Testament of the Prince Elector, worthy to be read by all the friends of the Church; and let all Princes know, that it very much concerns them, as Austin speaks truly, to procure, that the Church, their mother, may have peace and quietness in their time.  

13. Cautiions and R●les conducing to Unity. F●w Decisions, in points of Faith.  The Cautions, which conduce to Unity, are principally these: First, Abstain from deciding Questions, as much as may be: that is, saving the Doctrines necessary to Salvation, or very profitable to that end, 'Tis Nazianzen's advice, Inquire not curiously into the manner of every thing; and Austin saith, In some things even the best and most learned Catholics do not agree, and yet the body of faith is still entire. This modesty of defining, the Fathers in the Nicene Synod, and the first of Constantinople, and the Moderators of them the Emperors have observed; for having set down this Confession, that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinction from one another, yet one God, and of the same Essence; in explaining the manner of difference between the Essence and Hypostasis, they were not solicitous. The Bishops at Ephesus, and Chalcedon, and the Emperors of those times, having defined, that the person of Christ is one, his Nature's two, thought it not fit to inquire subtly into the manner of hypostatical Union. In the Milevitane and other Synods, the Fathers and the State-men present, for the vindication of God's grace, pronounced plainly against Pelagius and his Relics, That without the Divine grace, nothing spiritually good, can be begun by man, or continued, or perfected: but many things sharply disputed about the order of predestination, and about the manner of reconciling man's free will with God's free Grace, they passed over with a prudent silence. All the Fathers of the ancient Church confess, that in the most holy Sacrament of the Lords Supper are exhibited the visible signs of Christ invisibly present: concerning the manner of his presence they differ in their speech, and yet for this they do not break the Peace. Wherefore Doctrines very few are to be defined, the necessary with Anathema the rest without: as it was done in the Synod of Orange: and there are in the ancient Counsel of Carthage these words to the same purpose; It remains that we speak our opinion in this controversy, judging no man, nor separating him from our Communion if he think otherwise.  

14. And those in in General Councils.  But in those first ages, it was very available to the keeping of peace in the Catholic Church, that no Dogmatic definitions were wont to be made but in General Councils; or if any were made in lesser Synods, they were not firm until they were sent to other Churches and approved by common judgement. Which custom, if the Rulers in the Christian world would now revive, they could not do the Church a greater benefit; for in those remedies, which Physicians call topical, is little help, nor can the unity of the parts be hoped for, but from the unity of the whole body. I cannot forbear to praise that excellent Canon of England, An. 1571. Let Preachers take heed of Preaching any thing to the people, as a necessary point of Faith, but what is agreeable to the doctrine of the old or new Testament: and which the Catholic Fathers and ancient Bishops have collected thence.  
What hath been said of things to be believed, must be understood also of things, by the Divine Law, appointed to be done; but of these, the controversies are not so many. In both kinds, for the retaining of concord, it will be needful to make the people understand, that all things enjoined are agreeable to God's word. That which Seneca saith against preambles, Let the Law command not dispute; 
15. Ecclesiastical Laws delivered in a persuasive way.  may have place in things merely Arbitrary (yet in such Laws we see the reason of them given at large by Justinian and others, in the Code and Novel Constitutions) but in things that are to be performed religiously, the severity of the Injunction is to be mollifyed by the gentleness of persuasion. So Plato hath given in precept, and Charondas and other Lawgivers have showed us by example. And certainly as Governments are made firm by the willingness of people in all things, so most of all in the business of Religion. For, saith Lactantius, Nothing is so voluntary as Religion; which without the wils consent is nothing. And people that are compelled by Law to serve God, serve not God but the Prince, Themistius. Here then is required the greatest care and pains, that the major part of the people, being convinced by divine Testimony, may know the things commanded, to be according to truth and piety. I say, the major part; sor we may rather wish, than hope for an universal consent; but for the ignorance or malice of a few the care of truth and peace is not to be deserted. Yet here must be showed tenderness and discretion, that they who resist both the Divine and Humane Ordinance, may be rather withheld from doing ill, than compelled to do good: as Austin hath long ago judiciously distinguished in this matter. 
16. How top eserve unity in point of ceremonies.   
Now we go on to the things not determined by Divine Law, such as are many things belonging to Church Government, to Rites & Ceremonies. Wherein, if the matter be fresh and easy to be wrought, it were safest to restore all things to the times next the Apostles, and to observe what was then observed, with great consent, and no less benefit of the Church, For the most ancient Constitutions are the best. Yet there must be a respect had to the present things, and a respect to the places too: Wisely saith Jerom: In things neither contrary to Faith nor manners, let the customs of our Country be as Canons Apostolical. Austin and others have words of the same sense. And variety here is of good use, serving for a Testimony of Christian Liberty. See the History of Socrates. 1.5. c. 22. Verily, if in this nature there be any thing that may be bettered, yet is tolerable and of long continuance, 'tis wisdom to let it still continue; unless the change may be made upon a handsome occasion, and with favourable assent. The change of a custom, saith Augustin, doth as much disturb as prosit. But in these things, wherein God's word hath left a liberty, the Highest Power shall do well to content the people. So in Secular matters we see that Cities and Companies that have no jurisdiction, have leave to make certain orders for themselves; which the Highest Power, after examination passed upon them, approves and ratifies.  

17. Highest Powers need the Ministry of others.  One thing more we will not omit, which perteins also to the manner of using the Right we treat of: The Highest Power ought to use not only the advice, but service of other men: and therefore particular affairs, lest the multitude of them oppress the mind of one, are to be put off to Courts ordained one above another, and the last appeal to be made to the Highest Judgement. So in the ancient Church under the Christian Emperors there were Presbyteries in Cities, there were Synods Metropolitan, and Exarchicall, and, above all the rest, Imperial; but of this we shall speak again hereafter.  
All that we have said here, of ask Counsel, of contenting the people, of inferior Courts, and whatsoever may be added, ought not to be esteemed perpetual, and always profitable; for no prudential precepts are universal; 
18. prudential Rules have their exceptions: and whence.  because prudence must have regard to emergent circumstances, Times, Places, Persons, make a great alteration here. When the matter is clear, there is no need of Counsel: when dissensions are hot and vehement, there is little hope of Consent; neither can the proceeding be by degrees, when either the matter will not admit delay, or the Lower Courts are suspected of injustice, by reason of hatred, or favour, or other impediments of upright dealing. In such cases, when the ordinary course cannot be observed, advise must be taken of necessity.  

19 The Distinction of power absolute and ordinary, erroneous  By the way we must note their error, that distinguish of power absolute and ordinary; for they confound the power, and the manner of using it. As in God the power is one and the same, whether he work according to the order appointed by him, or beside that order: so the power also, or the right of the Supreme Governor is the same, whether he observe the prescribed order, or not; but, in common accidents, it is the part of a wise Ruler to follow the accustomed order, and the Positive Laws. Laws are made for ordinary cases: 
L. 3.d. de Leg.  in cases extraordinary the Highest Power must leave the road and take some unusual way; for cases are infinite, order and Law Positive finite, and the finite cannot be an adequate Rule of the infinite. 
20. Highest powers how far obliged to their own Laws  But although it be the Duty of the Highest Governor in usual affairs to use the ordinary way of Government; yet if he do otherwise, he may indeed be said to do not rightly, but not to go beyond his Right. The right of the highest Power is not limited by Positive Law; for the Right of any man is not limited but by his Superior; and no man is Superior to himself. Hence also Austin said, The Emperor is not subject to his own Laws, for 'tis in his power to make new; and Justinian, 
Nou. 105.  In all things before spoken, the Emperor is excepted: to whom God hath made the Laws themselves to be subject. If then the Question be proposed, whether it be lawful for the Highest Power in common accidents to exceed the bounds of Law: the Answer may be given in the words of Paul the Apostle, 
1 Cor. 6.12.23.  It is lawful, but not expedient: or in the words of Paul the Lawyer, 
L. ●non omne. d. de reg. jur.  It is lawful, but 'tis not for his honour. It becomes your wisdom, saith Cicero, to consider not how much you may do, 
Pro Rabir.  but what you ought to do: and every where in good Authors, to that which is lawful, is opposed that which is a duty, that which is expedient, that which is honest, that which is best to be done. Lastly, that which is said above, hath place here also: Though the action hath not full rectitude, if Right be not wanting, the Act is firm; for suppose an unwise command, suppose a disorderly command come from the Highest Power, it must be fulfilled, if it may be, without sin: for the Apostles word is still of force; We must needs be subject. To him hath God allotted Supreme Authority, to us is left the glory of Obedience.   

CHAP. VII.  
Of Synods.  
THis place requires, 
1. What we mean by Synods.  that we treat of Synods. By Synods we mean Assemblies consisting of Church-Pastors alone, or chiefly of them, for the acting of somewhat by common consent; for if Pastors be called together to hear commands, that Assembly I suppose is not called a Synod. The utility of these Synods being evident, it is enquired, what Original they have, and what necessity.  

2. No Precept in Scripture for Synods.  I find no Precept in the Law Divine for having of a Synod, and they are much deceived that make Examples of equal force with Precepts. Yet are Examples of great use, that it may appear, what hath been usual, and what in the like cases may be prudently imitated. We have no Examples of these Synods out of the Old Testament; for a Synedry is one thing, and a Synod another. In the New Testament we have a Law for Believers to meet for prayer, and hearing the Word, and breaking of bread. The offended brother is bid to tell it to the Church; that is, to the Assembly of the faithful, and it is added, Where two or three do join in prayer, and where two or three are met together in the name of Christ, Christ will be present with them. And Paul saith, The spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets, speaking of one Church or Congregation. 
3. Their Original not from Act. 15.  Here is no Synod yet. The Original whereof is wont to be taken from that History, Acts 15. but whether that Assembly be properly called a Synod, as we now take the word, may be made a Question. There arose a Controversy between Paul and Barnabas, and certain Jews at Antioch, concerning the force and efficacy of the Mosaical Law. Paul and Barnabas, and some of Antioch, are sent to know the judgement of the Pastors; of all Asia? or, of Syria, Cilicia, and Judoea, gathered into one place: no certainly: but of the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem. 
Act. 15.3.  The company of the Apostles was a College, not a Synod, and the Presbytery or Eldership of one City was not a Synod neither. Only one Church is consulted with, or rather the Apostles only, whose Answer is approved by the Elders and Brethren of Jerusalem.  

4. But from the Law of Nature: with a distinction of the Law of Nature, Absolute, After a sort;  Wherefore we derive the original of Synods from the Law of Nature. Man being a sociable creature, his nature permits association especially with them, to whom either any contemplation, or action is common. So Merchants for Traffic, Physicians and Lawyers to examine the controversies in their Art, hold their meetings by the Law of Nature. But to avoid mistake, we distinguish between that which is natural absolutely, and cannot be altered, as to worship God, to honour our Parents, not to hurt the innocent: and natural after a sort, that is, permitted or allowed by Nature, until some Law of man interpose; thus all things are by Nature common, all persons free, the next of kin is heir, until by humane Constitutions propriety, and servitude be introduced, and the Inheritance given away by Will. 
5. Synods not from the Law of Nature absolute.  In this second acception, it is natural to hold Synods; for, if it were so in the former sense, Bishops would never have asked the Empeperours' leave, before they met; and Jerom's argument, to prove a Synod unlawful, were not good; Show me, saith he, what Emperor commanded the celebration of that Council. The convention therefore of a Synod is in the number of those things, which being permitted by the Law of Nature, are wont to be commanded by humane Law, or permitted, or prohibited. So in the Council of Agatha, the Bishops summoned to the Synod are desired to come, unless they be hindered by sickness, or the royal Precept.  

6. Synods under the Pagan Emperors, by what right.  It may be objected, that leave to gather a Synod, was never asked of the Pagan Emperors. But we say, there was no need to ask leave, when there were no Imperial Edicts against it. As for the ancient Decrees of Senate against meetings, religious meetings were excepted in them, and particularly the Jews (as Philo relates it) had leave of Augustus to assemble. In whose privileges the Christians might justly claim a share, 
Act. 24.14.  believing all things that are written in the Law and the Prophets. And Suetonius, under the name of Jews, designs the Christians too. Besides, in the places where most of the Synods were held, though subject to the Roman Empire, they had the benefit of their own Laws. Wherefore, if at any time the Churches enjoyed Peace, which often happened under Pagan Emperors, the Bishops had no hindrance, but they might meet in Synods. But in the heat of Persecution, as the Christians could not intermit Church-meetings, although forbidden by humane Laws, because they were commanded by Divine; So the Bishops were careful, not to incur the suspicion and hatred of the Rulers by Synodical Assemblies, so long as the Church could subsist without them. Cyprian shows in several places, when under persecution there arose a great Question about receiving the lapsed into Communion, and to the deciding of it there was need of Common-counsel, nevertheless the Bishops deferred their meeting till the storm was passed: neither durst the Bishop of Rome, Liberius, without the consent of Constantius call a Synod. The orthodox Bishop of Spain assembled not into the City of Agatha, without the permission of King Alaric, although an Arian.  

6. Synods called by Christian Emperors.  What the Pagan Emperors had no regard of, that the Christian Emperors justly assumed to their care and government, well considering, the corruption of anything to be so much the worse, by how much better it is, in the regular use. After that, Synods were not left in medio, but as they gave hope of good, or fear of evil, so they were either commanded or forbidden. Therefore Socrates the Historian saith, The greatest Synods were holden according to the Emperor's pleasure. This is spoken of general Synods in the Roman Empire; But Constantine called also Topical, whereof Eusebius speaks; Having special care of the Church, when discords arose in sundry places, The Emperor himself, being appointed by God, the common Bishop or Overseer, commanded the Ministers of God to assemble in Councils. After the Acts of the Nicene Council were confirmed by the same Constantine, the general Law of Synods to be holden twice every year, supplied the place of special consent. In stead of half-year Synods, in some places they had annual. Nor was the Assembly at the pleasure of the Bishops, but the Governors of Provinces had a charge given them, to make the Bishops, though they should decline it, to meet together in Synods: and beside those at set times, other Synods also were holden out of order, at command of the Highest Power.  

8. Three Questions about Synods.  But there are three principal Controversies concerning the Highest Powers right and office about Synods. First, whether it be lawful for the Highest Power to command any thing in Sacred affairs without a Synod; Second, what is lawful for him, and what he ought to do before the Synod, and in the Synod; Third, what after the Synod.  
For the resolution of the first Question, we must conceive, 
9.1. Whether the H Power may govern without a Synod.  whatsoever is said very justly of the exceeding great commodities of Synods, belongs to the manner of using the Right of Empire, not to the Right itself. For if the Highest Power should receive from the Synod any right of Governing, it were not then the Highest: The Highest being that which is subject unto God alone, and under God hath the fullest right of governing. Again, if the Highest Power without a Synod could not command that, which it might command with a Synod, then should it receive part of the right of governing from the Synod: and then, because none can give what he hath not, it would follow, that somewhat of the Government were in the Synod; which the Synod, not having by any Humane right, must challenge by Divine right; whereas the Divine Law denies any such Power to have been given by God unto the Church, (as hath been showed above,) and therefore not to Synods. The Right being thus confirmed, we make no scruple to affirm, That the Highest Power may sometimes rightly order Sacred things without a Synod: They that universally hold it unlawful, 
10. The affirmative proved by examples.  will never prove what they say: but we shall easily. For there are extant many examples of the Hebrew Kings, that without a Synod gave commands in Sacred matters.  
Whether the Church declare or not, even before the Church's declaration the King's duty is to reform what is amiss, and for neglect thereof he must give account to God. Eminent among the Christian Emperors is the example of Theodosius. He sat as arbitrator between several Factions of the Bishops, he gives every one the hearing, he reads their (confessions, and after prayers to God for his direction, he gives his judgement, and pronounceth his sentence for the Truth. To omit other examples; The Kings and other Highest Powers, which in the memory of our fathers have purged their Churches from inveterate errors, have done according to the pattern of those ancient Kings and Emperors: as elsewhere we have showed. True it is, and they are commended for their diligence that have observed it, there were such circumstances in those actions, by reason whereof that course was taken, and no other could serve the turn. And we acknowledge that course to have been extraordinary, and more seldom taken: but (as before) we say, The manner of doing being divers with regard to times and persons, changeth not the right; but floweth from it according to the rules of prudence; Nor doth any one affirm, a Synod is to be omitted without cause, but that sometimes there may be causes for the omission of it.  
These causes may be referred to two heads; either because a Synod is not necessary, or because it appears it will be unprofitable. That both may be the better understood, we must note the Ends of a Synod in a public Church; for of this we speak. We have proved already, that a Synod is not called, as if it had any part of the Government belonging to it. 
11. Three ends of Synods: yet not necessary. Counsel. Consent. Jarisdiction.  The end therefore is, that it may give Counsel to the Prince for the advancement of Truth and Piety, that is, go before him by a directive Judgement. Another end is, that by the Synod the Consent of the Church may be settled and made known. So, although the Apostles severally had both knowledge and authority to define the controversy of Mosaical Ceremonies, it was 01 for the Churches good, that it should appear, they were all of one mind, and that the pious people should be taught to understand the truth rightly, and to make unanimous confession of it. A third end may be added to the former: as Presbyteries in a public Church, so Synods, beside their native, have an adventions right from Human Law: whereby they judge of Causes, as other Courts ordained by the Highest Power; and so, that upon their sentence coaction follows. But now, of all these ends none is necessary, nor is a Synod simply necessary to those ends. Counsel is not necessary in things manifest to any one by natural or supernatural Light; For as Aristotle said well, We make use of Counselors in great matters, when we distrust ourselves, as unable without the help of others to discern the Truth. Who doubts, but the man that denies God, or his Providence, or his Judgement after this life; the man that makes God the proper author of all sins; the man that denies the Deity of Christ, or the Redemption wrought by him; I say, who doubts, but a man so profane, may be put out of office, or out of the Commonwealth, by the command of the Highest Power, without the advice of many Counselors. Again, the Highest Power may have such assurance out of some former Synod, that he need not call a new one. Therefore a Synod is not necessary, to the end sufficient Counsel may be had. And as for consent of the Church to be enquired or constituted, 'tis in vain sometimes to take any pains about it, when the Church is manifestly divided two ways, the parties and their heat being well night equal, as in the Donatists' time it happened in Africa. Sometimes also, the consent of the Church may be known without a Synod: if there be extant the unanimons writings of almost all the approved Doctors in their Churches. Be sides, every one in private may either by voice or writing declare his opinion, which Austin saith was done in his time, and commends it. And he that peruseth ancient story shall find the Church's affairs more often transacted, and consent testified by communication of Letters, than by Synods: as is observed by Bilson, Reynolds, and the Magdeburgenses. And lastly, it may be the Cause in hand is so peculiar to one Church, that the consent of others is not needful. Now for the third end of Synods, the hearing of Causes, it depends upon the will of the Highest Power, from whose Authority it proceeds; although in the ordinary way, inferior Courts are not past by, yet if those Courts be liable to some suspicion, or the business will not bear delay, the Highest Power may call it from them to himself. We conclude therefore, that which Whitaker and others have written before, and the example of Free Cities, that without a Synod preserve their Churches, do confirm: A Synod is not at all times necessary, nor in every case.  

12. Synods sometimes not useful.  So far from necessary sometimes, that it is not profitable; for as the parts are, such is the whole. I will not here repeat the old complaint almost of all ages, that the chiefest distempers of the Church have proceeded from the Priests. Nazianzen hath said enough, where he also renders the principal causes thereof, the Ambition and Pride of Churchmen; nor doth he speak of Arian Synods only, but of all of his time, those especially wherein himself was present: Therefore, saith he, have I withdrawn myself, and sought for security of mind in rest and solitude. This evil will happen if it appear, either that the integrity of judgement is hindered by vehement prejudices, (which often befalls men, not malicious:) or that factions are so prevalent, that a farther branch may rather be expected from the Synod, than any testimony of consent. I much wonder, what came in some men's minds, when they said, They that accuse another of impiety, 
13. Accusers may not be Judges in a Synod.  may be his Judges also in a Synod; and, that the Right of refusing, which hath place in civil affans, cannot be extended to Ecclesiastical. For certainly, the common Rules, which arise out of natural equity, aught to be of force, no less in Ecclesiastical than other judgements; and I remember Optatus speaking properly of the Ecclesiastical, saith, Judges must be sought, which are not of either party, because judgement is hindered by affection. In the Council of Chalcedon, the Judges charge the Legates of the Roman B. they should put off the Judge's person, if they would be the accusers of Dioscorus; And Athanasius would not come unto the Synods, wherein 'twas manifest the adverse party reigned. Such is often the face of things, 
14. Synods sometimes hurtsull.  that a Synod may be hurtful at the present, which if you stay awhile, and let the minds of men come to a calm, may be called to good purpose. 
1 Cor. 3.13  Time shall declare, saith the Apostle, the work, that is, 
Phil. 3.15.  the doctrine of every one: And, If any man be otherwise minded, God shall reveal the truth. In both places showing, there is often need of time, that the Truth may be found out, and a right judgement given. The contrary may also happen, that the present evil cannot endure the delay of a Synod, and calls for a more compendious remedy. Moreover, the same causes for which great Assemblies are suspected by the Highest Power, may also have place in Synods; for, as a very learned man hath said, It is not less Political, to assemble Bishops, than other Orders of men. There is the same fear, the same danger, unless they have put off Humane passions, when they became Pastors. I might reckon up many examples of unhappy Councils, as were under Constantine, those of Antioch, Caesaria and Tyrus; the Bishops of which last, as the Emperor in his Letters plainly tells them, did nothing else but sow divisions and hatred, and disturb the Peace of the world. Yet I confess, the Church is not in the best condition, when Synods cannot be had: and therefore all means is to be used, that these Assemblies may be retained, or after long omission restored, whereby the Church speaks both to her Members, and her Governors with most convenience. 
15. What may serve in their stead.  And yet, even then, when the Highest Power governs without a present Synod, it hath the judgement of the Church in former Synods; it hath the perpetual consent of the most famous Doctors, which flourished in every Age and Nation; it hath the most learned and religious Divines of the time present, both domestic and foreign, whose opinions are worthy of an equal regard, especially in points of Doctrine, which is the common study of them all, and in respect whereof they have every one a share in the Universal Episcopacy. In making Church-Laws, the King (saith the Bishop of Ely) made use of men fit to be advised with, men who in reason are esteemed most under standing, most able and judicious to answer in such affairs: and saith Burhil, He was instructed by Ecclesiastical Councils, or in defect of these, by Authors for their Faith and skill in these matters most approved.  

16. O. her causes to deny Synods, beside the general corruption of Religion.  Upon the premises, we see there are other causes, beside the great corruption of Religion, in contemplation whereof Synods may or aught sometimes to be omitted: and therefore they were not so often granted by the Christian Emperors, as they were desired. All are Petitioners to your Grace with sighs and tears, saith Leo to Theodosius, that you would please to command a Synod in Italy. 
Epist. 24.  Yet he prevailed not; yea in vain did the Right of calling Synods belong unto the Emperors, if upon just cause they could not deny to call them. It is certain, the Churches which were sick of the Ubiquitarian error, could not be accounted past all hope, yet the Electors and Princes, to whom the Laws of Germany commend the care of Religion, without a Synod by the Counsel of wisemen expelled this disease out of their Dominions; and are praised for it, by the same persons, who will not acknowledge the Right, on which alone that Reformation depends. The office of a Prince, 
In 4. prac. loc. 5.  as Zanchius and others with him note, partly consists in this, that, until a free Council may be had, which cannot be had at all times, He command the dissenting parties, to use, 
17. What is to be done, till 2 free Council may be called.  not their own, but the terms of Scripture, and forbear to condemn each other in public. This also pertains to the Right of ruling before a Synod, and therefore without a Synod.  
It doth not follow hence, that the liberty of judging, which by Divine right is due to Divines, is taken from them; for they may, also out of Synods, deliver their judgement, either before the Highest Powers, or if it be needful, before others too: and they may render the reasons of their judgement out of the word of God.  
The sum is this, Synods, we confess are the most usual help of Governing the Churches: yet we hold, such time may fall out, that Synods may not be profitable and convenient, much less necessary. And our greatest wonder is, the boldness of some men, that maintain, even when the Powers take on them the protection of the Church; 
18 Synods not called without the Highest Power.  whether they will or no, Synods may lawfully and rightly be assembled. Beza was of another mind, who hath said, Synods are to be called, not without the command and favour of the King. Junius was of another mind, who said. 'Tis an unjust and dangerous attempt of the Church, to hold a general Assembly, without his knowledge and Authority, who is set to keep order amongst men. Lastly, of another mind were All, that have hitherto defended the Protestant cause against the Papists.  

19 Whetther the Highest power may choose the Synod-men.  Next concerning the Right and Office of the Highest before and in the Synod, it is controverted, Whether it be lawful for the power to design the persons, that shall come unto the Synod, or no. It is lawful, we doubt not: but to clear the matter, let us proceed in order.  

20. The Right of the Primitive Church. And the Assembling of Bishops.  After that Christ instituted the Church and the Pastoral office, it hath been lawful, by the Law of Nature; not the immutable Law, but by that which hath place until some other Provision be made; for the Church, in things concerning the Church; or, for the Pastors, in things concerning the Pastoral office, to make choice of them that shall go to the Synod: because, no Humane Law, no agreement interceding, to determine the persons, there is not other way. By this right; the Brethren of Antioch send some of their number with Paul and Barnabas to Ferusalem. 
Acts 15.2.12.  Likewise, the Elders, and the Church of Ferusalem together with the Apostles, send out of their Company chosen men to Antioch. But in all the ages following, I find no example of election made by the Church; for to the Diocesian Synods assembled all the Presbyters, to the Metroplitan all the Bishops, unless any were detained by great necessty. Here then is no election, but that the Bishops seem to have taken with them to the Metropolitan Synods some Presbyters and Deacons at their own pleasure. That greater Synods might assemble, 
21. The Emperor's encyclic letters to the Metropolitans.  the Encyclic Letters of the Emperors were sent to the Metropolitans, and for the most part the election of their fellow-Bishops was imposed on them, to complete the number which the Emperors had prescribed. This appears by the Letters of Theodosius and Valentinian to Cyrill, the like whereof were sent to all the Metropolitans, as the Acts do testify. Plainly, to Cyril is the election there committed; which election the Metropolitans made sometimes alone, sometimes with the Provincial Synod of their Bishops. Of the suffrages of the Church or people there is no appearance. The Metropolitans, in case any of them could not be present in Synods themselves, sent some Bishop or Presbyter to spply in their names, and to keep their places.  

22. The Highest Power may elect Pastors for the Synod. Proved by reason, and examples.  Albeit this were the most frequent manner of election, yet by no Law was the Highest Power forbidden to call Synods of Pastors elected by his own discretion. This alone is enough to prove a permission; but reason doth evince the same: if we consider the ends before spoken of, for which Synods are assembled. For first, many Synods are had only for Counsel, but naturally it is lawful for every one to choose his Counselors; so it is in questions of the Law, of War, of Merchandise, and all other affairs: between which and the Ecclesiastical, as to mere consultation, there is no dissimilitude. Synods are also holden for the exercise of external Jurisdiction, committed to them by the Highest Power; but this is also natural for every one to choose his Delegate. In the Synods, that are gathered for procuring of consent, the case is somewhat different, in these it seems very expedient, that the Election be either by the Churches or by the Pastors, to the end, the acts of the Synod may be more passable; for men are wont to like those things best, which are done by those persons, whose faith and diligence themselves have chosen. This therefore belongs not to the Right, but to the prudent Use of it; and is not perpetual; because it may sometimes happen, that the election made by Pastors may be less available to concord, than if it be made by the Highest Powers. Again, in a Synod held for Counsel or Jurisdiction, because the Highest powers take not notice of all able men, it may be best sometimes to receive them upon the commendation of the Church or Pastors. We say then, not that the Highest Power ought always to choose the persons, but that he always may. Our leader in this judgement is Marsilius Patavinus; for he saith, It pertains to the Authority of a Lawgiver, to call a general Council, and to determine fit persons for it; by determining, he means not only approbation of the persons, but election too; and herein he is followed by the Learned French Defender of the Protestants cause against the Trent Synod. Nor are examples wanting. The King of Israel calls unto him what Prophets he will● and namely Michaia at the persuasion of Fehosophat. 
1 King. 22.  The Donatists request a Synod of Constantine, to judge between them and other African Bishops, by this Petition, We beseech you, excellent Emperor, because you are of a just and Royal extraction, whose Father was no persecutor, and because Gallia is not infected with this iniquity, that your piety would command Judges for us thence, to allay the contentions here. Not the Churches, not the Synod of Gallia, but the Emperor names the Judges. To the first Synod of C. P. Theodosius admitted also Macedonian Bishops: who were not surely chosen by the Churches or Bishops Catholic. That other Emperors and Kings used the same Right is very certain. And this very thing did the Protestants desire of the Emperor Charles the fifth; and the other Kings; that they might have leave to choose pious and learned men, and send them to the Synod. 
23. When the election is permitted to others, the Highest Power commands ●●●veri.  But here we must observe, when the Churches or Bishops choose men for the Synod, whether by their Native or Dative Liberty, The Supreme Governor hath an undeniable power still over that election; For all use of Liberty, as above is said, is subject to Command; and the virtue thereof is this, that for just causes some turbulent men, or otherwise unfit, may be excluded from public business.  
That the time and place were proscribed by the Emperors for the Council, the things also to be done, and the manner of doing; that Synods were translated at their pleasure, or dissolved, both others before us, and we also have made so plain, that I think it will be denied by none. Wherefore let us now rather see, what Judgement in the Synod is competent to the Highest Power. 
24. The H. Power may judge in Synod.  They fancy to themselves an Adversary over whom they may get an easy victory, who take the pains to prove, that the Bishops judged; not the Emperor's alone; for who ever did so forget himself as to deny that? but this we affirm; The Highest Power hath right to Judge together with the Pastors: the proof whereof is needless here, because above we have made good to the H. Power an Universal right of judging, which certainly, by the Synod cannot be taken away. But whether it be best for the Supreme Governor to express himself, and how far, is another question.  
Let us go through every end of Synods. If a Synod be had for Declarative judgement, 
25. Whetheir it be expedient or no, in person.  that is, that the Bishops may show out of the holy Scripture, what is true, what false; what is lawful, what unlawful; here the King, being well versed in the Bible, cannot be deprived of that which is granted to private men, to search the Scriptures, to try the spirits. But here must be exceeding great Caution, lest the Majesty of one, bridle the Liberty of many. 'Twas said of old, Caesar, when will you give your Vote? if first of all, I shall have one to comply with. Yet will it be most profitable, that the Supreme Governor not only honour the Assembly with his presence, but also order and moderate the actions, inquire into the grounds of every sentence, and propose objections. Which the Emperor Constantine did in the Nicene Synod, and Charles the Great, in that of Francford. But when the Synod, in things not determined by Divine Law, gives Counsel to the Highest Power, what is for the Church's benefit; here also it is better to propose the incommod●es with the commodities, than to deliver judgement openly: according to that Rule, What should be done, debate with many; what shall be done, determine with a few. The royal presence also, when the Synod is held chiefly to testify the Church's Consent, is of good effect, to curb the boldness of turbulent men: but, the Supreme Governor shall be more assured, whether the consent be true and spontaneous, if he give no suffrage, but he content to reserve the Epicrisis, or final determination to himself. And this hath place too, in the Synod, which by concession of Humane Law, doth exercise some Jurisdiction: the Supreme Governor may be present, and give Sentence if he please, but 'tis more proper for him, that he reserve himself entire for the Epicrisis, or Judgement after.  

26. The Highest Powers present in Synods by their Deputies.  We have spoken of the Highest Power, when itself is present in the Council; but pious Emperors could not always be so, by reason of other affairs: and then they sent others in their name, with Commission either to judge together with the Bishops, or only to preserve good order. For in the Synod of Chalcedon, it is clear enough that the Senators and Judges interposed often, and gave their Sentence in defining the very Articles of faith; but in that of Ephesus, Candidian was not allowed by Theodosius to pass his judgement. To the Council of Tyrus, Constantine sent only Dionysius, a man of Consular degree. to observe all that passed; but he went beyond his Power, as Ahanasius notes; He had all the talk, and the Bishops observed him in silence.  

27. III. What is the Highest Powers right after Synod.  Now we come to that Judgement, which belongs to the Highest Power after Synod; the Greek Fathers call it Epicrisis. This is so proper to the Highest Power, that it must not be cast off or neglected by Him. 
The Epicrisis: wherein is contained right to change, to add, to take away.  For if the Synod only give Counsel in things to be done by the Highest Power, 'tis certain His judgement, to whom the counsel's given, aught to follow, whether it be led by certain arguments (as is necessary in the matter of Faith) or in some sort by the Authority of other men. For (as above) some Judgement of the doer must precede every act, that it m●y be right; but absolutely, and in all things, no man can square his judgement by that of another, unless it be such a judgement as in infallible, but the Judgement of a Synod is not such. If some Doctrine be explained, or some Law Divine, 'tis not only the Right, but the Duty of the Highest Power, to see weather the Synod walked according to the Rule of Holy Stripture: as Constantine writes of himself to those that met in Tyrus. For 'tis his part to Govern. What if some Synod, (such as many have been, and many may be,) shall either through ignorance, or by conspiracy, or because the greater party oversways the better, agree upon some doctrine, manifestly repugnant to the Catholic faith derived from the Scriptures? Suppose the Arimin, the Seleucian, (both which were greater than the Nicene) or suppose the second Nicene Synod; Shall the H. Power now command any thing to be done, which the Law Divine, and his conscience instructed by that Law forbid? No man in his right mind will say so. But if somewhat be conceived by the Synod, which by Divine Law is not determined, but partains unto Church-government, since all Government, whether introduced by Nature, or by Positive Law, is under that Power which among men is Highest; it is the part of this Highest to see whether the things conceived will be useful for the Church; for to the last agent belongs also to give the last Judgement. Therefore have Synods submitted both their Articles and Canons to Emperors and Kings; but with different respect; the Articles to be examined by Sacred Writ (for the true do not refuse examination, the false, even after Synod, deserve rejection;) the Canons to be tried according to the Rules of prudence; and if profitable, they received the force of Laws. Concerning the Canons are those words out of the Councils of France; if there be any defect, let it be supplied by His prudence; if any thing amiss, let it be corrected by His judgement. Wherefore not only the right of approving, (as some do now) but of examining, taking away, adding, correcting, did the ancient Bishops ascribe unto the Highest Powers. Nor indeed can any one, with reason, be said to approve any of those things, which are not in his Power to disapprove. He is properly said to consent, who may also descent, according to that in Seneca; If you would know whether I am willing, allow me Power to be unwilling: and Aristotle, Where to do is in our chayce, there is also, not to do. This is certain, some Canons have been disallowed; a great part of the Chapters, which in the year 856, the Bishops set forth in Synods, was rejected by Carolus Cal●●s: as we read in his Capitular. And Clarolus Magnus made some addition to the Decrees of the Synod holden at Theodons'. We add, saith he, this of our aunt. Lastly, where a Synod hath passed judgement by a Power derived from Humane Law, here it is much less to be doubted, but that His judgement is reserved to the Supreme Governor. For all Jurisdiction, as it flows from him, returns to him again. Hither I refer that Judgement of the Ephesine Synod, whereby Nestorius was cast out of his Patriarchship. The Synod prays the Emperor, that what was done against Nestorius might be of force.  

28. An objection answered.  One may object, that where the Supreme Governor was himself present in the Council, there at last nothing remalned, but to confirm the acts with his Authority. But, neither can this be granted. For when the Supreme Governor judged among others, he Judged not as Supreme; for he might be Inferior in the Suffrages. Wherefore his final Judgement must still remain safe unto him, I mean his Imperative judgement, and that in the freest manner. The same is true of the Magistrates, 
D. quando appell.  if they be present in any Court under their Authority.  

28. The manner of giving the Epicrisis, or final judgement; And of Appeal.  But we must observe, that the Supreme Governor exerciseth this Imperative Judgement, sometimes wholly by himself; sometimes partly by others, partly by himself; Which appears by instance in Civil affairs. For Kings, unto whom supplication is made against the sentence of the Praetonian, Prefects, or of the chief Senate, do for the most part commit the last hearing of the Cause to men of Law; whose sentence, unless it be suspected, they confirm; sometimes, they command the Cause to be pleaded all again before themselves. So in causes Ecclesiastical, it was the Custom for Emperors to commit the matter to the examination of other Bishops, for their religion and wisdom most noted; and, taking account of them, to confirm what in their own discretion they judged best. And this is the cause why against former Synods, other new, and these not greater than the former, were so often called: not because this Synod by itself was Superior unto that; but, these men had greater credit with the Emperors, than the former. It was but seldom, that the Emperors heard all the Cause again themselves: as Constantine, after the Church had judged twice, himself examined the Gause of Coecilian, and gave final Judgement in it. He also called before him the Bishops who had met at Tyrus, to render him an account of all their doings. Wherein he is justly defended by our Men against the Patrons of the Roman Sea.  
It is true in Sacred no less than in other matters, that an Appeal strictly taken, which inhibites the execurion of Sentence given, may by the Civil Law be taken away: but then there is left open another way; to implore the Hearing of the Highest Power, by Complaint or Supplication. For if this be denied, the King could not scatter away all evil from his throne, He could not be a terror to all evil, which is his perpetual office: so that the old woman said well to Philip of Macedon, If he were not at leisure to be Judge, He should 
Dio.  not be at leisure to be King. Maecenas saw this of old, who showeth to Augustus, that no man (under the Highest) ought to have so much Power committed to him, as that from him there should be no appeal.  

29. The Epicrisis in parts of Religion, as well as in the whole.  One thing more must be remembered here, that the right of the H. Power, after the Synod, to determine any thing against the Synod, cannot be contracted only unto those Controversies, wherein as it were the whole body of Religion is in Question. For there is the same right in the parts, as in the whole: and the reasons before alleged give unto the H. Power a free final Judgement, in single Questions, as well as in all together. For also in single Questions, Synolds may err, neither aught the H. Power to yield blind obedience to them, much less by its Authority to defend a false and hurtful doctrine; or suffer the truth to be oppressed; nor can the wisdom of the Highest Power permit errors to increase by little and little, and as their nature is, one beget another, till their number be so great that they cannot be rooted out without hazard of the Commonwealth.   

CHAP. VIII.  
Of Legislation about Sacred things.  

1. The several acts of Authority are Legislation, Jurisdiction, and another without special name.  HItherto we have spoken generally; now let us more nearly view the several parts of Authority. The Act of Authority either respects all, or single persons: that is Legislation; this, if an occasion of Suit, is Jurisdiction; if otherwise it is called by the general name, because it wants a special. Of this last sort, the commands are such as the Centurions: I say unto this man, 
Mat. 8.9.  Go, and he goeth: to another, Come, and he cometh: to my servant, Do this, and he doth it: but the principal act is, the Injunction of Functions permanent. 
2. Wherein is Legislation.  In what things Legislation is, may be understood by the precedent part of our discourse; for almost all things belonging to Authority we have explained by examples of Legislation as the more noble. Thence it appears, that a Law is made either of the things defined by Law Divine, or of those that are left undefined. The Laws that are made, either respect the whole body of Religion, or the parts of it.  

3. It belongs to the Highest Power, about the whole Body of Public Religion.  In nothing more shines forth the virtue of Supreme Authority, than in this, That it is in the power and choice thereof what Religion shall be publicly exercised. This, all that have written Politics put in the chiefest place, among the Rights of Majesty; and experience proves the same. For if you inquire, Why in England under Queen Mary the Roman Religion was set up, but under Queen Elisabeth the Evangelicall; the nearest cause cannot be rendered, but from the will and pleasure of the Queens; or (as some will have it) of the Queens and Parliament. Inquire, why one Religion is in Spain, another in Denmark, another Sweden; you must have recourse to the Supreme Governors will.  

4. Answer to the Objection of the change of Religion.  But many do object, If that be so, the State of Religion will be very unconstant, especially where one is Ruler over all; for upon change of the King's mind, Religion also will be changed. 'Tis true indeed, that they say: but that danger is in all other things as well as Sacred. The work will be like the workman; and the Law be as the King. Yet no man's right is to be denied him, for the danger of abusing it: for than no man's right shall be safe. Besides, although the Highest Power should transfer that right upon another (which we have showed he may not) the same danger would still remain; for the right would but pass from men to men: and every man may be deceived. Here then, our only comfort lies in the Divine providence. Indeed the hearts of all men God hath in his power, but, 
Pro. 25.1.  The King's heart is in the Lord's hand, after an especial manner. God doth his work, both by good and evil Kings. Sometimes a calm, sometimes a storm is for the Church more useful. If the Governor be pious, if a diligent reader of the Scriptures, if assiduous in prayer, if Reverend to the Catholic Church, if ready to hear wife Counsels, by him will the truth be much advanced. But if he be of a perverse or corrupt judgement, it will be more hurtful to himself than to the Church; for he must expect a heavy judgement from the King thereof, who will not suffer his Church to be unrevenged. The Church in the mean while, ceaseth not to be the Church; yea, if the King rage against it, it will gather strength and inciease under persecution.  

5. Religion must not be brought in by the force of subjects.  Certainly, 'twas never lawful for Subjects to gain by force the public exercise of their Religion: the ancient Christians when they were at strongest, when they had Senators and Precedents very many of their mind, never took such right unto themselves. 'Tis the Office of the Highest Power alone publicly to authorise the true Religion, and to remove the false. To remove Idols out of private places belongs to the Lord of the place; and upon his neglect, to the King as the Lord general: but to remove them out of the public place is the right of the Highest Power, and to whomsoever it shall delegate that office. 
Deut. 7.5.  And thus is that Law of Deut. to be interpreted; You shall destroy their altars, and break down their statues, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire: The command must first be given by the Highest Power, and then must execution be done readily by the Subjects: Do thus saith Austin upon the place, when you have received Commission for it. The Pagan Temples in the Roman Empire were not shut up, before that Law of Constantius, extant in both the Codes. If any one hath broken Idols and there been slain, the Elibertine Council forbids him to be received among the Martyrs, because it is not written in the Gospel, nor is any such thing found done by the Apostles.  

6. False & Schismatical worship, by the Highest Power, sometimes prohibited and punished.  But the Highest Power hath not only forbidden Idolatrous Assemblies, but those too, which gave themselves to any evil superstition, or error publicly pernicious, or were obstinate breakers of the Church's peace. Christian Emperors have excluded Heretics and Schismacks from all access to honours; have deprived them of the right to obtain any thing by Will; have given away their Churches to the Catholics. All which, Austin at large defends against the Donatists. For those p●●shments of such inexcusable Delinquents in Religion, which left them time of repentance, the ancient Church approved. But the pain of Death was so much against the gentleness of the old Religion, that Idacius and Ithacius were condemned by the Bishops of Gallia, for being Authors, that certain Priscillianists should be confuted with the sword: and in the East a whole Synod was condemned, which had consented to the burning of Bogomilus.  

7. Sometimes dissembled and regulated.  Yet sometimes also false Religions have gone unpunished under pious Emperors. The Jews, whilst they held from the contempt of the Christian Law, and from drawing over Christians to their Sect, had always free use of their Religion. Neither were the Pagan rites prohibited by Constantine at the beginning of his conversion, but he advanced Pagans to the Consulship, as Prudentius notes to Symathus. So Jovinian and Valentinian, Princes worthy of all praise, terrified not them with threathing edicts, that violated the verity and unity of the Christian Law. And which is more to be noted, the Emperors did not only permit impunity to disagreeing sects, but often made Laws to order their Assemblies. Constantine and following Emp●●urs grant to the chief Rulers of the Jewish Synagogues the same Rights with Christian Bishops. So Theodosius forbids any to be received into their Sect against the will of their Primates; and forbidding them to be received into their Assemblies, that denied the Resurrection and Judgement, or would not acknowledge the Angels to be God's creature, He saith he had reform the Jewish Nation. So the Proconsul's took away the Churches of the Donatists from the Maximianists, because they were proved to have been condemned in a Council of the Donatists.  

8. Legislation in the parts of Religion.  Moreover, in the true Church, the Right. and Office of the Highest Powers is not only conversant about the whole body of Religion, but the single parts, as reason and examples do evince. Reason, because it cannot be otherwise, but He that hath right upon the whole, hath right upon the parts. Examples are at hand: Ezechias, that he might suppress the adorers superstition, took away the Serpent set up by Moses; and by the same right, against the Decrees of the second Nicene Synod, Charles the Great forbade the adoration of Images. Honorius and Arcadius repressed, by their Edict, Pelagius and Calestius, the authors of a false opinion: and so of late, some of the Germane Princes have purged their Churches (otherwise well ordered) of the Ubiquitarian Error. 
9 Suppeslion of unprofitable questions, So●●m. 1.7. c. 12 〈◊〉 cleric. D. de sum. ●●init. And of words not found in So pure, N●●●on   
For prevention of Schism, Constantine cut off needless Questions: an example worthy to be imitated by our Rulers; for it is most true which Sisinius said to Theodosius, By Disputations about Religion, contentions only are inflamed. The Emperor Andronicus, of excellent knowledge in Divinity, threatened the Bishops disputing subtly upon, The Father is greater than I: that unless they would abstain from such dangerous discourse, he would throw them into the river. Even true words, but not extant in the Bible, were for a time forbidden to be used. So Heraclius the Emperor prohibited both the single and the double Energy to be ascribed to Christ; that this is not to be disliked, 
De side.  we have the authority of St. Basil for us, who saith, Many pious men abstained from the words Trinity, and Homoousion, and that also the word Unbegotten is not to be used of the Father, because these words are not in Scripture. And Meletius of Antioch for a time abstained from questions about Doctrine, only delivering what pertained to emendation of manners, esteeming this care above the other. It is pertinent here, which Plato hath in his Laws, That no man should publish any writing, unless approved first by Judges appointed for the purpose.  

10. The Regulating of Church men's conversation.  This is also an especial work of Laws, to compose the manners of the Clergy. The blind and the lame David excludeth from the Temple: Ezechias and Josias command the Priests to be purified. Justinian doth not allow the Bishops to wander up and down, 
Novel. b.c. 11.  to play at Dice, to be spectators at Plays. And Platina exclaims very justly, O King Lewis, 
In Greg. 4.  I would you lived in our times! Your most holy orders, your Censure is now very necessary for the Church.  

11. Laws about things undetermined by Divine Law; And that, beside the Canons.  To proceed; That the Powers also used their Authority in defining things which the Divine Law hath left undefined, is most plain. The King of Ninive proclaimed a Fast; David commands the Ark to be transported; Solomon order all things for the ornament of the Temple, and after him Josias: who also takes care, that the Treasure destined for Sacred uses be not alienated. Of this kind is the greatest part of Constitutions which appear in Theodosius and Justinian's ●ode, and in the Novels, and in the French Capitulars: as, of the age of Bishops, Presbyters, Deaconesses, of the immunity and judgements of the Clergymen, and infinite other things, which were tedious to number, That in those Laws are Constituted many things that are not in the Canons, both the Reading shows, and Whitaker confesses. Therefore also in the Trent Synod, the King of France doubted not to declare by his Orators, That the most Christian Kings (so 'tis in the Acts) have made many Edicts in matters of Religion, after the Example of Constantine, Theodosius, Valentinian, lentinian, Justinian, and other Christian Emperors; That they have made many Ecclesiastical Laws, and such as the ancient Popes not only were not displeased with, but some received into their Decrees; and esteemed the chief authors of them, Charles' the Great, and Lewis the Ninth most Christian Kings, worthy the name of Saints; That the Prelates of France, and the whole Order Ecclesiastical, according to the Prescript of those Laws, have piously and Christianly ruled and governed the Church of France.  

12. Yet the Canons are of use, in the making of Laws.  In the mean time it is most true, that the Emperors for the most part in making laws had respect unto the Canons, old, or new: whence is that saying, The Laws disdain not to imitate the Sacred Canons; For, in things not defined by Divine Law, the Canons are useful to the Lawgiver two ways. They do both contain the Counseiss of wise men, and make the Law more gracious in the subjects eye. This, as it is not necessary to the right making of a Law; so, if it may be obtained, is very profitable. Justinian's Novel is Extant, wherein he gives the force of Laws to the Ecclesiastical Canons, set forth, or confirmed by the four Synods, the Nicene, the first of Constantinople, the first of Ephesus, and that of Chalcedon. Where by the word Confirmed, we must understand the Canons of the old Provincial Councils, which being generally received, were therefore contained in the Code of the Catholic Canons.  

13. No Legislative Power belongs to the Church by Divine Right.  Now to that which some Inquire, whether the Church hath any Legislative Power, the Answer may be given out of our former Treatise. By Divine Law it hath none. Before the Christian Emperors, the Decrees of Synods, for the order, or the ornament of the Church, are not called Laws but Canons, and they have either the force of Counsel only, as in those things that rather concern single persons, than the whole Church; or else they bind, by way of Covenant, the willing, and the unwilling being the fewer, by necessity of determination, and therefore by the Law of Nature, 
14. Y●t it may be granted by the Law Positive; cumulatively, n●t●rivatively; and not without subordination and dependence.  not by any humane Authority.  
This notwithstanding, some Legislative Power may be granted by Humane Law, to Churches, Pastors, Presbyters, or Synods. For if to other Companies and Colleges, whose usefulness is not to be compared with the Church, that Power (as we have said above) may be granted by the Supreme Governor; why not also to the Church, especially when no Divine Law is against it. But two things must be here observed. First, this Legislation granted, doth not at all diminish the right of the H. Power, ('tis granted Cumulatively, as the Schools speak, not Privatively:) for the H. Power, though it may communicate to another the right of making Laws general or special, yet can it not abdicate the same right from itself. Next, the Laws made by any such Company, may, if there be cause, be nulled and corrected by the H. Power. The reason is, two Lawgivers, both highest, cannot be in one Commonwealth: and therefore the Inferior must obey the Superior. Hence it is, that for the most part, in the constitutions of Synods, we see the assent of the Highest Power expressed in these words: 
Come. Tolet. 6. can. etc.  At the command of the King; By the Decrce of the most glorious Prince, the Synod hath Constituted or Decreed.  

15. How Kings have confessed themselves bound by Canons.  It may be objected here, That Kings sometimes affirm they are bound by the Canons, and forbid to obey their Edicts contrary thereto. But this is of the same sense, as when they profess to live by their own Laws, and forbid their Rescripts if they are against the Laws, to be observed. For such professions take not away their Right, but declare their will: As a clause added in a former Testament, derogating from the later, makes the later of no value; not because the Testator might not make a later Testament, but because what is written in it is supposed not approved by his free and perfect Judgement. And hence it is, that if there be a special derogation from the derogating clause, as the later Testament is of value; so is the later Constitution too.  

16. The Canons dispensed with by Emperors. 1. Examples hereof, even in the Apostolical.  But that Canons have been nulled and amended by Emperors and Kings, and that Synods ascribed that Power to them was proved sufficiently, when we treated of Synods. Yea, (which is more) even those Canons, which are found in the Apostles writings were not perpetually observed. The reason is, because they were supposed to contain not so much an exposition of Divine Law, as Counsel accommodated to those times. 
1 Tim. 3.6.  Such is the Canon to Timothy, That a Neophyte be not made a Bishop; which was renewed in the Synod of Laodicea. Yet in the Election of Nectarius this Canon was laid by, by Theodosius; and by Valentinian, in the Election of Ambrose. And such is that Canon, 
1 Tim. 5.9.  That a Widow under sixty be not chosen for a deaconess: which Theodosius also constituted by a Law. Yet Justinian permitted one of forty to be chosen. 
17. Divine Laws also moderated by equity. Let ●●. 7.10 & 22.  'Tis not to be forgotten here, that the Hebrew Kings excepted some actions from the Divine Law itself. There was a Law, That no unclean person should eat the Passeover. Yet Ezechius, having poured forth his prayers to God; granted an Indulgence to the unclean to cat thereof. Again, the Law was, that the Beasts should be slain by the Priests: and yet twice under Ezechias the Levites, by reason of the want of Priests, were admitted to this office. Not that the Kings loosed any one from the bond of Divine Law (for that can no man do) but that according to equity, the best Interpreter both of Divine and Humane Law, they declared the Law Divine, in such a Constitution of affairs, to lose its obligation, according to the mind of God himself: For such a Declaration, as in private actions, and not capable of delay, it is wont to be made by private men, (So David and his companions interpreted the Law, which permits the Priests only to eat of the Shewbread, to have no binding force in the case of extreme hunger) so in public actions, or in private also that may be delayed, it is to be made by the Highest Power the Defender and Guardian of Divine Law, according to the counsel of wise and godly men. And hither, for conclusion, I refer, that in the time of the Macchees, it was enacted that it should be lawful to give battle to the Enemy on the Sabbath day.   

CHAP. IX.  
Of Jurisdiction about Sacred things.  

1. Jutisdiction about Sacred things belongs to the Highest Power.  TO Legislation, Jurisdiction is coherent, with so near a tye, that in the highest degree one cannot be without the other. Wherefore if the Supreme Legislation about Sacredthings, under God, agrees to the Sovereign Power; it follows, that the Jurisdiction also agrees unto it. Jurisdiction is partly Civil, partly Criminal. 'Twas a point of Civil Jurisdiction, that the Episcopal Sea of Antioch was abjudged and taken away from Paulus Samosatenus. The Criminal, from the chief part of it is called the Sword; He beareth not the Sword in vain, but is an avenger upon all that do evil: therefore upon them too, that do evil in matters of Religlon. 
2. The effects of it are declared.  Of this sort was the command of Nebuchodonosor the King, that they should be torn in pieces, who were contumelious against the true God; and that of Josias, whereby Idolaters were put to Death. Relegation also belongs to Jurisdiction. So Solomon confined Abiathar the Priest; without any Council, as the Bishop of Ely well notes; 'twas indeed for treason, but he had as good Right to punish him, if the offence had been against the Divine Laws. So the Christian Emperors banished Arius, Nestorius, and other Heretics. Esdras and his associates received Jurisdiction from Artaxerxes; whereby they punished the obstinate Jews with the publication of their goods, and ejection out of the public Society. The very same punishment in the Gospel is called Casting out of the Synagogue. For as Esdras had all kind of Jurisdiction by the grant of the Persian King: so by the permission of the people of Rome, and of the Emperors afterward, the Synedry of the Jews retained this part of it, with the power of binding and scourging. We learn out of the Hebrew masters, that there were three degrees of casting out of the Synagogue: by the first, Nidui, the party was commanded to stand off in the Synagogue in a meaner place: by the second, Cherem, He was not permitted to appear in the Synagogue, nor any other suffered to make use of him, nor allow him any thing, but to sustain his life in a most slender manner: the third degree, in Chaldee Scammatha, was the proper punishment of him, who by the Law of Moses had deserved death, but, the Power of capital Judgement being taken away, could not be put to death: his touch and commerce all men shunned. Some such thing seems that to be in John's Epistle, casting out of the Church, which Diotrephes did, that loved preeminence, 
Ep. 3. v. 10  and assumed unto himself Dominion.  
'Tis also a point of Jurisdiction to abdicate any one from the Priest's Office, which Josias did to the Schismatical Priests, only allowing them where with to live. So Theodosius and other Emperors made decrees about the deposition or restitution of Bishops. Constantine threatens the contumacious Bishops, and tells them they should be ruled, by the virtue of God's servant, that is, saith he, myself. For we must note, to the right of the sword it belongs, not only to eject out of that Office, which flows from the Empire of the Highest Power, but from all other Offices of what kind soever.  

3. Jurisdiction properly so called belongs not naturally to the Pastors.  That Jurisdiction about Sacred things, being a part of Empire largely taken, agrees to the Highest Powers, is very plain. Let us see, whether any Jurisdiction, Humane Law being set apart, agrees to the Ministers of holy things: and afterward, we will consider what is given to them by Humane Law. Naturally, the Priests have no Jurisdiction, that is, no Coactive or Imperative Judgement: because their whole Function includes no such thing, in the nature thereof. 
4. Yet by Law Positive it belonged to them in some Nations.  That Jurisdiction which the Priests had in the Primitive State of the Natural Law, they had as Magistrates, not as Priests; for even when the Priesthood was not joined with the Highest Power, seldom were the Priests without some power. Hence is Cohen a name common both to Priests and Magistrates; and among many Nations the Custom was the same. For the Druids among the Gauls were the most noble of that Nation; and among the Cappadocians, as Strabo, himself a Cappadocian, tells us, the Sacerdotal dignity was next to the Regal, and Kings and Priests were for the most part of the same family. Tacitus writes, that the Germane Priests of old, had alone the Power to punish; and among the Romans, that which Lentulus said in the Senate, 
Cic. l. 4. ad Attic.  The Priefts are judges of Religion, signifies not only the judgement of skill, but of power. But the Mosaical Law plainly to the Priests, and principally to the High Priest, as it gave eminent dignity, so Jurisdiction too, yet under the Highest Power, whether a King or Council. And 'tis manifest, where neither a King was constituted, nor a Judge, there the High Priest was Prince, as being the most eminent among all, whether Private men or Magistrates. Examples whereof are Heli, and afterward the Asmoneans. That among the Jews the Sacerdotal Nobility was of prime note, both Josephus and Philo observe. That the Priests had Magistracy, even this alone may prove, that he is to die who obeyed not the command of the Priest. 
De●●. 17.8.  In which Law the High Priest is equalled to the Highest Judge. Nor did they only give judgement in Sacred but in Civil affairs, being the best interpreters of the whole Law, at that time the wisdom in Divine and Humane Law being not divided. 
L. 3. devit. Mos.  Whence also, Philo, where he brings in Moses upon the Tribunal, saith, 
5. Pastoral acts of Divine Right, which seem to come near to Jurisdiction, and yet are distinct from it.  that the Priests sat with him on the Bench. But in the Evangelicall Law, Christ having not given unto Pastors any Dominion or Command, neither hath he given them any Jurisdiction, that is, coercive Judicature. Yet let us see, what actions there are, either of Pastors, or of the Church if self, which have any show of Jurisdiction, and therefore for their likeness may come under that name. Those actions we do here consider, which owe nothing to Humane Law, or to the will of the Highest Power. 
6. The Apostolical rod. 1 Cor 4.21  To Jurisdiction doth seem to pertain that Rod, where with Paul threateneth the Corinthians; whereby is meant, as the Apostle explains himself, 
2 Cor. 13.10.  to use sharpness, to revenge all unrighteousness, not to spare; all which are expressions of a certain miraculous virtue of imposing punishment. 
10.6.13.2.  Thus Ananias and Saphira fell down dead, 
Acts 4.13.  Elymas was smitten with blindness, 
1 Tim. 1.20. 1 Cor. 5.  Hymeneus and Alexander, and the incestuous Corinthian were delivered to Satan. To deliver to Satan, was plainly a point of miraculous Power, which inflicted torment on the body, such as Saul in former time felt after his departure from God, as chrysostom and other Fathers interpret. This is certain, when the earthly Powers used not the Kite of punishing, God had given them, to purge and defend the Church; what was wanting in Humane aid, God himself supplied by Divine assistance. But, as Manna ceased, after the people were brought into the promised Land; so, after the Emperors took on them the Patronage of the Church, whose Office was to punish them that troubled the Church without or within, the forenamed Divine punishments expired. To speak to the purpose, that Divine execution of revenge was properly the Jurisdiction of God not of men, because the whole work was Gods, not the Apostles. God, that he might give testimony to the truth of the Gospel Preached, as at the Apostles prayers, or presence, and touch, he healed diseases, and cast forth Devils: so, at their imprecation, commanded men to be vexed with diseases, or seized on by Devils. Nor did Paul more in delivering men to Satan, than did Peter and John in curing the lame man, who say, 
Acts 3.12.  they did nothing by their own Power, and transcribe the whole effect to God. At the Church's prayers also did God often show the like signs of his displeasure; 
1 Cor. 5.2.  therefore are the Corinthians blamed, that they mourned not, to the end the incestuous person might be taken away from among them. And to the same effect is that wish, not command, of the Apostle, to the Gal. 
Gal. 5.12.  Would they were cut off, that trouble you.  

7. The use of the Keys.  Now, in the perpetual Office of the Pastors, some resemblance of Jurisdiction hath the use of the Keys. So, by Christ himself is called, that application of the Gospel-threats and promises, which is made to particular men. Whereunto Preaching hath the same proportion, as Legislation to Jurisdiction; wherefore by the same figure is the use of the Keys called Jurisdiction, as the Preaching of the Gospel Legislation. It hath been showed afore, that Christ, as alone he gives Law to souls, so alone he passeth sentence on them, not only in the end of the world by the last judgement, but in the mean time also by retaining or remitting sins. He alone, saith Ambrose, remits durosins, who alone hath died for our sins. And Jerome saith, As the Priest makes the leprous clean or unclean, so the Bishop or Presbyter binds or loses. The same Father shows, where he, that useth the Key, errs either in fact or Law, there the Key is of none effect. 'Tis otherwise in Jurisdiction, for there, what the Judge erring hath pronounced, stands, by reason of his Authority that gives sentence, and passes into a judged case. As then, the Crier doth not give the sentence, that he declares either rightly or amiss; so the Pastor, in that use of the Keys, cannot properly be said to exercise Jurisdiction.  

8. Prescription of the works of penance, by way of direction or persuasion.  To the use of the Keys coheres the prescription of works of penance; which if it be general, as that of the Baptist to the Jews, Bring forth fruits meet for repentance; and that of Daniel to the King, Break off thy sins by mercy: or if special, as the enjoining restitution, and open detestation of an open offence; it pertains to the annunciation of the Law, not to Jurisdiction. But if that be specally prescribed, which the Divine Law hath not specially defined, this belongs not to Jurisdiction, but aught to be referred to Counsel, by which name it is very often called by the ancient writers. Wherefore, as Philosophers, Physicians, Lawyers, and friends also giving Counsel, do not properly pronounce sentence, although oft times the Counsel is such as cannot, without great fault, be rejected: so neither doth the Pastor pronounce senrence, or use Jurisdiction when he affords advice wholesome for the soul.  

9 Nonexhibition of Sacraments.  Moreover, it is annexed to the use of the Keys (which also hath some appearance of Jurisdiction) not to exhibit unto certain persons the seals of Divine grace. But, as he that Baptizeth, or gives the Eucharist (as the old manner was) into the mouth or hand of the receiver, exerciseth not Jurisdiction, but only a Ministerial act: so likewise, he that abstains from the same actions. Nor is any difference here between visible and vocal signs. By what right therefore a Pastor declares in words to a man openly wicked, that he is an Alien from the grace of God; by the same right he forbears to exhibit Bapusme to him, it being a sign of the Remission of sins; or if he be Baptised. the Eucharist, it being a sign of Communion with Christ. For the sign is not to be applied to him, to whom the thing signified belongs not, nor is a Pearl to be cast to Swine, but (as in the Churches was wont to be proclaimed by the Deacon) Holy things are for holy persons. Yea, it is not only against verity, but against charity too, to make him partaker of the Holy Sacrament, 
1 Cor. 11.29.  that discerneth not the Lord, body; for he eateth and drinketh damnation to himself; Here then, seeing the Pastor only suspends his own act, not exerciseth any right of Domivion over the acts of other men, it appears, these things pertain to the use of liberty, not the exercise of Jurisdiction. The like in some proportion we observe in a Physician, that attending his Hydropic patient, will not give him water when he calls for it, because 'tis hurtful: or, in a grave man, that will not vouchsafe a debauched man the honour of Salutation: and in those, that avoid the company of men infected with Leprosy, or other contagious disease.  

10. The Church's acts of Divine right, which seem to come near Jurisdiction, but yet are distinguished ●om it. Separation. Epist. 68 Jo. 10. Rom. 16.17.  We have looked upon the actions proper unto Pastors; let us come to them, which belong unto the Church, or are common to the Pastor with the Church. First then, the people (that we may speak with Cyprian) in obedience to the Precepts of our Lord, aught to separate themselves from a sinful Pastor. For command is given to every one particularly, and to all in general, to take heed of false Prophets, to sly from a strange shepherd, to avoid them that cause divisions and offences comrary to the doctrine. Secondly, the faith full are commanded to decline their familiar conversation, who, being named brethren, are Whormongers, Idolaters, Railers, 
Ti●. 3.2 Thess. 3.6.14. 2 Tim. 3.6. 1 Cor. 5.9.13 1 Tim. 6.6.12.  Drunkards Greedy, Heretics, making a gain of godliness, or otherwise behaving themselves inordinately, against the Institution of Christ, Withdraw yourselves from such, be not mingled with them, turn away from them, eat not with them, saith the Apostle Paul in sundry places. For such men are (as the Apostle Judas speaks) spots in the love feasts of Christians. Wherefore when the Scripture makes use of these words, 'tis manifest, no act is signified greater than a private one; for what is the Church here bid to do, but what a Disciple doth, when he deserts an evil Doctor; or honest men do, when they renounce the friendship or society of their Companions fallen into wickedness? The words, that afterward came into use, Deposition of the Pastor, and Excommunication of the Brethren, seem to come nearer to the nature of Command; but words are to be measured by the matter, not matter by the words. A Church is said to depose the Pastor, when it ceaseth to use his Pastorship; to Excommunicate a brother, when it withdraws itself from his Communion; in both cases, it useth its own right, taketh away no right from another; and although it doth not that without judgement, (whence also the faithful are said to judge those that are within) it exerciseth no Jurisdiction properly so called, 
1 Cor. 5.12.  for Jurisdiction is of a Superior over the Inferior, but Judgement is often among equals; as in that place, 
Mat. 7.1.11. Canonical acts, superadded to the acts of Divine right, and distinct from; them.  Judge not, that ye be not judged.  
Having weighed what is of Divine right, let us now see whit hath been added, either Canonical or Legal. This was Canonical, and sprung from the Pastor's Counsel, and the Church's consent, that inquisition began to be made into actions also not manifest; and that such as abstained not from their sin, were not admitted to the Holy Communion, but after a certain space of time; for it was not unlawful to do otherwise, but this way was more expedient both for the lapsed and for others. For the lapsed, that they might the more detest their sin; for others, that the example might deter them from the like offence. Hence it was, that persons guilty of some grievous crime, first bewailed their fault for a while without the Temple, and after by several steps were admitted to the Prayers of the faithful, and last of all to the Sacred Mysteries. With the like severity did the Essens of old chastise the offences of their order, as Josephus relates; and at this day the Jews, being but merely private men, do enjoin penalties to the followers of their sect, that are delinquents. He that hath killed a man, standing out of doors proclaims himself a manslayer. To others are appointed abstinence, stripes, and exile also; for what is wanting to the Power of the Rulers, is supplied by the reverence of those that obey.  
To return to the Christian discipline: that the Institutes thereof were never reckoned as Laws Divine, appears by this, because 'tis not in the power of man to give a Dispensation or Indulgence then; but it hath been always in the power of Bishops, 
Cone. An cyr. Can. 2. & 5.  with respect had to the life of the Penitents, either to prolong or shorten the time of their penance. Yea, and generally men in danger of death were received to Communion; Which the Nicene Synod calls an ancient and Canonical Law: which agrees also with the custom of the Essences in Josephus. And among those, that by Divine Law are forbidden to be partakers of holy things, to wit, the impenitent, some are by the Canons kept only from the Communion of their own Province; others, the Clergies Communion being interdicted them, are admitted to the Communion of Laics; and for the same crime a Layman is Excommunicated, a Clerk put out of office. Besides, Austin teaches that. Excommunication must be forborn, if the contagion of sin hath invaded and o'erspread the multitude. Which exception were not to be admitted, were Excommunication grounded only on Divine Law. It appears therefore, many things were added out of Humane consent, which, as long as they were destitute of Imperial Authority, had not only no force of compelling, but, saving by consent, obliged no man: unless perhaps by that Natural Law, which command's offences to be avoided. In the same manner, as the Canons themselves, did the Judgements given according to the Canons, oblige every one; for, as to the debate of meaner businesses, the Laics were appointed by Paul the Apostle's counsel, for composing of differences: so, in the more weighty affairs, the Clergy were the Judges; unto which judgements, pertains that admonition, proceeding from natural equity: Against an Elder (that is, 
1 Tim. 5.19.  a man of approved faith) an accusation is not to berecerved without two or three witnesses.  

12. Jurisdiction granted to Pastors by Positive Law.  But after the Emperors embraced Christianisme, then at length to Pastors, as men that performed a public office, was some part of Jurisdiction given. This was threefold, by ordinary Law, by consent of parties, by delegation. By ordinary Law, the Bishops were allowed to judge of things pertaining to Religion. The first that seemeth to have made this Constitution was Valentinian the first, whose rescript Ambrose citys. 
L. 5. Ep. 32  Other Emperors did the like. Justinian by his Constitution exempts Ecclesiastical affairs from the Cognizance of the Civil Judges, 
Nou. 89.  and leaves them to the Bishops. In other causes, both Clerks and Laics pleaded not before the Bishops, but by their own consent. Which Jurisdiction by consent, the Bishops received from Constantine, with so full a Right, that the Cause which the Bishops had once decided, should be carried on no further; that is, there should be no appeal from the Bishop's sentence. Afterward, by the Synod of Chalcedon, 
Cap. 9  it was made unlawful for Clerks against Clerks to run forth to the Secular Tribunal, but first the action was to be examined before him, whom by the advice of the Bishops the parties should have chosen. And yet, if the Clerks did otherwise, the secular Judge wanted not Jurisdiction, but the Clerks were liable to the penalties of the Canon. First of all the Emperors, Justinian circumscribed the rights of the Secular Judges, and commanded, that Clergymen, whether by Lay or Clergy, in Civil Causes, should only be sued before the Bishop; yet so, that the Bishop might remit the difficult Controversies to the Civil Judges: and he might also appeal to the Civil Judge, that would not rest in the judgement of the Bishop. But the punishmen of the Clergy for Crimes not merely Ecclesiastical, at that time, and long after, remained in the hand of the Civil Judges. That which we have said of the nonappeal from the Sentence of the Bishop chosen Judge by consent of parties, the same, Arcadius also, Honorius, 
I. 1. Cod. de sent. pr. pr. l à procon. C. Th. de apple.  and Theodosius do show in the Epistle to Theodorus Manlius Praetorian Praefect: Let the Bishop's sentence be firm for all, that have cho●en to be heard by Priests; and we command the same reverence to be given to their judgement, which must be given to yours, from whom it is not lawful to appeal; For from the Pratorian Prafects was no appeal, but if any one said he was oppressed, 'twas lawful for him to Petition the Emperor. Whence the Praetorian Praefects are said to Judge in the Sacred place, that is, the Imperial; which may be as rightly said of Bishops judging by consent of Parties. The same right is attributed to the Patriarches, to whose cognizance the causes Ecclesiastical were deferred, which with Inferior Bishops could find no end. Against the Sentence of these Prelates (saith Justinian speaking of the Patriarches) there is no place for an Appeal, 
Sancimus, Cod. Epill. Cand.  by the Constitution of our Ancestors. The third kind of Jurisdiction we have called that which ariseth from delegation, whether of the Highest, or the Inferior Power; in this kind of Causes, was always granted an Appeal unto the Emperor, if Judgement were given by the Emperor's command; or to the Judge, whosoever he was, if by the Judge's Precept. In the name of Jurisdiction, we comprehed the right of citing Witnesses, of imposing on them an Oath, and binding the party overcome by Sentence, unless Appeal were made; upon whom also execution was done, not truly by the hand of the Bishop (that was not becoming) but by the hand of the Civil Judge. Hence was the Jurisdiction properly called Audience, because the Judge himself executed not the Sentence.  

13. The efficacy of his Jurisdiction.  Wherefore, above that, which the Pastors and the Church had by Divine right, and by the mere Canons, much was added by Humane Law, and the grant of the Highest Powers. The people now, had not only right to avoid an unfaithful Pastor, but such a Pastor by virtue of a Sentence pronounced against him, lost his Pastoral right, and whatsoever he ascribed to it: and, if he attempted any thing against the Sentence, was punished with relegation. So the Pastor now, had not only right to deny the Sacraments, and every one to deny familiarity, to the brother of an irregular life, but it was also unlawful for him to approach unto the Church.  

14. The Jews had the like granted them.  Nor ought we to wonder, this Right, by Christian Emperors, was given to Christian Pastors, when the same indulged thus much to the Jews, that none should be admitted into their Sect, nor be reconciled to it, without consent of their Primates. 
L. generaliter. ff. de dicurr.  And so the Pagan Emperors of old, as Ulpian saith, Imposed such Commands upon the Jews, which might not offend their Superstition; but the Christian Emperors gave them this farther privilege, that the Masters of their Synagogues, and other Precedents of their Law, were free from personal and civil offices: and if two Jews, by agreement, referred their Controversies to the Jews, the Judges should execute their Sentence. So much favour did the Christian Emperors bestow upon the Jews, for the beginning Truth had among them, and for hope of their future Conversion; as the ancient Father's love to speak.  

15. The accessories of Excommunication.  This is also to be noted, Besides that relegation from the Society of the faithful, other incommodities were annexed to Excommunication, to the end, the offenders might be the sooner brought unto repentance. And that this was no new thing, but of most ancient Custom, deduced even from the beginning of the world, or the reparation of it after the Flood, the perpetual use of almost all Nations is an argument of no small moment. Memorable is that place of Caesar concerning the Druids among the ancient Galls; 
L. 6. de Bel. Gall.  If any private person, or public, stand not to their Decrees, they forbid him their Sacrifices. This is among them the most grievous punishment. They that are under this interdict, are accounted in the number of impious and wicked persons: all men refuse their company, come not near them, nor discourse with them, lest the contagion hurt them, They receive no advantage by the Laws of the Kingdom, nor are capable of any honour in it. At this day in some places Excommunicate persons are interdicted the use of Common Pastures; in other places, a mulct is set upon their heads; therefore doth Luther justly call the greater Excommunication a Politic punishment. All this Jurisdiction or Imperative Cognizance, 
16. All Pastoral Junisdiction properly so called flows from the H., Power.  Court and audience is derived from the Highest Power. This was the meaning of the King of Britain, in that Law, All Authority of keeping Court, and all Jurisdiction as well Ecclesiastical as Secular, flows from the Regal Power, as from the Supreme head. And the Politia Anglicana speaks thus unto King James; The Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction is plainly the Kings; a prime, principal, and individual part of your Crown and Dignity. The Ecclesiastical Laws are the King's Laws, nor do they arise from any other fountain, but the King, nor are they preserved by any other Power but his. From the Royal Power, all Ecclesiastical. Jurisdiction streams, by the Arch-Bishops and Bishops to the Judges Ecclesiastical. Which is also the Bishop of Ely his meaning, when he saith, The Judgements of the Church receive external Authority from the Emperor.  

17. How far those Pastoral acts may be used upon the Supreme Governor. Of the use of the Keys.  Having spoken of the acts, competent to the Churches and their Pastors, either by Divine or Humane right, the Design of our Treatise carries us on to this consideration; what acts, and how far they may be exercised about him, who is endued with Sovereignty. The naked use of the Keys, with that which adheres unto it by Divine right, hath place, no less about the King, than about the least of the people: yea, is so much more necessary about Him, by how more there is in his sin, danger of contagion. Miserable is that Prince, from whom the Truth is concealed: and well did Valentinian, to exhort Ambrose, That he should proceed, according to the Divine Law, to cure the soul's infirmities. Nevertheless, 
18. Under which pretence, cannot be excused seditious Sermons, Which are refelled by Scripture, and the objections answered.  they are injurious to the Gospel, who under the name of the Keys, cover their popular declamations, wherein they openly traduce the actions of the Highest Powers, that are either of ambiguous Interpretation, or not at all known, or not certainly; and with much acerbity inveigh against them before the common people. This is a way to please the people, who being naturally jealous of their betters, lend a willing care, and an easic faith to such invectives; but 'tis not the way to edify them. Hence, it is necessary, that seditions follow or, which is the next step to Seditions, the Contempt of the Sovereign; nor without reason hath that most wise writer reckoned, Deubtfull speeches of the Prince, among the incentives of popular Tumults. A wide difference there is, between the preaching of the Gospel, and the use of the Keys. The preaching of the Gospel, being to all, is so to be attempered, that it may profit all; and concealing the persons, aims only at the vices. It is an evil custom, to turn the Pulpit into a Stage, and the sweet voice of the Gospel, into the old reviling Comedy. The ancient Romans censured it as an unworthy thing, to accuse any man in such a place, where he might not presently give in his Answer: as Cicero relates. But God, by an edict of his Law, hath especially guarded, not the life only, but the fame of the Highest Powers, when He said, Thou shalt not speak evil of the Ruler; Where manifestly, we must understand somewhat more to be forbidden, than what is unlawful toward private persons; nor is the Law meant of Power abstractly, or the Ruler only, that governs well. Paul applies that command to the High Priest Ananias, one that Judged contrary to the Law. Saul had grievously sinned; and Samuel in the severity of a Prophet denounceth God's wrath against him: yet being asked by Saul, to honour him before the Elders and the People, and not to leave him, He denies not the request. Nathan accused not David, guilty of Adultery and Murder, before the people, but comes unto himself; as it is credible the Baptist did to Herod, when he told him of his fault. So the ancient Bishops and whole Synods, in public always speak with great Reverence, even to the Pagan Emperors, and enemies of the Church, and to Constantius the Patron of Arians. Neither did the Invective Orations against Julian come forth in public, till after his decease. The Prophets, I confess, being Divinely inspired, did not always observe this Rule. And no marvel, seeing God, who by the ministry of Prophet's anointed Kings; who by Phineas, by Samuel, and by others, slew whom he pleased; and did many other things not allowed to private men; He also by the same Prophets set a mark of public ignominy upon irregular Princes. For what is more true, than that nien specially inspired by God, to fulfil his Commands, are by him released from the bonds of Law. Wherefore when Shimei openly upbraided King David with his homicide, David to excuse him found nothing else to say, 
2. Sam. 16.11.  but, It may be the Lord hath bidden him: intimating thereby, that only one way there was, to justify evil language to the King, if God hath given any one some special Injunction for it. The Prophets themselves, when they were accused for raising sedition, take their defence from nothing else, but a peculiar Command they had received from God. Truly, I do not find, the Kings were thus traduced by the Priests, whose office was ordinary; 
2 Chron. 24.20.  as for the example of Zacharias the son of Joiada, in the Gospel, the son of Barachias, his Speech aimed not at the King, but all the people; and in a common fault, he exhorted all to a common repentance, moved thereunto by the Spirit of God. This we know; Christ hath granted to them, who have received injury from the Brethren, that, after they had admonished the injurious, first alone, and then before a few, they might in the last place bring the matter to the knowledge of some pious Congregation; 
Mat. 18.17.  Where, by the name 02 of Congregation or Church, learned men, and among them the famous Beza, not without reason, understand, not all the people, but the Synedry; for, by the Septuagint, the word is given to every Company: and in Moses, by, all the Congregation, the Synedry of the Seventy Elders is signified, as Aben Ezra, and Rabbi Solomon have long since noted. This also we know, that the Corinthian, 
2 Cor. 2.6.  who had defiled himself with incest, 
1 Tim. 5.20.  was censured of many. We 02 know, that Timothy is enjoined, to rebuke them that sin, before all, that the rest may fear. Which place seems, by that which goes afore, to be understood of Presbyters that sin, who in the hearing of the other Presbyters were rebuked by the Bishops. But although we understand it generally, it is certain, these indefinite Rules admit their restrictions and limitations according to the quality of the persons. An Elder, saith Paul, 
1 Tim. 5.1.  rebuke not, but entreat him as a Father, and the younger men as brethren. Much more honour is due to the Sovereign Power, and to Magistracy, than to age. Add here, which many have noted, and is congruent to the Custom of the ancient Church, that the Prelates of the Church are not to be reproved before the multitude; how much less the King: who is, (as Constantine said) constituted by God as it were an universal Bishop?  

19 All coaction of the Highest Powers unlawful.  Now as ignominious traduction, so all coaction too, against the Highest Power, is unlawful; because, all right of compelling proceeds from it, there is none against it. That which is objected concerning Uzziah, 
2 Chr. 26.20.  is answered by interpreting the text according to the Original, thus: And Azariah the chief Priest, and all the Priests looked upon him, and behold he was leprous in his forehead, and they made him hasten thence, yea also, himself was compelled to go out, because the Lord had smitten him. By the Divine Law, it was not permitted for a leprous man to be in the Temple; the Priefts were therefore earnest in hastening the King away, because he was struck with leprosy, and the disease itself increasing upon him made him depart of his own accord, The Priest declares, God compels.  

20. Canonical acts cannot be exercised against the Highest Power, without consent.  We have said what may be done by Authority of Divine Right; the rest, that hath been added by the Canons, either naked, or clothed with Law, as it may, we confess, to good purpose be used upon the Emperor sometimes; so, if he oppose it or forbid, by what right or with what prudence it may be used, we do not see. For, that all Government, which ariseth from consent, is under the Supreme Command, and that all Jurisdiction is not only under it, but also floweth from it, is demonstrated afore; nor is that in question, that the Sovereign is not bound by penal Statutes. Whence the ancient Fathers have interpreted that of David, To thee alone have I sinned, to be spoken, 
Ps. 1.51.  because he was a King; whence also is that note of Balsamon, to the twelfth Canon of the Ancyran Synod. The Imperial unction drives away penance, that is, the necessity of public satisfaction. Mean while 'tis true, that Kings, to their great honour; as in Civil affairs to their Courts and Parliaments, so in Sacred they may submit themselves to Pastors even as to public Judges. For it is current, 
l. 〈…〉  saith Ulpian, and a thing in practice, that if the greater or equal subject himself to the Jurisdiction of the other, sentence may be given, for him, or against him. But this subjection, because it depends upon the Kings will, and may be revoked at pleasure, diminisheth not a jot of his Supreme Command, as it hath been proved by very learned men. Whether or no it be expedient, that a King should suffer this Jurisdiction to be exercised upon him, is wont to be disputed. They that affirm, show how by this submission of Kings, much strength & Authority accrueth to the Discipline of the Church. 'Tis true, and spoken to the purpose, As the Princes, so will the People be, and the Ruler's example hath the sweetest influence. But, for the Negative it is said, That the Commonwealth stands by the Authority of the Governor, and (as Aristotle) the consequence of contempt is dissolution. Certainly, if any credit may be given to them, that have recorded the affairs of the Emperor Henry, and among them to Cardinal Benno, the Rise of his calamity was, that publicly, with lamentable penance, naked feet, and course apparel, in an extreme cold winter, he was made a spectacle of men and Angels, and at Canusium, for the space of three days, endured the scorn of Hildebrand. A difference therefore must be made, between those things which are needful to the public profession of repentance, and the more grievous and ignominious punishments. To the former some of the Emperors, before Henry, rare examples of Christian meekness have yielded willingly: but Henry was the first of all, upon whom any thing so ignominious was imposed, or any thing at all without a voluntary submission. And Hildebrand, or Gregory VII. was the first of all the Popes, that took upon him so great a boldness toward the Imperial Majesty, as Onuphrius tells us; who also saith, that the Kings and Emperors, who either upon just or unjust cause exempt themselves from these Positive censures, are to be resigned up to the Judgement of God. And so the Kings of France, for many ages, have challenged to themselves this right, That they cannot be excommunicated. 
21. How the Pastor may satisfy his conscience.  In what fort a Pastor, without such coaction, may satisfy his conscience in the use of the Keys, Ivo Carnotensis hath declared: Let him say to the Emperor, I will not deceive you; I permit you at your own peril to come into the visible Church; the Gate of Heaven, I am not able to open for you, without a better reconciliation.  

22. What is the Right of the Highest Power, about the fore said acts of Pastors and Churches.  It remains now to show, what is the Right and Office of the Highest Power, about those actions, which we have ascribed unto Pastors and Congregations. And first, as to those actions, which by the only Right of Liberty, and Privilege of Divine Law, are exercised, seeing by them also injury may be done to others, it is certain, they are comprehended within the sphere of the Supreme Jurisdiction. For, not only the Actions, which proceed from the Authority of the Highest Power, but all Actions whatsoever, capable of external moral goodness or evilness, are called to the judgement of the Highest Power. If married persons perform not to each other, what the Law of Matrimony requires; and if the Master of a Family neglect his charge; in these cases, the Courts of Justice are of use. Of all evil, the Power is ordained the Avenger. One among evils, and not the least, is the abuse of the Keys, and unjust separation, or denegation of the Sacraments. 
1 3. Cod. de ●pisc. & Cl●ic.  There is an Imperial Law, prohibiting the Bishop, that he Sequester no man from the Holy Church, or the Communion, unless it be upon just ground. And Justinian in his Novel, forbids all Bishops and Presbyters, 
Novel. 123  to segregate any one from the Holy Communion, before cause be showed wherefore the Sacred Rules will have it to be done. Mauritius the Emperor commands Gregory the Great, to embrace Communion with John of Constantinople. In France, the ancient usage was by seizing on their Lands, and other ways, to compel the Bishops to the Administration of Sacraments. And the Princes of Holland have often laid their Commands upon the Pastors to execute Divine service. Much more then, may the Highest Power challenge this right over such Actions, as have their force, not by Divine, but Canon Law. For, under the pretext of Canons, it sometimes happens, that the Canons are violated; and 'tis possible, the Canons themselves may be exorbitant from the Divine prescriptions. If either be, the Highest Power cannot deny the Plantifs, to take knowledge of the case. Now concerning those actions, which flow from Humane Law, and oblige men whether they will or no, and draw after them coaction, there is much less cause of doubt. For all Jurisdiction, as it flows from the Highest Power, reflows unto the same.  
But as it is a part of Jurisdiction, no● only to Judge, but to appoint Judges, so belongs it to the Highest Power to do both. 
2 Chron. 19.8. & 11.  Thus Ama●●iah, and the other 02 Priests with him are constituted Judges by Jehoshaphat. 
22. Ecclesiastical appeals depend on the Highest Power.  Neither can be showed more evidently, the Jurisdiction of the Supreme in this kind of causes, than that all degrees of appealing depend upon his pleasure. Otherwise, why do the Pastors of England appeal unto this or that Bishop, all the Bishops unto the two Archbishops? And there is the same subordination of the consistories, Classical, and the national Synods. Nor is the last term of appealing limited by any Law Natural or Divine. Wisely said the King of Britain, in his judgement every Christian King, Prince, and Commonwealth have it in their Power, to prescribe unto their subjects that external form of Government in Church affairs, which may suit best with the form of Civil Government. And truly, of old, it was so done by the Christian Emperors. Otherwise, whence came that so great Prerogative of the Constantinopolitan Church? Whence had the Synod of Chalcedon power to abrogate the acts of the second at Ephesus? Now as in Civil businesses, the judgement is permitted by the Highest Power, 
23. Exercise of Supreme Jurisdiction by himself or others.  for the most part, to the appointed Courts, and at last, upon Petition against the greatest of them, the matter is referred to men most skilful in the Law; or, more rarely, the Highest Power itself advising with learned Counsel gives final judgement; but very seldom upon suspicion of some Court, calls forth the cause unto itself: so also in these controversies about Sacred things, it hath been most usual by the ordinary Synods, and, upon appeal from their decree, by a certain Assembly called for the purpose, to put an end unto them; it hath been less usual, yet sometimes useful, for the Emperor himself to judge of the Religion and equity of the former Judges. Thus in the case of the Donatists, after a double judgement of Bishops, Constantine did; who although he approved not the appeal, yet he refused not the trial of it. But this is somewhat more rare, and yet not without right, that, if a Synod upon probable causes be declined, the Highest Power calls the cause before itself, and weighing the opinions of most eminent Divines, pronounces what is most equitable. 
Can. 12.  The Synod of Antioch prohibits him that complains of injury received from a Synod, to trouble the Emperor with the hearing of his Case, so long as the matter may be rectified by a greater Synod. Yet this takes not from the Emperor the Power to hear the cause, if it be brought before him. Moreover, the modesty of the ancient Bishops hath attributed Power to Kings, not only to examine the right or wrong of Excommunication, 
24. The Highest Power may dispense with Canonical and Legal penalties; And judge whether Excommunication be just or no.  but to pardon also and abate the punishment thereof, for so much as belongs to Positive Law. Ivo Carnotensis, a Bishop, and a stout desender of the Churches right against Kings, was not afraid to write unto his fellow-Bishops, that he had received a certain person into Communion, in contemplation of the King's favour to him, according to the Authority of a Law, that saith, whosoever the King receiveth into grace, and admits unto his Table, the Priests and Co gregation must not refuse. The Kings of France, and the Vindicators of the Regal Right, the Judges of the Supreme Courts, have often constituted and decreed, that public Magistrates, by occasion of that Jurisdiction they exercise, are not subject unto those Ecclesiastical penalties. So in the Decrees of Hungary, of the year 1551. the ecclesiastics are forbidden to send out, without the knowledge and permission of his Majesty, any sentence of Excommunication against the Nobles of that Kingdom. And in an ancient Law of the English it is read, that none of the King's Ministers be Excommunicated, unless the King be first acquainted with it. Which I see the Princes of Holland have thought sit to imitate; for the same was promulged by Charles the fifth, by his edict in the year 1540 Nevertheless, such use of the Keys as is congruent to Divine Law, and such injunction of penance as is consentancous to the Laws and Canons, the Highest Powers are wont to approve. And this is the Imperial Anathema mentioned in sundry of Justinians Laws. We conclude, that Christian Powers at this time, do not innovate, which will not, unless upon causes approved by themselves, suffer Excommunication, being joined with public shame, to proceed unto effect; which by their command inhibit censures manifestly unjust; for it is their Duty, to save every one from injury, and to keep the Church from Tyranny.   

CHAP. X.  
Of the Election of Pastors.  
REmains that part of Empire, which, as we have said, consisteth in assigning Functions. 
1. Two perpetual functions, of Presbyters and Deacons; And their difference.  The perpetual Functions in the Church are two, of Presbyters and Deacons. Presbyters, with all the ancients, I call them that feed the Church, by preaching of the Word, by Sacraments, by the Keys; which by Divine Law are individual. Deacons, which in some sort serve the Presbyters, as the Levites did the Priests of old. To this order are referred the Readers, who were in the Synagogues, as the Gospel and Philo show, and were retained in the Church, as appears by History, by the Canons, and by the writings of the Fathers. In the Gospel, he that keeps the Book is called the Minister, which is even all one with Deacon: and the same appellation is given by the Synod of Laodicea to the Deacons of of Inferior degree, which were afterward called Subdeacons'. But the most laborious part of Deaconship is about the care of the poor. Presbyters, the ancient Latin Church translated Seniors. Deacons, I think, cannot otherwise be styled, than Ministers: although there be some, who, as their manner is in other things, had rather carp at this, than acknowledge it to be true. I am deceived, if Plinius Secundus did not understand both Greek and Latin; yet he, relating the Institutes of Christians, rendering word for word, names them Shee-Ministers, whom Paul entitles Sheedeacons', and the Church afterward Deaconesses. Now, as the Levites could do nothing, but the Priests might do the same; so is there nothing in the Deacons function, which is excepted from the function of the Presbyter: because the Deacons were given to the Presbyters as Assistants in lesser matters. Before Deacons were ordained, one of the Apostles, Judus Iscariot was Treasurer of the Lords money; and after him, all the Apostles for some time distributed their allowance among the poor, until the contention risen among the Widows, and the greatness of their other employments enforced them to use the help of others. And yet, the Institution of Deacons did not so acquit the Presbyters, but they had still the poor under their inspection. Hence were the Bishops chiefly trusted with the dispensation of the Church's money, and that with so full a Power, as to be unaccountable, but to use part of it for the necessities of themselved and other men, and to deliver part to the Presbyters to be disposed among the poor: 
C. 38.40.41. C. 44.  as appears in the Canons which are entitled Apostolical, and in the Synod of Antioch. Unless the ancient Custom had been so, in vain had the Apostle commanded a Bishop to be hospital; in vain had the Antiochian Collections been delivered to the Presbyters at Jerusalem.  
Now concerning the Constitution of Presbyters, 
2. These four distinguished, Mandate. O dination. Election, Confirmation.  whose function is principal 01 and most necessary, we must note four things that by many writers are not accurately enough distinguished; The first is, the faculty itself of preaching, of administering the Sacraments, and using the Keys, which we will call the Mandate; a second thing is, the application of this faculty to a certain person, which by the received word we will style Ordination; a third is, the application of this person unto a certain place or Congregation, which is called Election; the fourth is that, whereby a certain person in a certain place exerciseth his Ministry under the public protection, and with public Authority; and let us call this, if you please, Confirmation.  
The first is to be distinguished from the second. To illustrate this with a Simile: The Husband's power is from God; the application of that Power unto a certain person proceeds from consent; whereby yet the right itself is not given. For, if it were given by consent, by consent also might Matrimony be dissolved, or agreement made that the Husband should not rule over the Wife; which is not true. The Imperial Power is not in the Electors; therefore they do not give it: yet they do apply it to a certain person. The Power of life and death is not in the people, before they join together in a Commonwealth; for a private man hath no right unto the Sword: yet by them it is applied unto a Senate, or single person. Christ, without controversy, is He from whom that right of Preaching, of exhibiting the Sacraments, and of using the Keys, doth arise and receive its virtue. He also by his Divine providence, as he preserves the Church, so procures, that the Church may not want Pastors.  
The second differs as much from the third, as for a Physician to be Licenced to practice Physic, and to be chosen Physician to such a City: or, for a Lawyer to be admitted to the honour of that Profession, and to be made a Syndic of some Corporation. These two have been ever distinct, and sometimes sepatate. The Apostles were truly Presbyters, and so they call themselves; for the greater Power includes the less; yet was not their Injunction appropriate to any certain place. The Evangelists also were Presbyters, but to no place bound. And so, long after, was Pantanus ordained by Demetrius, 
3. Of Ordination without a Title.  Bishop of Alexandria; Frumentius, by Athanasius, and were sent to preach the Gospel through India; Which in our time hath been also done; and would it were done more carefully. Indeed the 6. Canon of the Synod at Chalcedon forbids Ordination absolutely, or, without a title; but this is not of Divine Law or perpetual, but positive, and such as admits exceptions. The reason of the Cannon was, lest by too great a number of Presbyters the Church shall be burdened; or, the Order itself grow cheap, and vile. The London Synod excepteth fellows of Houses in both Universities, and Masters of Art living upon their own means, and who are shortly to undertake some cure. If the Bishop ordain any other, 'tis at his own peril, to keep them from want, until they are provided for. Therefore Election, that is, assignation of a certain place, and Ordination are not always joined together, and when they are, they are not the same.  
Which is farther proved, because they that are translated from place to place, must be chosen again, but not again ordained, which they must be, if either Election and Ordination were the same, or Ordination a part of Election. Besides, it will appear that Election was made by men of sundry sorts, but Ordination only by Pastors, 
4. Ordination only by Pastors, 1 Tim. 5.22.  and anciently by Bishops only. Hence Paul writing to the first Bishop of the Ephesians gives him Admonition, That be lay hands on no man suddenly. And the most ancient Canons entitled Apostolical, require, that a Presbyter be ordained by a Bishop, but a Bishop not without two or three Bishops. Which Custom, if seems, came from the Hebrews: for the Senators of the Great Synedry could not be ordained, but by three Priests; and that by imposition of hands, as is noted by the Talmudists. Without question, this manner was most holy, and for the conservation of sound Doctrine most commodious: when none was admitted to teach the people, but he first received Allowance from the approved Doctors of the same Faith. Pastor's therefore ought to ordain Pastors; nor is this their office, as they are Pastors of this or that Church, but as Ministers of the Church Catholic. For, saith Cyprian, There is but one entire Episcopacy, whereof every one is a partaker. Hence it hath been always held, that the Baptism is of force, given by a Presbyter without the limits of his peculiar Charge.  
Nor is it material, whether the Election precede the Ordinarion, or be consequent to it; for, when it precedes, it is a conditionate, not plenary Election: which the Canons of later times have called Postulation. 
5. The H. Power hath Authority over it.  Over this Ordination the Highest Power hath an Imperial inspection and care. Justinians Constitutions are extant, of the Ordination of Bishops and Clerks; and other Laws of others, which prescribe the age and standing of men to be ordained. Laws of good use, and fit to be revived for the prevention of the Church's ruin, through the rawness and ignorance, and inexperience of her Teachers: according to that out of the old Poet: 
What lost your state, founded on so good Rules?  
The public charge was given to boys and fools.   
The fourth member of our distinction, Confirmation, differs as much from the third, as the Church considered by itself, differs from the Church public. 'tis pertinent here, that Ezechiah is read to have Confirmed the Priests; 
2 Chro. 29.3.  that Pastors are defended by Laws and Arms; that some Jurisdiction or Audience is attributed to them; that Maintenance is assigned them, out of the public, either lands or moneys; that Vacation from civil offices, and in some cause's exemption from the Court of Inferior Judges is indulged to them. All which shows, that their public Confirmation is by the favour of the H. Power; as the Institution of their Office is from God, their Ordination by the Pastors. Only there remains to be disputed their Election, that is, the Application of the Person to the Place, or of the Place to the Person.  
That we may handle this question exactly, 
Cap. 7.  we must have recourse to that distinction set down afore. 
6. Right Immutable, Mutable.  Some things are of immutable right; other things are just and right, until it be constituted otherwise. In this later way, not in the former, the Election of a Pastor, in any place whatsoever, belongs to the Church or Congregation of the faithful in that place. That the Election is rightly made by the Church, is proved by the very Law of Nature; for, naturally every Society is permitted to procure those things, which are to their own conservation necessary; in which number, is the Application of Functions. So have the Company in a ship, a right to choose the Master Fellow-Travellers their Leader; a free people their King. Whence it follows; 
7. How the Election of Pastors belongs to the Church.  if the Divine Law hath not prescribed a certain way of electing, and as yet no Humane Law thereof is extant, than the Election of their Pastor pertains unto the Church.  
But he that will affirm this Right to be immutable, must evince the immutability, either by the Law of Nature, or by the postive Law of God. By the Law of Nature, he cannot: for no reason persuades it, and like examples show the contrary. So, many Nations, who are under the Command of the best men, or of hereditary Kings, may not now Elect their King, because, that which Nature did permit, might be changed by Humane Law, and hath indeed been changed. He must then have recourse to Positive Law, which he will never be able to produce. Examples in stead of Law, he must not allege; for many things are rightly done, which yet are not necessary to be done. 
8. Apostolical Institutions subject to change.  Nay more, not only many things, grounded upon examples of the Apostles time, but also some things Instituted by the Apostles, use hath altered to wit, such things, which were not strengthened by the force of a Law. The Apostles Instituted, that the Churches should have Deaconesses: which Pliny also shows to have been among the Christians in his age. What Church is there now, wherein this Office is retained? And Beza saith, he sees no cause why it should be restored. The same Beza acknowledgeth, the Function of the Deacons to have been perpetual, by Apostolical Institution; who nevertheless approves the different usage of Geneva. The Apostles Instituted, that Baptism should be celebrated by immersion, which by aspersion is now performed. Many other things of like sort, need not be proved abrogated, seeing they are proved to have been used, they are not proved to have been commanded. But farther, it appears not out of the whole History of the New Testament, 
9 Deacons, but not Pastors, elected by the people.  that Pastors were Elected by the people: that the manner of Election remained indefinite, is more easily collected thence. I speak of Pastors; for, of the receivers of the Church's money, there is not the same reason. The Apostles were very solicitous, lest by taking of the public money they should incur suspicion, or give offence. Paul might assume Luke unto himself, by his Apostolical Power, and commit to him the custody and disposition of Collections for the poor: but he chose rather, to permit a free election to the Churches; for this reason, as himself speaks; that no man should blame him, 
2 Cor. 8.20  in the administration of so copious munificence. For the like cause, was the election of Deacons, remitted by the Apostles to the multitude, that no man should complain of any partiality between the Hebrews and the Hellenists. But this was not perpetual, the reason thereof being temporary; for in the next times after the Apostles, the Deacons were not chosen by the people, but by the Bishops; 
10 Pastors in the Apostles time elected by the Holy Spirit, And Mathias the Apostle. Jo. 6.70.13.18. Acts 1.2. Gal. 1.1.  the people being sometimes consulted with, and sometimes not.  
To proceed with the Pastors: the Princes of them, the Apostles, were elected by God the Father, and by Christ. I have chosen you twelve: I know, whom I have chosen, saith Christ. After that He through the Holy Ghost had given Commandments unto the Apostles whom he had chosen, saith Luke. Paul an Apostle, not of men, nor by men, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father. So, them that were in the next degree to Apostles, the LXX. Evangelists, Christ himself appointed. 
Luke 10.1.  This Divine Election to Preach the Doctrine, than first brought down from Heaven, is signified by the word of sending; for, after the Election of those LXX. it is said, pray the Lord, to send Labourers into his Harvest; 
Luke 10.2.  and that is pertinent, 
Rom. 10.15.  How shall they Preach, unless they be sent? When Christ was ascended into Heaven, the promised Comforter supplied his place. Therefore, both to the ambulatory, and to the standing Offices, the fittest men were chosen, by the judgement and testimony of the Spirit, but by the Ministry of the Apostles, or of them whom the Apostles had made Governors of the Churches. 
1 Tim. 1.18.  So Timothy was admitted to his charge according to the prophecies which went before on him: that is, saith Theodoret, by Divine revelation: not by Humane suffrage, saith Chrysostomo. And Oecumenius generally of that age, By appointment of the Spirit were Bishops made, not in a common way. Hence Paul in his oration to the Presbyters of Ephesus, tells them, 
Acts 20.  They were made Overseers over the Lords flock by the Holy Ghost. Sometimes also, Lots were cast, that the people might, by the event, be certified of the Divine judgement. The most ancient Author, Clemens of Alexandria, hath left this written of John the Apostle, By Lot, He chose the Clergy, of those that were signified by the Spirit. Nor is it a new thing to use Lofs in the choice of Priests, but used also by the Gentiles, by the ancient institution, doubtless, of the sons of Noah. This illustrates the History of Mathias: 
Acts 1.23, etc.  whom, I wonder by what argument, some have persuaded themselves, to have been elected by the people; for in Luke, there is no foot-step of such election. What is said, They appointed two Barsabas and Mathias, ought not to be referred unto the multitude, as chrysostom would have it, but, as it is the common opinion of the Fathers, to those eleven, whose names are afore expressed, and who by the mouth of Peter had spoken to the multitude. These are they, who in the words immediately following are said to have poured out their prayers unto God, and to have given forth their Lots, that it might appear, not, whom the multitude, but whom God had chosen: for so themselves speak; wherefore, that which follows, is not to be rendered, He was chosen by the suffrages of all, (for who can believe, that the people were called to give their votes, after the Divine election, unless God's pleasure ought not to stand, without their good liking;) but, He was numbered with the eleven Apostles, as the Syriac and all the ancients have interpreted.  

11. Popular elections not proved by. Acts 14.23.  So, there is another word in the Acts, wherein some are more subtle, than is necessary. The Apostles are said to have commended the faithful Lycaonians to God, with prayer and fasting, after they had ordained them: Presbyters in every Church. This ordaining is expressed by a Greek word, in whose Etymology some have found the suffrages of the people. And 'tis true, that both at Athens and in the Cities of Asia there was a Custom of giving suffrages with the hand stretched forth. And if we were delighted with that subtlety, 'twere easy to interpret the word of the Apostolical Imposition of hands or Ordination, for he that imposeth hands must needs stretch them forth, and the next writers after the Apostles use the word in this sense. But indeed, neither the Evangelists, nor other Greek Authors are so curious in their words; yea there is scarce any word which hath not enlarged its signification, beyond the original meaning. Again, if Luke in this place would have signified a popular election, he would not have ascribed the word, ordained, to Paul and Barnabas, as ho doth, but to the multitude. Therefore Paul and Barnabas do the same thing here, which in another place Paul would have Titus do, 
Til. 1.5.  that is, or deign Presbyters in every City. That which Titus is commanded to do, by the precept of the Apostle, the same doth the Apostle here, being so authorised by the Spirit of God, that he needed not the assistance of the people. Lastly, the fasting and prayers did not precede the Ordination, but intervened between it and the Valediction; that it is strange, this should be drawn into an argument of popular election, when as, if the prayer and fasting of the people had preceded, this were nothing to the purpose. For, the people may also fast and pray to God, that the election of a King to be made by the Electors, may be prosperous and happy; yet are not the people therefore the Electors.  

12. Nor by the precept of avoiding false Teachers.  I have seen them, who would assert Election to the people by Divine and immutable right, upon this ground, that the people hath from God a precept to avoid false Pastors. But these men do not observe, that this argument, if it have any force, proves Election to be the right not of the multitude only, but entirely of every single person. For all, and every one, must avoid false Pastors, with all care. And so must every sick man take heed of a rash Physician: but no man will therefore say, that the City Physician is to be chosen by the Plebeians. This may rightly be collected thence, 
13. The old way of trying Pastors in the Primitive Church.  before election can come unto effect, the people, and every one among the people, must have power to allege causes, if they have any, wherefore he, that is proposed, ought not to be elected. For Paul having spoken of Bishops, and passing unto Deacons, saith, 
1 Tim. 3.10.  And let these also first be proved, where, requiring that to be observed in Deacons, which was to be observed in Bishops, there is no doubt but he would have Bishops to be proved, especially seeing he said afore, that they must be blameless. Among the Athenians, there was a probation of their Princes, the form whereof was this: 
Pollu●. l. 8.  What Parents and forefather's they were extracted from, of what tribe they were, of what estate, what service they had done the Commonwealth. So, if a Pastor were to be elected, it was justly granted every one to inquire, what his behaviour was, how married, what his children were, and the rest which Paul would have observed in a Pastor. This is that in the Council of Chalcedon, 
Can. 6.  Let the name of the ordained be published; for so Lampridius hath expressed it, in the life of Alexander Severus: When he appointed Governors of Provinces, he published their names, exhorting the people, if they had any thing against them, they should bring in their evidence; for he said, it was a great gravamen, not to do that in choosing Rectors for Provinces, which the Christians and Jews did, in publishing the names of such as are to be ordained. This is indeed a Luculent Testimony of the old fashion of Christians, not much distant from the Apostolical time. For between the decease of John the Apostle, and the Reign of Severus, are about a hundred years and ten. But this place is so far from evincing the Christian Priests to have been chosen by the people, that hence you may rather conclude the contrary. For 'tis one thing to be admitted to prove crimes or impediments, another thing to elect. Severus did propose unto the people the Governors' names: but that they were elected by the Emperor himself, no man, that hath read History, will doubt. Yea, 'twas needless to propose the Priests unto the people, if the people did elect them. It is most certain, in the ancient Church, after the Apostles age, although by right the people might choose their Pastors, that was not every where observed, but the people abstained very often from election by reason of the incommodities of popular Voting, retaining in the mean time the right of probation. 
14 Cyprian doth not confirm, but everthrow Popular Election.  And this is the sense (if it be rightly weighed) of Cyprian's Epistle to those of Spain; wherein some lay the chief foundation for Election by the people; for he doth not precisely say, The people have power of choosing worthy Priests, but either of choosing worthy, or refusing the unworthy. Either is sufficient for Cyprian's purpose, that an unworthy person may not creep into the place of a Priest. And in the following words, he doth not say, a Priest is to be chosen by the people, but the people being present. Why so? that a fit and worthy person may be approved by the public testimony and judgement; And a little after, that the people being present, either the crimes of evil men may be detected, or the merits of good men commended. How so? Because the people most perfealy knows the life of every one, and hath best experience of his conversation. Nevertheless, the same Cyprian in the same place declares, that, to choose a Bishop in the presence of the people was not a thing of universal Custom. It is held, saith he, among us, and in all the Provinces, almost. How weak the arguments are, which he allegeth out of Scripture, to prove the people's presence necessary, hath been showed by others. And the cause he brings hath hardly place, but where the Pastor of a City is to be chosen out of the people or Clergy of the same. But, that Elections were not always made by the people, appears even out of Cyprian himself, in another Epistle, which is likewise thought to favour popular suffrages. In Ordinations of the Clergy, most dear brethren, we are wont to consult with you afore, and by common advice to weigh the manners and merits of every one: but humane Counsels are not to be waited for, when the Divine suffrages do lead the way; Aurelius our brother, an illustrious young man, is already approved by our Lord, and called by God, etc. And then, Know ye therefore, most beloved brethren, that He was ordained by me, and my Colleagues that were present. He saith, He was wont to consult with the people; that they were always to be consulted with, he saith not: yea, by his example he shows the contrary; for He with his Bishops had promoted Aurelius, the people's advice being not required. He setteth down the cause: the people is advised with, to give testimony of life and manners: but Aurelius had a sufficient testimonial from his twofold Confession, which Cyprian calls a Divine suffrage. By the same right, He declares to his Clergy and people, by epistle, that Numidicus was to be ascribed to the number of the Carthaginian Presbyters, and that he had designed the like honour for Celerinus.  

15. Pastor's oft chosen by the Bishops, not by the People.  That in Africa other Bishops also had right of Electing Presbyters, the saying of Bishop Aurelius in an African Council showeth; The Bishop may be one, by whom, through the Divine grace, many Presbyters may be constituted. And, that the testimonies of the people were not always desired, is manifest in the third Carthaginian Council: the words of the Canon are, That none be ordained Clerk, 
Can. 22.  unless he be approved, by the testimony either of the Bishops, or of the people. Wherefore, two ways lead one to the Clergy, Popular testimony, or Episcopal examination. Whence Jerom to Rusticus; When you are come to perfect age, and either the people or the Prelate of the City shall elect you into the Clergy. And in another place; Let Bishops hear this, who have power to Constitute Presbyters through every City. Yea, the Laodicean Synod, whose Canons were approved by a Council Ecumenical, rejecteth popular Eclections: Upon which place Balsamon notes, that the most ancient Custom of popular Elections was abrogated by that Canon, for the incommodities thence arising: as he also notes upon the xxvi. of the Canons Apostolical, that Presbyters were of old chosen by suffrages, but that custom was long since expired.  

16. The Election of Bishops By the Clergy; By the Comprovincial, Bishops.  Now let us proceed to the Election of Bishops, a thing of so much more moment, than the former, by how much more care of the Church was imposed on the Bishops, than on the mere Presbyters. No man denies them to have been chosen by the people, that is, by the Laity and the Clergy, after the Apostles time: but, this to have been of right immutable, no man can affirm. For, to pass by the examples of them that have been constituted Successors by the deceasing, Bishops; it is a thing of most easy proof, that Bishops were very often chosen, either by the Clergy of their City alone, or by the Synod of their comprovincial Bb. For the right of the Clergy, the place of St. Ferom is remarkable: At Alexandria, from Mark the Evangelest, unto Heracles and Dionysius the Bishops; the Presbyters always named one to be Bishop, chosen out of themselves, and placed in a higher degree. Naxianzen speaks ambiguously; He would Elections were permitted, either to the Clergy alone, or chiefly to them; for so less evil would befall the Churches: yet withal he shows, this was not observed in his time, but the suffrages of the richest and most potent men, yea, the Votes of the people too, had the stroke in Elections. But, the Election made by the comprovincial Bishops is approved by the great Nicene Synod, 
Can. 4.  without any mention of the people. Whereunto agrees the Antiochian, adding this, 
Can. 19  If any contradicted such Election, the suffrages of the greater part of Bishops should carry it. Yet I deny not, in many places, even in the time of these Synods, the people also had their Votes: but the custom was not universal. It was free, until the Synod of Laodicea was confirmed by an Universal Council: the xii. Canon whereof, following the Nicene and Antiochian, gives the right of Electing to the comprovincial Bishops: the xiii. expressly takes away all Sacerdotal Elections from the multitude. Justininian also hath excluded the common people from the Election of Bishops, and committed it namely to the Clergy, and the prime men of the City. By the prime men he means the Magistrates and Officers. Among many named, the designation of one he committed to the Metrapolitan: yet so, that, if there were a scarcity of able men, the Election of one, by the Clergy and principal men, might stand. Notwithstanding this Constitution of Justinian, (which did not long outlive him,) soon after, there was a return to Synodical Elections: which Balsamon relates were usual in the East in his time also; with this exception, that the Metrapolitans were chosen by the Patriarches, the Patriarches by the Emperors.  

17. Mutab●lity in the man●er of Election.  Wherefore we conclude, it is neither proved out of the Scripture, nor was it believed by the ancient Church, that the Election either of Presbyters, or of Bishops, did immutably belong unto the people. Of this judgementa also, they must needs be, whosoever have transferred the Election to the Presbytery; for, were it of Divine and immutable right that the Multitude should Elect, the election could not be transferred to the Presbytery, more than to any others. Neither were the Compromise of any value, which we read was often made concerning Election, if it be determined by Divine Precept, that the common people must choose the Pastor; for that sentence, What a man doth by another, be seems to do by himself, pertains only to those actions, whereof the next efficlent cause is undetermined by Law. Certainly, the very same thing, that we say, was judged against Morellius at Geneva, that is, in that City, wherein great honour, great right belongs unto the people; which Decree, the most learned Beza defending, That the whole multitude, saith he, was called together, and gave their Vote, was neither essential, nor perpetual. In the same place, he thinks it sufficient, if the common people be allowed to bring in reasons, why they are displeased at the Election, which reasons afterward are lawfully to be examined. Beza himself commits the Election to the Pastors and Magistrates of the City; which is congruent enough to Justinian's Law, but is not of right Divine and immutable; for how can that be proved if Ordination and Confirmation be rightly distinguished from Election. And the ancient Church was of another mind, permitting to the Bishop the Election of Presbyters, and of the Bishop to the comprovincial Bishops. Wherefore. the manner of Election is of the number of those things, 
18. In Elections the Highest Power hath a Legislative right.  that are not specially determined by Law Divine, but only under general Rules, which command all things to be done in the church for edification in the best order, and without confusion. But in all things of this nature, those general rules remaining safe, we have demonstrated afore, Legislation belongs to the Highest Power. Bullinger, a man of a very sharp judgement, is of the same mind, who having alleged many examples of popular Election, infers thus; 
L. 2. de Episc. Ord. & Inflit.  Yet I will not thence conclude, that the right of electing Bishops, is to be reduced to the promiscuous Votes of the common people; for, whether it be better, that the Bishop be designed, at the meeting of the whole Church, or by the suffrages of a few, no right Constitution can be prescribed to all Churches: for several Countries have several Laws, Customs, and Institutes. If any in whom the right is, abuse it by Tyranny, they are compelled into order by the Holy Magistrate, or the right of designing Ministers may be transferred from them to others: for it is sufficient, that some Elders perform that office of Electing, upon command of the King or Magistrate, by the advice and Counsel of men who understand what the function of a Bishop is; what is the condition of that Church or People, over which a Pastor is to be appointed; who also can judge of the endowments, the learning and manners of every one. By this right, Justinian, as we have said, Constituted a manner of Electing, somewhat receding from the former usage, and the ancient Canons; by this right, after the Nicene Canon, were many Bishops elected by the Clergy and the People. The Laws of Charles the Great, and other Kings, are extant, containing divers ways of Electing, so that Bucer said most truly, The form of Election is prescribed by pious Princes.  

19 And may itself make Election, upon just cause.  Let us now consider, whether the Highest Power itself may make Election: the question is not, whether it ought to make it; nor, whether it be always expedient to do so, but, whether, if it do make Election, it commit any offence against the Law Divine. We say, with the excellent Marsilius Patavinus, The Lawgiver or Prince is not, by any Law of God, prohibited from the Institution, Collation, or Distribution of Ecclesiastical offices. Whosoever affirm the contrary, do accuse of impiety, innumerable pious Princes of ancient and of this age; which truly is a point of great temerity, when no Divine Law can be produced to prohibit it, as hath been abundantly by others, and by us in some part demonstrated. Although this might suffice (for whatever is not circumscribed by Divine Law, is within the sphere of the Highest Power:) yet, for the descending of our sentence, both reasons and examples are in readiness.  

20. This proved by reason;  The first reason is taken hence, that all actions, even those that naturally belong to others, not having causes determined by nature, we see are rightly exercised by the H. Power. Naturally men choose teachers for their children, and give them Guardians; sick persons make use of what Physician they please; Merchants elect the Curators of their Company: Yet in many places, Guardianship is appointed by Law alone, or the will of the Magistrates; Physicians are constituted by public Order, and Informers of Youth too, with interdiction of others from the practice of those faculties; and to the Commanies of Merchants are fit Curators also appointed by the Highest Power, without blame of any any, But, if this right be competent to the Highest Power, over those things, which did belong to every one, much more over those things that belong unto the People; because, the power of the people is devolved upon it, as all men know, that have any knowledge of the Laws. That sometimes there may be just causes, why the H. Power should challenge to itself the Election of Pastors, no wise man will deny. For often errors introduced into the Church against the word of God, cannot be rooted out by other means; often, there is no other way to avoid Schism; often, the suffrages of the Clergy are disturbed with factions, popular election with seditions; whereof are extant many examples, even of the purer times. Add in the last place, that the times are now and then so boisterous, that the King will hardly keep the Crown upon his head, except he have a care, the Pastors may be most obedient and faithful to him. Verily, all Histories do witness, how dearly the Germane Emperors paid for their abdication of this Imperial Right.  

21. And by examples, in the state of Natural Law; And under the Moisaicall.  That we may come to Examples, it hath been showed afore, that before the Mosaical Law, and afterward among the Nations without Judaea, Kings themselves enjoyed the Priesthood, the Divine Law not then forbidding it: at which time, there can be no doubt, the Priesthood might also have been committed by them to others: as we read the Pontiffs and Flamens were created by the Kings of Rome. But, among the Hebrew people, after Moses Law, no man, except of Aaron's family, could be admitted to the office of a Priest; nor to the service of the Temple, 
1 Reg. 13.31.  unless he were a Levit. Hence, is Jeroboam justly blamed, for choosing Priests who were not Levits, for the Law did not allow it; nor was it in the King, to command Sacrifices to be offered, in any place but the accustomed, which, after David, was Jerusalem. Other Functions, or the places for them, the King might assign to the Priests and Levits. So were some Levits appointed by David for preaching, others for singing. And, that there should be Singers with Harps and other Instruments, was God's precept by the Prophets: as the application of persons to the several offices is every where attributed to David, under the name of King; and after David, to Solomon: and Jehoshaphat, the King, not the Prophet, by name electeth Priests and Levits, whom he might send forth to the Cities of Juda to instruct them. The very same thing that is here debated. 
Aug. in Ps. 44.  For, as some Fathers were of opinion, the right of blood in the Moisaicall Law, is correspondent to the Imposition of hands in the Christian Law. As then, the Hebrew King may apply certain persons; to a certain office and place, but only such as were of Aaron's family and Levits; so the Christian King rightly makes a Presbyter or Bishop of a certain City, but of them which are ordained, or to be ordained. And so did Nehemia's Lieutenant to the Persian King, leave some Levits in the particular Cities, others he called forth unto Jerusalem. Yea, the High Priest attained not that dignity by Succession, but Election of the great Synedry, yet confined unto certain families (which Election seemeth to have been the regal right, when the Kings reigned) the most learned of the Hebrews Maimonides hath observed.  

22. Examples of the Roman Emperors, and of the Kings of France.  But let us proceed with the Christians. Before Constantine, no man will wonder that no Christian Pastors were elected by the Emperors, when the Emperors either were enemies to the Church, or had it in contempt, and accounted it not worthy of their care. Constantine gave the force of a Law to the Nicene Canon, of Election to be made by Bishops, other Emperors after him did the like, either by renewing the Canon, or not abrogating of it. And, 'tis manifest, this manner of Election was long in use; the Empire being of greater extent, than that the Emperor's diligence could provide for all the Churches. Notwithstanding this, it was lawful for the Emperors, if they pleased, to Elect by themselves. For, seeing it is from the Highest Power, that the Canon hath the force of a Law, no marvel, if the Highest Power, upon just causes, may recede from that Law, either in the whole, or in some particular case. For Laws are wont either to be abrogated, or tempered and limited by the Lawgivers, as afore is showed. Yea, there is no need of abrogation or solution of the Law, when as the Lawyers agree in this, that, by the general words in the Law set down, the right of the Highest Power is never conceived to be excluded. 'Tis true, the Examples of Elections made by Bishops prove, it is not necessary that Elections be made by the Highest Power; the Canons also show, the same Elections are rightly made by Bishops, with consent of the Highest Power: but neither of these is in question. The Question is, whether it be also lawful for the Highest Power to make Election. That it is lawful, we have the judgement of the best, both among the Emperors and the Bishops.  
In the first Synod of Constantinople, Theodosius commanded the names of all that were proposed should be given to him in papers, reserving to himself the choice of one. What can be more clear? One among all the Bishops proposed Nectarius: the Emperor makes choice of him, and persisteth in it, against the will of many Bishops; who, seeing the Emperor would not be removed, give place, and yield him that reverence, which was due unto him, in a matter not prohibited by Law Divine. Who sees not, this was done beside the Canons? for according to the Canons, the Emperor had no share in the Election, but here the Emperor alone electeth, that is, designs the person. The Bishops, as also the Clergy and people, approve of the Election. But, 'tis one thing to elect, another to approve of the Election. The Bishops approve, because it was their Office, after Baptism, to impose hands upon Neitarius, as yet a lay man and Catechumen. And heart too, we observe, the Canon was not followed: for according to the Canons, a Catechumen, nor Neophyte, could not be elected. The Clergy also, and the people do approve: because to them belonged the Trial, which, how far it differs from Election is showed above.  
Many examples we might allege, of Elections not Cunonicall, but Imperial. Why the Emperors themselves elected. we deny not they had peculiar causes; but this pertains not to the question of right, but prudence. Certainly, the Emperors believed it to be lawful for them, before they considered whether or no, it were expedient. For of things unlawful, there ought to be no consultation. 
23. Objections answered.  To say the cause hereof was some Divine revelation or inspiration, in such an age of the Church, is a mere refuge of pertinacious ignorance: to say, the Domination of the Roman Bishops, was the cause of Imperial elections, when as yet that Episcopacy was not turned into temporal Dominion, is to be quite mistaken in the order of times. Nor yet can we doubt, but the more Sanctimony abated in the Clergy, and Obedience was slackened in the people, the more just cause had the Highest Powers to vindicate Election to themselves. In the West, that Bishops were most often, and for a long time, elected by the most Christian Kings of France, without any suftrage of the people or Clergy, is written in all the French Histories, as it were with Sunbeams. What was said of the Domination of the Roman Bishops, as if he had given occasion to Kings to draw to themselves the Elections, besides that it is before answered, cannot be applied to the Bishops of France, and to those times, when the French Kings did not yet possess Italy. Yea, on the contrary, because the French Kings used this right in their own kingdom, therefore also in Italy did Charles the great assume this to himself, that he might not with less power govern Italy, than France and Germany. For, it is most truly observed by Godalstus and others, the Decree made in Pope Adrian's time, pertains only to the Italian Bishops, when in other parts, the complete right of Election was in Charles before. In vain also, a recourse is had to the wealth of Bishoprics, & the Temporal Jurisdictions annexed to them; for even in the times of Charles the Great, and much more in the ancient and purer times, Bishoprics were but poor and slender, as is noted by that most searching Antiquary, Onuphrius. And for Jurisdictions, the Bishops, in Charles his time, had none annexed to their Bishoprics: but this came into use at last, after the avulsion of Germany from France, when the Ottoes were Emperonrs in Germany. And, the Jurisdictions were so far from being the cause of Imperial Elections, that, on the contrary, therefore were Jurisdictions granted unto Bishops, because the Emperors were most assured of their fidelity, being chosen by themselves, and thought the custody of Cities might therefore most safely be committed to them: as the same Onuphrius hath observed. 
24. Of Investitures, by them is meant the Collation of Bishoprics.  Some have been deceived by the name of Investiture, Because the word is used of Fees especially, therefore have they thought all that is said of investitures of Bishops to belong to territories and Lands; which is a gross ●rrour; for, to vest and to invest, are old words of Germane Original, that signify the collation of any right whatsoever: and are therefore found in old Authors applied to all Offices both Civil and Ecclesiastical. It appears by a passage in the life of Romanus Bishop of Roven about the year 623. that Investiture by the staff was almost 300. years before Territories were given to Bishops; which began under Otto, the first Emperor of that name. And truly, if Investiture had been with respect to Civil Jurisdiction, it would have been by the Sceptre, Sword or Banner, as the manner of those times was, not by a ring and staff. Wherefore, although the most Christian Kings did not challenge to themselves imposition of hands, which maketh Presbyters; yet these two things they esteemed as their right, to join this man unto this Church, which is signified by the Ring; and to confer upon him Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical, that is, judgement concerning Sacred affairs with a certain public power, which is signified by the staff. For to the King himself also, when he was first consecrated, together with the Sceptre was wont to be given a staff. 
L. 5. c. 30.  And by this, saith Aimonius, the defence of the Churches, that is, a power to maintain Religion, was delivered to him from God; for the Offices corresponded to the signs: as also a Canon was vested by a Book. Many ages after, when piety had begotten opulency, and the daughter laid a snare for the mother, the Emperors, almost detruded from their most ancient right, began to show the indignity of the thing, by this argument among the rest, because the Bishops by their munificence possessed Lands and territories. But never did the Election of them depend upon this alone, being more ancient than the same munificence. Moreover, the accessary cannot have so much force, as to draw the principal after it: and besides, in some places, at this time, stipends out of the public succeed in place of Lands: and for all this the right of the Highest Powers remaineth the same it was. Therefore, by the name of Investiture, in the stories of those times, is not to be understood a naked sign; nor are Kings to be thought so unwise, that, for a bare rite or Ceremony they would have undertaken so many labours, and so many wars: but, with the sign, or by the sign, the thing signified must be conceived, that is, the Collation of Churches. Which Collation, it is certain, was made two ways: for, either the Kings by themselves, made Election freely, and without the suffrages of any other, or else, they granted others the right of clecting, the right of approving, not imaginary, but with a liberty to annul the Election, being reserved to them, selves. Both of these, Historians comprehend in the name of Investiture. Which right remained in the Emperors until the times of Hildebrand, who first laid violent hands upon it. Onuphrius Panuinus relating his life; He first of all the Roman Bishops attempted to deprive the Emperor, not only of the election of the Pope himself, which also Adrian the third had sometimes done; but of all Authority too, whereby he Constituted the other Prelates, to wit, the Bishops and Abbats. The Author here hath rightly explained Investiture by the name of Constitution.  
Those two things, whereof we said Investiture consisteth, that is, the power of choosing, and the Liberty of refusing, if the Bishop were chosen by any other, all writers approved for their diligence in this kind, have very well distinguished, and knit together in the Regal Right. Such a liberty of refusing I mean, which is not subject to the judgement of another, And indeed these Rights, both of election, and of rejection, are of great consequence to maintain both Church and State: but the former, of so much the greater moment, by how much it is more to oblige, the receiver of a benefit, than to exclude, an enemy. Paulus Aemilius, when he had declared how that right was extorted from the Emptrour Henry: 
25. Examples of the Kings of England.  That thing saith he, much weakened the Imperial Majesties, in the minds of his people; for he was devested of the better half of his Jurisdiction. And Onuphrius in the same manner: Half his Power was at once taken from the Emperor. The same Author elsewhere speaks of Henry the third This most excellent, right (so he calls Election) 〈◊〉 retained with all his might. Of the same mind were the Kings that buil● their power upon the ruins of the Roman Empire. To let pass others, let us hear, if you please, the King of England speak himself. Henry, the first of that name sina● the Conquest, granted the Bishopric of Winchester to William Gifford, and presently, against the statutes of a new Council, invested him with the possesions perraining to the Bishopric. The same Henry gave the Archbishopric of Canterbury to Ralf Bishop of London, and invested him by the ring and staff. This is that same Henry, who in the relation of Westminster, by William his procurator constantly alleged, that he would not, for the I●sse of his kingdom, lose the Investitures of Churehes; and affirmed the same in threatening words. Away with the unlearned Interpreters of History: who doth not see here that by Investitures is meant the collution of Bishoprics? The Parliament Statute also under Edward the third, giveth plain evidence for the fame, wherein is manifest, that the Royal Right to collate Bishoprics was in England more ancient, than the election of the Clergy. And Historics do give their testimony too: which declare how Bishoprics, were collated by Etheldred, and the most ancient Kings, seven hundred years ago. Afterward, elections were granted to the Clergy, under two conditions, which were observed likewise in Franses, that licence to elect were first obtained, and the election made were submitted to the King's pleasure. But in the later time the whole election was rendered to the King. In our time, there is an image of Election in the Chapters; the whole force of it is in the King. For, the Bishopric being void, the King, by his Letters, containing Licence to elect, transmitteth also the name of him, whom he would have elected.  
Bilson Bishop of Winchester discoursing with much diligence upon this Argument, in several places affirms that which is most true; That no particular form of Electing is prescribed by Divine Law: and seeing Princes are Heads of the people; and, both by Divine and Humane right, have the charge of all external and public administration, as well in Sacred as in Civil causes, committed to them these reasons necessarily evince, that the Elections are also committed to their trust; at least, if they be pleased to under take the burden. The same Author saith, It is as clear as the Sun; that other Princes, be side the Roman Emperors, since the first profession of Christian faith, not only had the Highest Power in Electing Bishops; but by their sole Authority Instituted whom they judged worthy of that honour, without expecting the suffrages of the Clergy or People. I will not add more examples or testimonies: either these are sufficient, or nothing is sufficient.  
Whosoever therefore, dares to condemn of Sacrilege, so many famous Kings, some whereof, first in their Kingdoms professed the Christian faith; some courageously resisted the Pope's ambition; some either began or promoted the Church's reformation; and among them many renowned for their holiness and learning: whosoever, I say, 
26. Pastors as well as Bishops may be Elected by the Highest Power.  dare account them sacrilegious, as if in electing Bishops they had violared the Law Divine, he shall not have me for an approver of his temerarious judgement. Now, whereas some, in this business of Election, distinguish the other Pastors from the Bishops, because indeed themselves live where no Bishops are, this difference comes to nothing. For such Pastors, although they have this common with mere Presbyters, that they are not over others; yet have they thus much of Bishops, that they are not under other Pastors; and so 'tis doubtful, whether they may be rather numbered among mere Presbyters, or Bishops. Moreover, seeing Presbytery is contained in Episcopacy, they that bestow the Bishopric, do withal bestow the Pastoral cure of a certain place or City, & something more: so that, the Argumentation rightly proceeds, as from the greater to the less, or rather from the whole to the part. 'Tis true, the ancient Emperors & Kings mixed themselves but little with the collation of Pastoral offices of inferior degree; the reason was, because they thought in reason, all that lesser care might be rightly commited to the Bishops, chosen either by themselves, or according to their Laws. And therefore, in the most ancient Canons, you shall hardly find anything of the Presbyters election, because all that business was at the Bishop's dispose as we have showed before.  

27. Examples hereof.  Yet are not examples wanting, whereby it may appear, that Ecclesiastical offices, of the lesser rank also, were collated by Kings. Onuphrius is witness, for the Emperors. An Epistle of Pope Pelagius, Bishop of Rome, is extant, which signifies, that the Sacred Letters of the most gracious Emperor were come unto his hands, requiring certain men to be made Presbyter, Deacon, and Subdeacon at Centumcells. The public Records of our own Country do abundantly witness, the Princes of Holland, Zealand, and West risia, even from the beginning of their Principality, have conferred, at their pleasure, upon fi●men, the Pastoral Gure of every City and Village, except in what places it could be proved, that the same right was granted away to others, and that Gustome. was kept until the times of the last War. These examples, although they be not ancient, are yet sufficient to refel those, who have adventured publicly to affirm, Pastors, until the very last times of the War, were chosen by the People. Here might be added, were it needful, very many Records of Investitures, whereby the Princes bestow upon Noble men, their Vassals, among other rights, also the Collation of Churches. And I, for my part, cannot understand, how it comes to pass, that the same right doth not still endure to this day: whether it be expedient, or where, and how far it is expedient, is another question. The States, in my opinion, by their pains taken in the Reformation, have not deserved to be in worse condition, then before they were. In the Palatinate, the Pastoral Cures are conferred by the Decree of a Senate, which by the command, and in the name of the Elector, hath government of the Churches. In the Dominion of Basil, the Churches without the City have no power at all in choosing their Pastor; whom the Magistrate of the City sends to feed them, him they receive with reverence, although they never heard him teach. In the beginning of the Reformation, they were content with this Call alone. It is the Saying of Musculus: 
Loc. Com. de Elect.  A Christian Pastor ought not to be solicitous about his Call, nor to doubt that it is Christian and lawful, where he is called to preach the Gospel, by the pious Magistrate or Prince. Wherefore the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches doth not deprive the Powers of this Divine Right. Neither have the States themselves ever been of another judgement; for, when in the year 1586, without the assent of the States, a Synod was held, the Earl of Leicester, Governor of these parts, to move the States to allow of the Synod, declared Nou. 16. That such allowance should be a detriment to no man, in respect of that right he challenged in the Institution of Pastors. And in the same year, Decemb. 9 the Acts of that Synod were admitted by the States, with some exceptions, whereof this is one: That the States, noblemans, and City Magistrates, and others should retain the right and Custom of Instituting and destituting Pastors, and Schoolmasters.  
Let us now give answer to the rest of the Objections, used to be brought against the Highest Powers in this regard. Some say, 
28. The Objection from the abuse of Right, answered.  that certain Kings and Princes have abused the Elections, either through a sordid love of gain, or through too much favour. It is too true; but to the determination of the question, 'tis impertinent; for, the abuse of right depriveth no man of his right; unless perhaps a subject, by the sentence of his Superior; much less, is a possible abuse sufficient to the loss of right. Then, no man shall be certain of any right whatsoever. But to speak the truth, there is a greater number of laudable Elections, which Kings have made. And on the contrary, by popular Elections, the matter often was brought unto Seditions and slaughters, to Sword and fire; nor is the Clergy always free from favour and faction, no not at this day. So that, if for fear of incommodities Elections may be overthrown, no kind thereof will be able to subsist. When Genebrard, an enemy to the Regal right, had said, the Bishops of Rome chosen by the Emperors were monsters of men, the contrary was showed by our side, that they were good men, at least in some mediocrity; 
Rainold. 187.  but from the Election of the Clergy and People came forth Monstces in●ee●. Moreover, the Greatness of the Highest Powers yields not to corruption so easily, as private men, nor is so obnoxious to unjust desires and importunity of Suitors. Lastly, Ordination, which remains with the Pastors, and the right of contradicting, which is left unto the people, shuts up the way, if not to all, which exceeds Humane Power, yet to the worst abuses.  

29. The Canons and Fathers answered.  The Canons are objected too, and some Sayings of the Fathers. That old Canon, which is the 30. in their number entitled Apostolical, speaks of Magistrates, not of Emperors; and as the Canon next before is opposed to nundinations, so this to violent intrusions. The Canon pertains to them, that being not lawfully examined and ordained invade the Church by force, by the Magistrates help and favour. So, the Parisian Synod disapproves not Election, but Ordination by the King; nor all the King's Authority, but that which is against the will of the Metropolitan and comprovincial Bishops, to whom the ordination did belong. For King Charibert himself, under whom this Synod was holden, elects Pascentius to the Bishopric of Poitiers, whom the Comprovincials received, as rightly chosen. And if the Canon bear another sense, yet is it nothing to the purpose. For, if it was made by the King's consent, it might be rescinded, either by himself, or by other Kings also, especially with the sentence of their Peers: because no positive Laws are immutable; but, if without the King's consent, than neither had that Canon the force of a Law, nor could the Regal right be impaired thereby. This is certain, since the Kings began to Elect Bishops, many Synods have been held in France, and not any one of them hath reprehended the Kings in that respect, but many have admonished the King, to use that study and care in choosing Pastors, which was meet. Whence it is evident, the Gallican Bishops never found any thing in that Election, contrary to the Laws Divine. 'Tis very improper for our men, to produce the Authority of the Nicene second Synod, whereby the worshipping of Images was introduced. And yet, the meaning of the Canons alleged thence, is no other, then of those we have already answered. That sharp speech of Athanasius against Constantius is alleged also; Who having received most grievous injuries, if he had uttered any thing, not so generally true, as accommodated to those times, what marvel is it? seeing other Fathers too, have let fall many words, which will not bear a rigid Examination. Yet doth not Athanasius, how hot soever in this cause, pretend any right Divine, but inquires, Where is that Canon, that a Bishop should be sent out of the Palace? He shows, what Constantius had done, was not Canonical: and rightly; for another way of Electing was then in use, and that confirmed by the Authority of the Nicene Synod, and by the Precepts of Constantine. Now, although for just causes, it be granted unto Kings, to recede from the Canon; yet to forsake the Canon, with intention of promoting to Episcopacy the favourers of the Arrian party, was not the part of a pious Emperor. This way of electing is the more justly reprehended, if Ordination also being omitted, Bishops were obtruded upon the Churches: which is very credible to have been done; for it was not probable, the Orthodox would ordain Arians, or such as used Collusion with them. Verily, not any one of the Fathers hath hitherto been found, who said, there was any Divine Law to hinder the King from choosing the Pastor. It appears, the most holy Bishops above mentioned, who condescended to the Election made by Theodosius were of another mind. And thus much be spoken of the Highest Powers embracing the true Religion.  

30. Touching the Right of Pagan Kings.  As to the Kings, that give no assent to the saving Faith, pious Assemblies never made address, unto them, for election of their Pastors. For how could they expect defence of the Church from the enemies of the Church. And, suppose the matter should succeed most happily, yet would it be an indecorum, that the Affairs of the Church should be judged before the unjust, 
1 Cor. 6.1.  and not before the Saints. Yea, if Kings that are aliens from the Faith, arrogate to themselves any such thing, without question they bring upon themselves the greater Judgement. Notwithstanding, if Infidel Kings will not at all admit any Pastor or Bishop, except Elected by themselves, and in the mean time leave to the Church the Probation, and to other Pastors the Imposition of hands, I cannot think it convenient for Christians, to refuse men, otherwise fit, for this only reason, because they are commended by Infidels. For the good God doth effect his good work, even by evil men. I am not a man of that confidence, that I dare condemn so many Christian Churches in Thrace, in Syria, in Egypt, which do receive Patriarches or lesser Bishops from the King of the Turks; and that this patience of the Christians is no new thing, is showed by Barlaamus Cyracensis. Clearly, 'tis better to entertain a worthy Pastor, adorned with good report of the common People, ordained by other Pastors, from the hand of a Prince, though an unbeliever, then to suffer the waist of Churches. Esdras, we are sure, did not decline the office of restoring God's worship, imposed on him by the Pagan King Artaxerxes.  
But, that we may return unto our own, that is, unto Christian Powers (for that was aspersed on the by, to give others occasion of better thoughts upon this business) we must advertise the Reader, that in all this Treatise, we inquire what is lawful, not what is at every time expedient. For, whether we reflect upon ancient or later times, we shall see great variety in the manner of election: nor only through ages and Provinces, but through years and particular Cities. So much uncertainty there is in that, which the Law Divine hath left uncertain. And truly, 
31. The best manner of Election.  where the question is not of the right, but of the best manner of Election, 'tis marvellous how many things may probably be discoursed on every part. Give me Cyprian, and those of his time, there will be no fear of popular election. Give me the Nicene Fathers, I would gladly ascribe the election unto Bishops. Give me such Emperors as Theodosius, Valentinian, and Charles the Great, there will be no danger in the election Regal or Imperial. But we are fallen into the lees of the Church, and after we have with circumspection viewed all things, we find nothing, but some incommodity is annexed to it. Therefore nothing at all can be here prescribed, as perpetual; That which is indefinite, 
Arist Eth. 9.14.  must have an indefinite Rule. Yet if I were in this respect to give my advice, the manner of Justinian's times is not displeasing to me, with this caution, that a Pastor be not obtruded upon the people against their will, and also saving the right of the Highest Powers to rescind and make void Elections, 
32. The Right of rescinding Elections reserved still to the H. Power.  if any error be committed, pernicious to the Church or Commonwealth. Which right, not only the French Kings, but also the ancient Roman Emperors very frequently have used, as is most easy to be proved.  
They do much err, who confound this will and pleasure of the H. Powers, whereby the Election made is approved, or disapporved with that consent, where with the Magistrate of every City, according to the Laws or Canons, concur to the Election, in the next place to the Clergy, and sometimes with the People. For, here is a wide difference. The pleasure of the Highest Powers is over the Election; the Magistrates consent is a part of the election. That agrees to the Highest Powers, as such; this to the Magistrates, by Positive Law; nor properly as Magistrates, but as an honoured part of the City. Therefore the Election by the Magistrates stays within the bounds of their City; but Emperors and Kings exercise their right, not only in Cities which they dwell in, and whose Churches they frequent; but, if they see it needful, through all places of their Dominions. Again, the Magistrates may be overcome with suffrages, the Highest Power cannot. Certainly, although the election be permitted to others, that right of free approbation cannot safely be abdicated by Him that rules in Chief. Also, 
33. And of exauctorating Pastors, if need be.  after Election made, the right of removing a certain person from the Ministry of a certain place, although it may be in others too, ought always to remain in the Highest Power. So Solomon ejected Abiath●r from being the Priest of God. So the Bishops of Rome were more than once deposed by the Imperial Power, as Bellarmine himself confesseth. The proof whereof is easy. For if the Highest Power hath right to interdict any one the City or Province, he must needs have a right also to interdict him, the Ministry of this City or Province. For this is included in that: and, in whose Power the whole is, in his power the part cannot choose but be. Nor only may the Highest Power do this by way of punishment, but by way of caution too: to wit, if any Pastor be drawn by the People into matter of tumult, which perhaps may come to pass without his fault. For, unless the Highest Power could do this, the Commonwealth were not sufficient to secure itself.  

34. Although chosen by others.  The last error is of those, that think it belongs unto the same Person, to elect and to remove. For the Highest Power may interdict, not only public acts, but private, too, to which it electeth not the Persons; namely, in negotiation, and conduction: as above is said, when we spoke of Jurisdiction, and is manifested by Examples. For, eight or more Roman Bishops, it is certain, have been deposed by Emperors, sometimes with a Synod, sometimes without, whereof a good part were elected by the Clergy and people of Rome.   

CHAP. XI.  
Concerning offices to the Church, not always necessary.  

1. Things necessary to be distingu●sh● 〈◊〉 ●ot necessary.  IT is of much concernment for the keeping of peace in the Churches, vt● distinguish accurately, between the things commanded by Divine Law, and the things not commanded. For, although the right or manner of regiment somewhat differs, thence will follow no divulsion of the Churches, as long as neither part ascribes to their own way, the authority of Divine precept. And this is the prihcipall cause, why we have taken so much pains to show, That manner of Election, which Kings and some pious Princes do at this time use, is not by Divine Law forbidden. Not, that we propose their examples to be imitated by others: for, other kinds of Election may be either by themselves more profitable, of at least to the disposition of the people, and state of some churches more fit; or else, if for no other cause, for the ancient custom sake, to be preferred: but, that we may not, by a temerarious censure, alienate from us the Kings, and the Churches too, by whom that manner is observed. What we have done concerning Election, the same we must do about the offices Ecclesiastical, which some of the late Reformed Churches use, and some use not; That is, We must declare, nothing is either way defined concerning them, by Precept of Divine Law; whereby, it will easily appear, The diversity of government ought not to be any obstruction to fraternal unity. Fully to understand the right of the Highest Powers, this Discourse is very necessary; for, in things determined by Divine Precept, a necessity of execution lies upon the Highest Power; in other things there is left some liberty of choice. And, as we have said afore, The Ecclesiastical Government for the most part is conformable to the Political, which was also observed by the King of Great Britain, a Prince of excellent wisdom.  
Now, the principal Controversy amongst the Protestants, is about the Episcopal eminence, and about their office, who being not Pastors, that is, neither preach, nor administer the Sacraments, yet are Assessors, 
3. Of Bishops and Lay-Elders.  or assistants unto Pastors, and by some are styled Presbyters, or Elders. Let us consider of both, so far as our design permits; for, these questions are so largely handled by others, that scarce any thing remains to be added. Especially, the most learned Beza, having undertaken the defence of the Gonevian Discipline, hath, according to the fertilty and vigour of his wit, copiously expressed, what might be said both for those Assessors, and against the Bishops: And, on the other side, they that extol the Anglican Church, Saravia and the Bishop of Winchester have disputed very smartly, as well for the Bishops, as against those Assessors. So that, whoever would have perfect intelligence of these matters, are to be remitted to their Books. For our parts, Our endeavour being to lessen, not to widen, the difference, we will contract, into a few determinations, all that is either confessed on both sides, or may be so clearly proved that it cannot be gainsaid by any, but the contumacious.  

3 The word shop● plain Here ●●ken so the O●●sver ●●stors.  In the first place for Bishops; we take leave to use the word in that signification, wherein the Synods Universal and Topical, and all the Fathers have always used it. In the Apostolical times, it is certain, though the Functions were distinct, the names were not. For, the Function of the Apostles is called Presbytery, and Episcopacy, and Diaconary, nor is any thing more usual, than for the generical name, by some particular right, to adhere to one of the species; as in adoption, cognation, and other words of the Law appears. And so, the name of Bishop, when in the nature of the word it signifies any Inspector, Overseer, and Prepositus, or (as Jerom translates it) supra-attendent (for the Septuagint also have rendered the Hebrew word, which is given to Magistrates, by the name of Bishop; and among the Athenians the foreign Praetor, among the Romans the municipal Aediles were called by this name; and Cicero saith Himself was made Bishop of the Campanian coast;) this name by the Apostles, and Apostolical men, according to the use of the Hellenists, was given to any Pastors of the Church, Nevertheless, by a certain proper and peculiar right, it might be assigned to them, who, as with the rest they were Overseers of all the Flock, so above the rest were constituted Inspectors of the Pastors also. Wherefore they abuse their own time and other men's, who having undertaken to discuss the question, take much pains to prove the name of Bishop common to all the Pastors: when as the word is of a larger signification much. They also do but beat the air, who with great endeavour prove, that unto all Pastors whatsoever certain things were common, namely, the right to Preach, to exhibit the Sacraments, and the like. For, the question is not of these things wherein they do agree, but of that eminence whereby they are distinguished. And, that is yet somewhat more absurd, that some, to prove Bishops differ nothing from mere Presbyters, bring in the Fathers for their witnesses, That Bishops are all of equal merit: as if you did say, That all the Roman Senators were equal to the Consuls, because the dignity of both the Consuls was equal. But he is angry with himself, or with his Reader, who refutes such things.  

4 Bishops not against God's word.  Concerning Episcopacy then, that is, the eminence of one Pastor among the rest, this is our first Assertion, That it is repugnant to no Law Divine. If any one be of a contrary opinion, that is, if any one condemn all the ancient Church of folly, or even of impiety; without question, it lies upon him to prove it: and for proof I see nothing alleged but this: Whosoever will be great among you, 
Mat. 20.26. Mar. 10.44.  let him be your Minister: and whosoever of you will be chief, shall be the servant of all. But certainly, all eminence or Primacy of Pastors among Pastors is not here interdicted: but all Pastors are admonished, that they may know, that a Ministry is enjoined them, not an Empire given. For the precedent words are, They that rule over the Gentiles exercise Lordship over them; and their Great ones exercise Authority upon them; But so shall it not be among you. From this place we may much rather argue for Eminence and Primacy, than against it. For that which is in Matthem and Mark, Whosoever will be great, and the chief, is in Luke, He that is greatest among you: He that is the Precedent, or leader. Moreover, Christ exhorts them by his own example: The son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister. Wherefore, the precept of Ministering doth not hinder, but one may be greater than they to whom he Ministereth. Ye call me, saith Christ, Lord and Master: and ye say well; 
Jo. 13.13, 14.  for so I am. Therefore if I your Lord and Master have washed your feet, ye ought also to wash one another's feet. And how could Christ disapprove the disparity of Ecclesiastical Offices, when himself had appointed LXX. Evangelists, of a second order and lesser degree, 
Ad Fabiol.  as Jerom speaketh in dignity inferior to the Apostles, as Calvin saith. Much more clearly, triumphing now in Heaven, 
Eph. 4.11.  He hath given some Apostles, and some Prophets, some Evangelists, some Pastors and Doctors: not only distinct in Functions, but by certain degrees also. For God hath given in the Church, first Apostles, in the second place Prophets, in the third Doors. The very Deaconry, by the Apostles instituted, is sufficient to prove, that Christ had not commanded an equality of Churchmen. Therefore, we set down this first, as a thing of undoubted verity; Wherein we have Lanchius, Chemnitius, Hemingius, Calvin, Melanchthon, Bucer, all consenting with us; yea, and Beza too, so far as to say, That some one chosen by the judgement of the other Presbyters, should be and remain Precedent of the Presbytery, cannot, nor ought not to be reprehended.  

5. Bishop's always in the Catholic Church.  Secondly, we determine, That the Episcopacy we speak of, hath been received by the Universal Church. This appears out of the Universal Councils; whose Authority, even now, among pious men is very Sacred. It appears also, by comparing Synods either national or Provincial; whereof there is hardly one to be found, but it carries in the forehead manifest signs of Episcopal eminence. All the Fathers, none excepted, testify the same. Among whom, the least friend to Episcopacy is Jerom, being himself not a Bishop, but a Presbyter. His testimony therefore alone sufficeth: It was decreed all the world over, that one chosen from among the Presbyters should be set over the rest, to whom all the care of the Church should pertain. Yea, so universal was this Custom, that it was observed oven among the Heretics, which went our of the Catholic Church; All these things, saith the Author of the Homilies upon Matthew, which are proper to Christ in verity, have Heretics also in their Schism, Churches, Scriptures, Bishops, and other orders of the Clergy, Baptism, Eucharist, and all things else. Certainly, this error of Aerius was condemned of all the Church, that he said, A Presbyter ought to be discerned from a Bishop by no difference. Jerom himself, to him who had written, There is no difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter, answers, 'Tis spoken as ignorantly, as one would wish; you have, as the Proverb is, made shipwreck in the Haven. Lastly, Zanchius also acknowledgeth the consent of the whole Church in this point.  

6. Bishops in the time of the Apostles.  Our third determination is, That Episcopacy had its beginning in the Apostolical times. Witness the Catalogues of Bishops in Irenaeus, Eusebius, Socrates, Theodoret, and others, all which begin from the Apostles age; now to derogate faith, in an Historical matter, from so great Authors, and so consenting together, it cannot but be the mark of an irreverent and pertinacious mind. It is all one, as if you should deny the truth of that, which all the Roman Histories deliver, That the Consulship began from the expulsion of the Tarquins. But let us again hear Jerom: At Alexandria, saith he, from Mark the Evangelist, the Presbyters always elected one from among themselves, placed him in a higher degree, and called him Bishop. Mark deceased in the 8. of Nero: to whom, (John the Apostle being yet alive,) succeeded. Anianus, to Anianus Abilius, to Abilius Cerdo. The same Apostle surviving after the death of James, Simcon had the Bishopric of Jerusalem; after the death of Peter and Paul, Linus, Anacletus, Clemens Held that of Rome; Evodius and Ignatius, that of Antioch. Surely, this Antiquity is not to be contemned: whereunto Ignatius himself, the coetanean of the Apostles, and his next followers Justin Martyr and Irenaeus yield most apparent testimonies, which need not be transcribed. We will end this with Cyprian: Now, saith he, through all Provinces, and through every City are appointed Bishops.  

7. Bishops allowed by the word of God.  Our fourth is this; This Episcopacy is approved by Divine Law: or, as Bucer speaks, it seemed good unto the Holy Ghost, that One among the Presbyters should be charged with a singular care. The Divine Apocalyps affords an irrefragable argument to this assertion; for Christ himself commands to write unto the seven Angels of the Asian Churches. Who by Angels Understand the Churches themselves, they manifestly contradict the Holy Scriptures. For the Candlesticks are the Churches, saith Christ, and the stars are the Angels of the seven Churches. 'Tis a wonder, how far men are transported by the spirit of Contradiction, when they dare confound things, so openly distinguished by the Holy Spirit. We deny not, but every Pastor, in a general signification, may be capable of this title of Angel; but, here 'tis manifestly written to One in every Church. Was there but one Pastor in every City? No sure; for even from the time of Paul, at Ephesus, 
Act. 20.17, 18.  were many Presbyters ordained to feed the Church of God. Why then is the Letter sent to One in every Church, if no One had a peculiar and eminent Function? Under the name of Angel, saith Austin, is commended the Governor of the Church. The Angels are the Precedents of the Church, saith Jerom. If any had rather hear the modern Writers, let Bullinger speak; The heavenly Epistle is destined to the Angel of the Church of Smyrna, that is, the Pastor. Now Histories do witness, that Angel or Pastor of the Church of Smyrna Polycarpus was ordained Bishop of the Apostles, namely by St John, and lived in the Ministry of this Church 86. years. What Bullinger relates of Polycarpus is confirmed by Irenaus, Tertullian, and other Ancients, who say, We have the Churches nourished by John: for though Martion reject his Apocalyps, yet the Order of Bishops recounted to its Original, will stand upon John the Author. Let Marorat also speak; John began with the Church of Ephesus, for the celebrity of the place; nor doth he address himself unto the people, but the Prince of the Clergy, that is, the Bishop. Haply, Beza's Authority, or Rainolds will be more accepted; See therefore, what favour the Truth found with them. Beza, To the Angel, that is, to the Precedent, who was in the first place to be admonished of these things, and by Him his other Colleagues and all the Church. Rainold; 
Colloq. cum Harto, c. 8. S.  In the Church of Ephesus, although there were many Presbyters and Pastors for the administration thereof yet One was over those many; whom our Saviour calls the Angel of the Church, and writes the things to him, which others from him might learn. Certainly, if it be well said by Dio Prusoeus, that Kings are the Genii of their Kingdoms; and in Holy Scripture, Kings are styled by the name of Angels, who sees not, that this name is also, by an excellent right, agreeable to the Prince of Presbyters. Christ therefore, writing to those Bishops, as men Eminent in the Cergy, without all question hath approved this eminence of Episcopacy.  
To let pass the Annotations after the second Epistle to Timothy, and that to Titus, which are found in the most ancient Greek Copies: Concerning Timothy, hear the writer, 
8. A place of Ambrose examined.  supposed Ambrose, whose words are these: Timothy created Presbyter by himself, the Apostle called Bishop, because the prime. Presbyters were so entitled; of whom One receding, the next succeeded; but, because the following Presbyters began to be found unworthy to hold the Primacy, that method was altered by a Council, providing, that merit not seniority should Create a Bishop, ordained by the judgement of many Priests; to the end, an unworthy person might not unadvisedly usurp the place, and so become a scandal to many. He saith, the primacy of Timothy among the Presbyters is acknowledged by the Apostle. Whereas some learned men would hence set up a certain circular praesidency, herein they are opposed by all the ancient Monuments, that are extant: nor do the words of Ambrose help them; for, receding is all one with dying, or departing. And, whereas the Courses of the Priests are brought hither to establish this Interpretation, 
L●. 1.8.  any one may see with half an eye, how impertinent it is, when those Courses make nothing toward presidency, which was always in the Highpriest, and other Chief of their Classes. But the alleged Writer his meaning is, that Seniority in age, or rather in Function was valued in the making of Bishops. Wherein, although none of the Ancients be on his side, yet, if we understand him of certain Churches, what he saith is not incredible. For, 
Justin. Nou. 123.  also the Archimandrits, or chiefe of Hermitages, at the Commencement of Monachism, were elected according to that Order. To believe him of all Churches, Jeroms testimony of the Alexandrian Custom will not permit. The same Writer, 
9 Timothy and Titus were Bishops.  concerning Timothy; Timothy now Created Bishop, he institutes by epistle, how he ought to govern the Church. Concerning Titus. Titus, the Apostle Consecrated an Apostle, and so admonisheth him to be solicitous for the well ordering of the Church. No other are the judgements concerning Titus, & Timothy, of Epiphanius, Eusebius, Chrysostom, Oecumenius, Theodoret, Theophilact, Primasius, as by producing their words hath been demonstrated by others. Yea, the Ecumenical Synod of Chalcedon saith; After S. Timothy, 
Actione 11 , until now, have been made xxvii. Bishops, all ordained in Ephefus. For, Antiquity did not believe, what of late some with confidence aflirm, that they who were Evangelists could not be created Bishops. As long as they walked about the Provinces, they did the office of Evangelists; but when beholding in one place a plentiful harvest, they thought fit to cherish it with their longer Presence, doubtless, being precedents to the Presbytery, they performed all offices Episcopal. Upon which reason, Antiquity believed, that the Apostles also were truly Bishops of certain Cities namely, in those places where they made longer stay, or to speak more properly, 
Act. 18.11.  where they sat; by which word, Luke hath very emphaticully expressed, Paul's abode with the Corinthians. Besides, Timothy and Titus, we read of others, advanced by the Apostles, into the Episcopal throne. Concerning Evodius, thus to the Antiochians writes Ignatius; He first, by the Apostles hands, was promoted to our presidency. What presidency that is, is not left doubtful by Ignatius, who every where distinguisheth the Bishop from the Presbyters, and prefers him above them. You must do nothing without the Bishop, but be subject to his Presbytery. And in another place; The reverend Presbytery, being dear to God, is so fitted to the Bishop, as the strings to the Harp. And again in another place; What is the Bishop, but the Prince; and the Presbyters, but his Counselors? This is that Ignatius, who saw Christ in the flesh; who lived with the Apostles; who, next after Evodius, was Bishop in the Church of Antioch.  

10. Bishops styled Angels, Apostles, Presidents.  A question may be made, when as their office, who were over the Presbyters by a certain perpetual dignity, is so ancient, and approved by Christ himself; by what name was that Honour entitled, before the common name of Bishops began peculiarly to be ascribed unto this Presidence which, as Jerom thinks, began about the viij year of Nero. The ancient Fathers are of opinion, that those Princes of the Presbyters were styled Apostles. And truly, there remain in Cyprian and other Authors, not a few obscure prints of this locution; Yea, Paul himself, when he saith, He was nothing less than the chief of the Apostles, seems to intimate, there were some other Apostles of lesser mark. That the name of Angel was anciently given to him, who afterward began to be called Bishop the Apocalypse evinceth. For, it appears the word was taken, as of common use, because those Letters are popularly written, and the Mystery of the Stars is explained by the appellation of Angels, as being very obvious; but, the most simple and plain denomination, seems to have been that of Precedent; for, by this name, Justin Martyr calls the Bishop, in his second Apology.  

11. Patterns of Bishops in the natural Law, in the Mosaical, but most probably the Rulers of Synagogues.  Another question may be, By what example Episcopal Eminence was brought into the Churches. It is certain, there were degrees of Priests among the Heathens; that the Custom was not new to the Grecians, and such as sprang from Greece, we learn by the most ancient discipline of the Druids, One, saith Caesar, is Precedent to the Druids, who hath amongst them the chief Authority. And how ancient the Emmence of Mother Cities, in matters of Religion, is, we learn out of Thucydides, where he speaks of the Corcyreans, a Colony of the Corinthians; upon which passage, the old Scholiast notes, It was the Custom to receive High Priests from the Metropolis. Strabo names one Priest of the Cattis, who was, we make no doubt, the highest; and among the Burgundians the greatest Priest is mentioned by Marcellinus. This custom, God himself approved by the legal Constitution of the Judaical Republic; when he set up One, with highest Authority, over all the Priests. Who, although in some acts he was a Type of Christ, yet the whole Institution of this Pontificate, is not to be referred to this end alone. This eminence of one Priest, served for Order also, as well as the Regal Power, which did also, in its way, adumbrate Christ. Although then, this example might suffice; yet to me, the Constitution of the Christian Church, seemeth not so much expressed, according to the pattern of the Temple at Jerusalem, as of the Synagogues. For the Synagogues were, in many places, without any Commanding Power; as neither the Church of Christ hath any by itself. Add hereunto, that wheresoever the Apostles came, they found Synagogues well enough ordered, even from the times if the Babylonian dispersion: which, if they would receive the Faith of Christ, (as to them the Gospel was Preached before others) there was no cause, why they should depart from that Government, that the experience of many ages did commend: nor was it any burden to the Gentiles, in such a matter, to accommodate themselves to the Jewish institutions. Now in every Synagogue, it is certain, there was one, who by the Greekish Jews was called the Ruler of the Synagogue: which name occurs frequently, both in the Gospel and the Acts; 
Lu. 8.41.  and every where the Prince of the Synagogue is designed by it. Only, one place is excepted; 
Acts 13.15.  where, the word being taken in a larger sense, in one Synagogue are named more Rulers, that is, both he, who (as the Hebrew Masters teach us) was the Prince, who answers to our Bishop; and then the Pastors, which Office and name remains in the Christian Church; and the Elemosynaries, which are like unto our Deacons. Wherefore in that one place the Pastors joined to the chief of the Synagogue are called the Rulers. So, in the new Testament often, the High Priest, with those next unto him, are called the chief Priests, and in Jeremy, the ancients of the Priests. 
Jerem. 19.1.  These Rulers of the Synagogues had others over them, which were called Primates; 
L. ult. Cod. Theod. de Jud.  in either Palestine one, and others in other Provinces. And thus much be spoken by the way, to illustrate the original of Bishops.  
Our fifth Assertion is, Episcopacy hath been the springhead, 
12. Bishops of great use to the Church.  whence many commodities have flowed into the Church. The History of all times proclaims it: but I will again use him for my witness, who in all Antiquity was the least friend of Bishops, that is, Jerom: In the whole world, saith he, it was decreed, that for the taking away of Schisms and divisions, one being elected from among the Presbyters, should be set above the rest. In another place. The Church's safety consisteth in the dignity of the chiefest Priest, that is, the Bishop: to whom if there be not given a Superior power over all the rest, there will be made so many Schisms in the Church, as there be Priests. Nor is it any thing else, which Cyprian doth so frequently inculcate: Whence have Schisms and Heresies arisen, and do still arise in the Church, but while the Bishop which is one, and the Governor of the Church, by the proud presumption of some men is contemned. And elsewhere: Heresies have no other Rise, and Schisms no other beginning, but hence, that obedience is not given to God's Priest; nor is one Priest and Judge for the time, in the steed of Christ elected. Not only single Assemblies, by the presidence of one, were guarded against Schisms, but as the same Cyprian saith, The Universal Church was coupled together by the chain of Priests, linked to one another and united. For, the whole Christian world was preserved in concord, by commerce of those Letters, which were called formate. And so much for Episcopal eminence.  

13. Bishops are not by Divine command.  To proceed: On behalf of the equality of Pastors, we have these things to say, not repugnant to those afore. First, The Episcopal eminence is not of Divine precept. This is proved enough, because the contrary is not proved. For Christ is no where read to have commanded it. Indeed, he approved it in the Apocalypse: but it follows not, Because he did approve it, Therefore he did command it. Episcopacy is of Apostolical institution, because it appears, in some Church's Bishops were ordained or approved by the Apostles: but the Apostles never commanded, that such Bishops should be in every Church. By which distinction, we separate Jeroms case from the case of Aerius. Jerom saith, The Bishops became greater than the Presbyters, by custom rather than by the Lords dispose: As also Austin, Episcopacy is greater than Presbytery, according to the titles of honour which the Church hath used. When the Fathers speak of Custom, they exclude not Apostolical institution; yea, as Austin saith, 
Epist. 19  What is observed in the Universal Church, nor is instituted by Councils, but hath been always kept, is most rightly believed, to have been delivered by no less Authority than Apostolical. But, as we have elsewhere said, it is not presently of Divine precept, whatsoever is instituted by the Apostles; for many things are instituted, with reservation of a Liberty to make a change. That the people should with a clear voice say Amen at the end of prayers. That the Preacher should be uncovered, was a Constitution in the Apostolical Church: Which in many places now, we see, is not observed. Moreover, the Apostles so appointed Bishops, that they left certain Churches without Bishops: as Epiphanius acknowledges, There was need of Presbyters and Deacons; for by these two the Ecclesiastical Offices may be complete; but where none was found worthy of the Episcopacy, the place remained without a Bishop; but, where was need; and they were worthy of the Episcopacy, Bishops were ordained. Those Churches therefore, as Jerom speaks, were governed by the common Counsel of the Presbyters.  

14. Not always one Bishop in every City.  This we shall add in the second place, It was not universally observed that one Bishop should be over every City. Of the Apostles time, we suppose it is already proved. And afterward, more Bishops than one were in the same City, in imitation of the Jews, who had as many chief Rulers as they had Synagogues; but in one City often times were many Synagogues, or (as Philo calls them) Proseuche, places of prayer. 
Acts 6.9.18.8.17.  So, at Jerusalem, was one Synagogue of Libertines, another of the Cyrenians, a third of the Alexandrians. And at Corinth, about the same time, were named two chief Rulers of Synagogues, Crispus and Sosthenes. Epiphanius declares, it was instituted first at Alexandria, that in the whole City should be but one Bishop. At last in the VIII. Nicene Canon, we see it was defined, That there should not be two Bishops in any City: yet so, that withal it appears, the Canon was sometimes dispensed with. For, the Canon permits, that Bishops returning from the Sect of the Cathari, to the Catholic Church, should retain Episcopal honour, next to the Catholic Bishop. So, the Ephesin Synod, after the Election of Theodorus, grants that honour to Eustachius, as appears by an Epistle to the Synod of Pamphilia: and, in the conference before Marcellinus, the Catholics offer the same unto the Donatists, if they would return unto Communion; Every one of us, receiving an associate of his honour, may sit with greater eminence, the peregrine Bishops sitting by as a Collenge. Valerius also, in the Church of Hippo, assumed Austin to himself. Which, although Austin saith 'twas done through ignorance of the Canons, appears yet to have been a thing not unheard of afore, much less believed repugnant to the Law Divine. Moreover, the Episcopal Chairs, in many Cities, were often void, not for some months only, but many years together; all which time, The Churches, that I may again speak with Jerom, were governed by the Common Counsel of the Presbyters: or, as Ignatius saith, 
Epist. ad Annoch.  The Presbyters fed the flock, until God should show them one to govern them. To the Roman Clergy, we see, Cyprian wrote many Letters, and the Clergy answered him, concerning all things pertaining to the State of the Church. Furthermore, all the ancients do confess, there is no act, except Ordination so proper to the Bishop, but it may be exercised by the Presbyter. chrysostom and Jerom are very clear in this point. And, 
15. In whom is the right o● Ordination.  although in the judgement of these Fathers, the right of Ordination is denied Presbyters; which may be seen in the constitutions of many Synods partly Universal, partly topical: yet, why may not this be understood, that the Presbyters could ordain none, in contempt of the Bishop. That they did in some sort concur to Ordinations with the Bishop, seems to appear by the IV. Synod of Carthage: When a Presbyter is ordained, the Bishop blessing him, and holding his hand upon his head, let all the Presbyters also, that are present, hold their hands upon his head, by the Bishop's hand. For the confirmation hereof, I dare not bring that of Paul, concerning the laying on of hands of the Presbytery, because I perceive, Jerom, Ambrose, and other ancient, and, the Prince of all recent writers, Calvin, interpret Presbytery in that place, not the consistory, but the Office to which Timothy was promoted. And truly, whosoever is versed in the Councils, and the writings of the Fathers, cannot be ignorant, Presbytery, as Episcopacy and Diaconacy, to be names of Offices. And, seeing it is certain, that Paul laid hands on Timothy, it seemeth neither necessary nor convenient, to join fellows with him for an Apostolical act, and Collation of miraculous gifts. In the mean time, I do not see, how this can be refelled, (even among the Schoolmen, Antisiodorensis long since granted it:) where Bishops are not, Ordination may be rightly made by Presbyters. For, the things that are observed for order sake, admit exceptions. So, in the ancient Council of Carthage, it is permitted Presbyters in case of necessity, to reconcile penitents: and in another place, to lay hands on the Baptised. Moreover, as we have said above, it is doubtful, whether Presbyters, that neither have Presbyters under them, nor a Bishop over them, are nearer to Bishops or more Presbyters. For, of Timothy also, Ambrose argues thus, He that had not an other above him was a Bishop. And, we know, (to take an instance in the Commonwealth) many things are lawful for a Senate having not a King, which to a Senate under a King's Power, are unlawful. For, a Senate without a King is as it were a King.  

16. For what reasons Bishops were laid by in some Churches.  This is our third Assertion: The causes were not light, why, in this age, in some places, at least for some time, Episcopacy was omitted. That the causes are temporary, Beza himself seems to acknowledge, when he saith, He is not the man, to think the old order were not be restored, if the ruins of the Church were once repaired. Of these causes, the first might be the penury of men, sufficient for so grave an Office; for, if that were a cause just enough, while the Church was young, to omit, in many places, the Episcopal eminence, as we heard Epiphanius say; why then, at the Churches Rise out of the thickest darkness, might not the same cause take place, especially in those places, where was found not one of the old Bishops, that would yield up himself to truth, and open his eyes to see the light held forth. Another cause of this omission, might be the long and inveterate depravation of the Episcopal Office. Socrates of old complains, some Episcopacies of his time had exceeded the bounds of Sacerdotal purity, and were corrupted into Domination. Hierax complains in Pelusiot, the Dignity of lenity and meekness was advanced into Tyranny. Nazianzen complains of the ambition of Bishops, and for that reason wisheth, if not Episcopacy, yet at least that perpetual right of Cities in retaining Episcopal dignity, were changed: Would to God, there were neither Presidency nor preeminence of place, nor tyrannical power; that we might all receive our estimate by virtue alone. The Fathers of the Ephesin Synod long since profess themselves afraid, lest that, under the colours of the Sacred Function, should commence the pride of secular power. And it is easy to find the like sayings in the African Councils. But verily, never did Ecclesiastical ambition, from the Apostles age unto those times, advance to such a height, as it hath done since those times, to the memory of our Fathers. So that now, without cutting off the part wherein the cause lieth, the disease seems almost impossible to be cured. It is true, good things are not to be condemned because some men abuse them: yet the abuse being turned into a custom, an intermission of the things themselves is not infrequent. The Mosaical Serpent might have remained without Superstition, if the thing itself were considered: but Ezechiah respecting the grown vice of the people, that he might take away the Superstition, took away the Serpent. I am loath to say, that the name and eminence Episcopal, by their fault, to whom it had fallen, had lost all its reverence, and was come into the odium of the common people; to whom, even when they are in error, somewhat sometimes is to be yielded. The Romans, being evil entreated by the Tarquins, took an oath, they would no more endure a King at Rome. A third cause may be added, that in those most infestious times, the Preachers of the truth, being hated for the truth's sake, were obliged to acquit themselves, not only from the crime of ambition, but from all suspicion too; which when by taking away the Episcopal dignity they solicitously endeavoured, for all this, they escaped not the calumny of their adversaries. What reproaches should they not have heard, had the change of Doctrine been joined with the acquisition of preferment? I will add one cause more, why, in the beginning of the Repurgation, Episcopacy was not very necessary. God had raised up excellent men, of great wit, of great learning, of great esteem, both among their own, and the neighbouring people: few indeed in number, but such as were able to bear the weight of many businesses: Their high reputation amongst all, easily supplied the defect of Episcopacy. But, (if we will with Zanchy-confesse the plain truth,) none were indeed more truly Bishops than they, whose Authority (although this was not their design) prevailed even to the overthrow of Bishops. Nor is that here to be omitted, which we have said already more than once, The Ecclesiastical Government, for the most part, receives some impression from the Civil. In the Roman Empire, the Bishops were correspondent to the Dukes, the Metropolitans to the Precedents, the Patriarches or Primats to the Vicars or Deputies of the Emperor. What marvel is it then, if people more accustomed to an Optimacy than Monarchy, would have the Church affairs committed rather to the Clergy, than the Bishop? And these are the causes, wherefore I think the Churches may be excused, which have no Bishops: whilst yet they abstain from a disapprobation of the most Sacred order, and withal retain, what Beza judged in no wise to be omitted: That was Essential, saith he, 
De Minister. ●vang. Grad. cap. 23.  which by the perpetual ordainance of God, hath been, is, and shall be necessary; that in the Presbytery some one, both in place and dignity the first, oversee and govern the action, by that right which God hath given him.  
Let us come unto those Assessors, whom in many places we see joined to the Pastors out of the people, by an annual or biennial Office. They call them Presbyters, when yet they neither Preach the Gospel to the people, nor exhibit the Sacraments. Concerning them, this is our judgement.  

17. Lay-Elders, none in the Apostolical ●ime.  First we say, Those temporary Presbyters are strangers to the Apostolical and ancient Church: nor have I seen any, that would affirm, much less could prove, that they were known of old. Tertullian prescribing against Heretics, among other things declares, how much their temerarious, inconstant, light Ordinations differ from the Rule of the ancient Church: This day, saith he, the man is a Presbyter, who to morrow is a laic: Nothing could be more clearly said, to make it appear, that temporary Presbyters were in those times unkown to the Catholic Church. It is not, say some, material to the nature of the Office, whether it be undertaken for a time, or for ever. If this be so, I may wonder, that Pastors also, employed in the word and Sacraments, are not made Annual somewhere. But if this be absurd, whence I pray, but because, as the gifts of God are without repentance, so the Divine Offices were instituted by him for the perpetual uses of the Church? He that hath put his hand to the Blow, and looketh back, is not sit for the kingdom of God: that is, for the ministry of the Church. Wherefore, this very change of Assessors, is no light argument, that this is an invention of Humane prudence, no institution of Law Divine.  

18. All the ancients by Presbyters understand only Pastors. The ambiguity of the word Seniors and Elders.  Secondly, All the ancient Church, by the name of Presbyters, urder stood no other men, but Pastors employed in the word and Sacraments. I speak not of the word old men, or Seniors and Elders: whereby, 'tis certain, sometimes age, sometimes Magistracy is meant: but, of the Greek word, which in the Latin tongue doth always signify the Pastoral dignity and Office: and so it do●h also in the Greek Authors, wheresoever the word Presbyter notes any thing else but age or Magistracy. We are not yet come to that place of Paul, which belongs rather to the question of Divine Right: and of the Elders of the old Testament, there will be place to speak hereafter. Of so great a number of Fathers, of so many volumes of books, after so long canvasing of this controversy, not so much as one place hath been alleged, wherein the Presbyterial dignity is ascribed to any other than Pastors; When yet, if there had been two sorts of Presbyters, not often, but a hundred, yea a thousand times mention of them ought to have been made especially in the Canons, which describe unto us the whole Government of the Church; at least the manner of electing those Presbyters, non-Pastors, would somewhere show itself. And although the Defendant, or he that is on the Negative, is not to make proof; yet were it easy to produce infinite places of the Fathers, which attribute to all Presbyters the right of feeding the flock, of Baptising, and exhibiting the Lords body; and, so far, equal all the Presbyters to Bishops, and call them the Apostles Successors: which also declare, the Presbyters punishment was, to be removed from the Presbytery, or for a time to be admitted only to the Communion of the Laics: which farther show, that maintenance was given to every one, and a much severer Discipline prescribed for them than others. Moreover Laws are extant too, of the Presbyters Privileges, and immunity from Civil Courts and burdens; and many other things there are, which will not suffer us to acknowledge any Presbyters, but Pastors only.  

19 The Penitentiary Presbyter.  Some allege a History of the penitentiary Presbyter, and sharply reprehend the abrogation of him; which yet, at other times, they like very well, when the Popish Confession is opposed. But who ever heard of any Penitentiary, that was not a Pastor? or, when did the ancients ever believe, that the use of the Keys might be separated from the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments? Certainly, Christ gave the Keys to them to be used, to whom he gave power to Preach and to Baptism. What God hath joined, let no man put a sunder. Ambrose, 
De penitent. 1.6.2.  of the right of binding and losing, saith, This right is permitted only to the Priests; and elsewhere, Those Keys of the kingdom of Heaven, all we Priests have received in the Blessed Apostle Peter. Jerim of these, that succeed in the Apostolical degree, They, saith he; having the Key, judge before the day of judgement; and in the same place, It is no easy matter to stand in the place of Paul, to keep the degree of Peter. chrysostom, This bond of the Priests tieth the very soul. 
20. Pastor's may be called Priests.  No man is ignorant, that the Fathers by Sacerdotes, or Priests, do mean Pastors, to whom the Word and Sacraments are entrusted: indeed, beside the use of the new Testament, but not without Authority of Scripture; for in Esay God foretelling the calling of the Gentiles by the Gospel, saith, 
Is. 66.21.  And I will also take of them (the converted Gentiles) for Priests, and for Levits. Wherefore, the exercise of the Keys, and the Right to absolve penitents, according to the judgement of all the Fathers, agree to Priests alone, that is, to Presbyters, the Depositaries of the Word and Sacraments. Wherefore also, these Presbyters, who specially attended to the absolving of Penitents, are to be thought no other than Priests, whom the new Testament styleth Pastors.  
Now, as the word Presbyter, when it signifies a Function Ecclesiastical, is never found in the Fathers applied to other than Pastors; so neither is the Latin word Seniors. 
21. Who are the Seniors in Tertullian.  Tertullian speaking of the use of the Keys, judgement is given, saith he, with great Gravity, as in the presence of God; and it is a very great prejudgement of the future judgement, if any one hath so affended, as to be excluded from Common Prayer, and the Assembly, and all holy commerce. The most approved Seniors are the Precedents, having obtained the honour by testimony, not by price; for no Divine thing is set to sale. That in those times Presbyteries consisted only of Pastors, Calvin himself confesseth; wherefore, Tertullian putting the Greek word into Latin, calls them Seniors, who had the power of the Keys. For in Greek they are called Presbyters: which word, in its primary signification, expressing age, was after transferred to Civil Dignities, and last of all to Ecclesiastical. Let all the Acts of Synods, that ever were, be read quite through, there will be found no Seniors, that were not Pastors. Moreover the word major natu, or Elder, which seemeth proper to age, began to be applied to Pastors, in imitation of the Greek word. Firmilian Bishop of Caesarea: The Majors are the Precedents (in the Church) who have also the power to Baptism, and to impose hands, and to ordain: He hath given sufficient caution, to understand no other than the Pastors. So then, the words, Presbyter, Senior, Major, have a threefold signification, noting First age, Secondly Magistracy, Thirdly Priesthood. Nor only was the name of Seniors common to Magistrates and Pastors, but the Assembly of Presbyters, the Presbytery, which Ignatius calls the Sacred System, Jerom bath translated Senate: The Church hath a Senate, the Assembly of Presbyters: that is, of those Presbyters, who at the beginning, saith he, were equal to the Bishops, and by whose Counsel the Church was governed. Tertullian by such another Metaphor, styles the Clergy an Ordo, or State; The Difference, saith he, between the State and people, was constituted by Authority of the Church.  
Farther, we must observe, by the word Seniors, Ecclesiastical writers doc often understand not dignity, 
22. Why the ancient Bishops used to consult with the Church.  but age. It is certain, the Bishops of old seldom disposed any affairs of greater moment, without consulting the Church. Which course was always profitable; in the times of persecution, or upon imminent fear of Schism, almost necessary. For this cause, to lay the murmuring, 
Acts 6.2.  which arose about the daily ministration, the multitude of the Disciples were called together. So, after Paul was come to Jerusalem, when there was a rumour of him, that he taught the Jews to forsake Moses, although all the Elders were present, 
Acts 21.22.  it is said, the multitude must needs come together. Cyprian saith, I could return you no answer alone, because ever since I was made Bishop I resolved (this word shows it was arbitrary) to do nothing, on my own head, without your Counsel (the Clergy) and consent of the people. 'Tis plain, as in the Ordination of the Clergy, so in separating and in reconciling the lapsed, the people were wont to be consulted with Not always all the people, among whom were Women and the younger sort, but the Fathers of Families, and not all these neither, but the elder, and of riper judgement, who haply are the Many, 
2 Cor. 2.6.  of whom Paul speaketh. These were often consulted with, in place of the people. In the acts of purgation of Cecilian and Felix, are mentioned, the Bishops, Presbyters Deacons, Seniors and after, Take unto you your Brethren of the Clergy, and the Seniors of the people. Some be Seniors then, who are not Clerks; and therefore Laiks. For these are still distinguished in the Fathers. 'Tis ill favouredly done of them that take this word amiss; for it is no term of disgrace, but is necessarily, used to distinguish the Clergy Seniors from the rest. Neither have the Father's only so spoken; whose Authority yet at least ought to suffice for the retaining of certain words; but the Prophets themserves, in whom the Priests and people are divided. Rightly then, are they called Laiks who are not Priests, that is, dispensers of Divine mysteries. Austin writes, To the Clergy and Seniors of the Church of Hippo, and in Turonensis it is, Before the Bishop, Clergy and Seniors. Yet I will not peremptorily deny, but by Seniors in those places, may be understood Magistrates, who, as we have even now said, were styled by that name. So, Leo inscribes an Epistle, To the Clergy, the honoured, and the common people.  
And, as in some places it may be doubted, whether by the word Seniors the Magistrates or the Elder in age are meant; so in other places, question may be made, whether by the same word the Elder in age or the Priests are signified. As, when Gregory appoints, If any Clergy man be accused, let the truth be enquired, the Seniors of the Church being present. And, when Austin mentions them, 
Serm. 19 de verb. Dom.  that for ebriety, thefts and other errors are rebuked by the Seniors. And, when Optatus shows, the Ornaments of the Church were commended to faithful Seniors. For, all this may agree both to Clergymen and Laymen. 
23. Who are the Seniors in the suppositious Ambrose. 1 Tim. 5.   
But, most worthy of our consideration is that place of an uncertain Author, commonly reputed Ambrose, out of his Commentaries on Paul's Epistles. The words are these: Old age indeed is honourable among all Nations? Whence it is, that both the Synagogue, and afterward the Church had Seniors, without whose advice nothing passed in the Church. How this is grown obsolete I know not, unbesse perhaps by the dissensions of the Doctors, or rather by their pride, whilst they alone would seem to be somebody. That we may know the writer's mind, we must see, whom he calls Seniors in the Synagogue. Whether the Magistrates, who were called Seniors sure enough, that the Synagogue may be a Bench of Judges, as in Matthew, 
cap. 10.17.  They shall scourge you in their Synagogues? I think not although many things (as we shall show anon) which belonged to the Jewish Magistrates, are wont by a certain similitude, to be applied to the Christian Presbyters. Hear the same Author elsewhere declaring: It was a Tradition of the Synagogue, that the Seniors (in dignity) disputed sitting in their Chairs, the next on Benches, the last in the pavement upon mats. I suspect the word (in dignity) stole out of the margin into the text. For Philo describes the same custom thus, They that come to be Priests take their places in order according to their age, the younger beneath the elder. Wherefore, the Seniors in age sat first. And, questionless, some such order of sitting was observed in the ancient Church, which James would not have neglected, when he reprehends them, that give the honour of the highet seats to rich men only, the poof being thrust known below, or enforced to stand. It follows in Philo, One of the most ●●●●full, passing over the difficult places (of the Holy Bible) makes an exposition of them. 'Tis to be noted, in the Synagogues of the Jews, to every one exercised in Holy Writ, 
24. Liberty to interpret Scripture in the Synagogue.  (and all were so, except mechanics, as also among us) it was permitted to interpret Scripture. By this common liberty, Christ taught in the Synagoves, and after him the Apostles. Memorable are the places, Luke iv. and Acts xiii. There the book is reached forth to Christ: here Paul and Barnabas, though unknown, are asked to speak unto the people, If they have any word of exhortation. If no stranger, or none of the people offered himself, than the chosen men of the Seniors (who were named the Fathers of the Synagogues, the Majors, and by an excellency the Seniors) interpreted the Law. And these being not well provided, it was the Rulers Office. Some what correspondent to this, we find in the first Christian Church. For, 
25. And in the ancient Church: with the d●fference  they that have the gift of prophecy are permitted by the Apostle to speak unto the people at the Assembly, by two or three, and the rest to judge. That miraculous gift ceasing, it was hardly lawful for any one, except the Pastors, to teach among the Christians. Indeed, we read of Origen and a few more, not Presbyters, who taught in the Church: but that was seldom, and not without peculiar licence of the Bishops. For the Bishop of Caesarea being reprehended for permitting Origen to teach, alleged three examples of the like concession, adding, it was credible, though not apparent, the same was done in other places. Here now we see some difference between the Interpreters of the Law in the Synagogue, and the Interpreters of the Gospel in the Church. In the Synagogue, they taught, as many as had any word of exhortations: in the Church, all what were approved and had obtained the honour of a Testimonial, as Tertullian speaks, that is they that were ordained. The Judges of the Highest Synedry were wont to be ordained by imposition of hands: but of the expounders of the Law, the same doth not appear. A reason of the foresaid difference is, not only because the Preaching of the Gospel is of more moment, than the expounding of the Law; but also, because in the Christian Church the Preachers of the word are withal dispensers of the mysteries. Whereas, the Masters of the Synagogue administered no Sacraments. For all the Sacrifices were offered in the Temple only, except the Passeover; which yet was not celebrated in the Synagogues, but in every house, the Master of the Family being chief. Nor was it any where commanded, that Circumcision should be given in the Synagogues, or by any special Ministers. It may then be doubted, what Seniors of the Church, Pseudambrose understands: those, that answer to the most skilful of the Synagogue, who also are scarce any other but aged men, (in which respect the chief of the Monks are called Seniors in Justinian:) or those, 
Nou. 133. Cap. 2.  that anser to the Elders in age, in Philo? If the former, then Pseudambrose saith the very same with Jerom. The one, Without the Counsel of the Seniors nothing in the Church was done: the other, The Churches were governed by the Common Counsel of the Presbyters: speaking of those Presbyters, which, he saith, at first were called Bishops, and out of whom afterward the Bishops were elected. But if the later please you more, (and truly his speech mentioned his age, not Office:) the meaning will be this, which we have expressed a little afore; That, instead of all the people, the Elder men were wont to be consulted with, in the more weighty affairs: that is, in ordaining the Cleriks, in absolving the lapsed, and such like. And indeed, it is more credible, this custom was long since obsolete and disused, to consult with the people or the chief of the people, than that the Bishops did almost all things without consulting with the Clergy. Yet this also by little and little came to pass and prevailed against the ancient custom. These things therefore being understood, no man will henceforth doubt, but in all Ecclesiastical writers, the word Presbyters or Seniors pertains either to the aged in the Church, or to the Magistrates, who also are a part of the Church, or to the Pastors. And this aught to prevail with us, that we take not, unadvisedly and without forcible arguments, the places of Holy Scripture speaking of Presbyters, in any other sense, than they have been taken by them, who being nearer to the Apostles times had more perfect intelligence of that ancient Title.  
But now let us proceed to the Ofacles of Holy Scripture and let this be our third Assertion: Those choice Assessors of the Pastors, of whom we dispute, 
26. Lay-Elders, or Assessors, not commanded by God.  are not by Divine precept. Whosoever affirms the contrary must condemn the Church of so many ages, for contempt of God's Law: from which temerity, we think it becomes us to abstain. Nor indeed is there any weight in their arguments, who affirm that which we deny, and upon whom therefore lies the necessity of proving. Sufficient answers have been returned heretofore by very learned men: yet lest any defect be in our Treatise, it will be worth our pains, to repeat what hath been well said, and to add somewhat that may bring light unto the question.  

27. Mat. 18.17. Explained: and the Difference 'twixt the Synedry and the Consistoty.  In the front, we have that which Christ commandeth, Tell it to the Church, etc. In which place, some are of opinion, Christ hath given the Church direction, to institute a certain Synedry to judge of things Ecclesiastical, consisting both of Ministers and other persons; for such they will needs have Ecclesiastical Synedries to have been. As for the words of Christ, the ancient and recent expositors have offered us sundry explications of them. To repeat them all were tedious. To me, the most simple and plain Interpretation, and which comprehends almost all the rest seemeth to be this: The man, that hath offended us, is not easily to be accounted for one deplored and incurable. There are several degrees of admonition to be observed, first alone, that he may, if it be possible, repent without a witness of his fault; if that avails not, a friend is to be taken with you; one, a second, and a third, if perhaps he will yield to their Authority. And hitherto Christ hath said nothing, which is not almost in the same words delivered in the writings of the Jews. For this is extant in the book Musar. If, say they, he will neither then be reconciled, (friends being used, two or three,) let him depart, and leave him to himself; for such a one is implacable, and is called a sinner. But the same book in another place adds one degree more; for thus it saith, If neither by this means he shall prevail any thing (friends being used) than he ought to make him ashamed in the presence of many. Which Christ not disapproving, according to his exceeding lenity, which he would have us to imitate, would have us try all things first, before we give up the man for lost; for that is the sense of, Let him be unto thee as a Heathen and as a Publican: that is, an incorrigible sinner. So, 
Mat. 11.19. Mar. 11.15.  in the Gospel are often joined, Publicans and sinners; and the Gentiles are called sinners, as when Christ saith, he should be delivered into the hands of sinners. Wherefore the meaning of Christ is, that before we relinquish all hope, after a few witnesses, any company of pious men ought to be adhibited, to the end the scandalous person may be reclaimed, by the number and consent of grave men, by the punishment or censure of many, as Paul speaks. For in Musar and in Paul the many, and in the words of Christ the Church, are the very same. Certainly, that a Company not great, is comprehended in the name of Church, both the LXX. teach us, and Paul too, who hath entitled, by the name of Church, one family of pious people. Here it sufficeth, that it be understood, this place in Matthew is nothing to their purpose; for a company both of Pastors, and of non-Pastors, may be without the Assessors, of whom now the question is.  
What they add concerning the Jewish Senates, after long consideration, I cannot grant. The Synagogues of the Jews, their Proseuche, and Phrontisteries, as Philo calls them, were far different from their Courts of judgement. In their Proseuchae were the Scriptures read and expounded, all were instructed (to speak again with Philo) to the love of God, to the love of virtue, to the love of men: whereto answer those three words of Paul, Godly, soberly, justly. Here are no judgements exercised upon any. That was done in the Courts of judgement; where the Judges had cognizance of Sacred matters as well as of Profane; the same Judges, by the same Law; for in the Hebrew people these were never disjoined. These Judges were partly in the several Cities, partly in the Head City. Those were the lesser Synedryes, to the Hellenists; this the Great one, and by an excellency the Synedry. Whence the Hebrews following the Hellenists derived Sanhedrin. None of these Courts, because they had all of them coactive power, could be retained in the Apostolical Church; because, it is certain, neither the Apostles, nor the Church had any coactive power granted to them.  

28. Lay. Elders not spoken of in, the new Testament.  I come unto the name of Presbyters, which many think, in the new Testament was given to the Assessors of Pastors; which is not clear to me. In the Testament I find three significations of this word ●one which pertains to age, as when the Presbyters or Elders are opposed to the younger; 
1 Tim. 5.1.  another, which belongs to Power and Empire, as when there is mention of those that sat in the great Synedry or in the less; a third, which agrees to the Preachers of the Gospel; a fourth I do not find. 
29. Why Pastors were called Elders by the Apostles.  A question may be made, why the Apostles called the Pastors, ordained by them, by the name of Presbyters? Was it, because scarce any other but old men were called to that Office? or, because in the Synagogue also the Masters, by an excellency, had that appellation? or, (which I like as well) by a similitude taken from the Jewish Magistrates? For, Christ himself, in the constitution of his Church, that he might show himself a King, and withal by degrees might abolish the hope of an earthly Kingdom, composed his Church, though destitute of all external power, to a certain Image of the Judaical Kingdom, and so erected the minds of his Disciples to the hope of a Kingdom Celestial. 
30. The Church of Christ compared with the Judaical Kingdom.  There was one King among the Hebrew people: He also acknowledgeth himself to be a King. In that Kingdom were twelve Princes of their Tribes: Christ constituted to himself so many Apostles, and, that it might not be doubted, whether he had respect, promiseth to them twelve thrones, whereon they should judge the twelve tribes of Israel. In the Kingdom, were LXX Senators of the Great Synedry: so many Evangelists are constituted by Christ. The third dignity in the Kingdom, was of the City Judges, called Presbyters or Elders: in the Church also the Presbyters follow the Apostles and Evangelists in the third place. The chief of those Judges were called Bishops or Overseers: and so in the Church the Princes of the Presbyters are the Bishops. Lastly, They that waited upon those Judges were Deacons or Ministers: so are, they called in the Church, who are Ordained below the Presbyters.  

31. The Office of Elders in the new Testament.  What the Office of Presbyters is in the Christian Church, the Apostles in sundry places teach us. Paul having sent for the Presbyters of Ephesus to Miletum, gives them to understand, that they were made Overseers over the flock to feed the Church of God. 
Acts 20.28.  James biddeth the sick call for the Presbyters of the Church, 
Jac. 5.14.  to pray over them, and anoint them with Oil, in the name of the Lord. 
1 Pet. 5.1.  Peter exhorts the Presbyters, being himself a Co-Presbyter, that is, a Colleague in the Office. It appears therefore, they were Pastors. Neither were they otherwise ordained, but by imposition of hands: as of Timothy it is recorded. In other places, where without any character, Presbyters are barely mentioned, to understand any other Presbyters, but those who in so many places are most clearly described, is the part of a temerarious conjector, unless the Context compel us to depart from the certain and received signification.  
In all the new Testament, only one sentence of Paul is extant, which is speciously brought to confirm those: Presbyters non-Pastors. 
32. An answer to the only place, 2 Tim. 5.17.  Let the Presbyters or Elders, that rule well, be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and Doctrine. From this word, especially, is inferred that there were in that time certain Presbyters, who ruled only, and did not labour in the word and Doctrine. But first, if that were true, at least somewhere else would appear this new kind of Presbyters (never spoken of before) by what Author, by what occasion it began, as the Original of Deacons is recorded: and not so on the By, and in passage, in a single place, where the speech was not concerning Offices Ecclesiastical; this necessary part of Ecclesiastical Government should not, I say, so slightly be insinuated. Again, the Father's next to the Apostles times would have told us somewhat of it: at least the Greek Fathers, who could not be ignorant of their own tongue, would have left us this Interpretation, which some suppose to follow from the very series of the words. Now, when as before the last age not one of the Interpreters hath taken the words of Paul in that sense, we have reason to see, whether they admit not another interpretation, more consonant to other places of the Scripture. Let us then consider the scope of the Apostle. He would have double honour given to Presbyters. What he means by honour, may be understood by the words afore, Honour Widows. Where, 
1 Tim. 5.3.  to honour is nothing else but to maintain them honestly; for, his will is that the Widows should be honoured, who are Widows indeed, that is, as appears by the opposition, such as have not believing kindred, by whose help they may be relieved; for, if they have, such he forbids to be burdensome to the Church. After he had finished his discourse of sustaining Widows, he shows, the Presbyters also must be supplied with honest maintenance. That this is noted by the word honour, the reason annexed proveth: For it is written, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the Ox that treadeth out the Corne. This same testimony of Scripture, he had produced elsewhere, to the same sense: who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? 
1 Cor. 9.7. etc.  who planteth a Vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? Say I these things as a man? or, saith not the Law the same? For it is written in the Law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the Ox that treadeth out the Corne. 
Dent. 25.4.  And afterward, If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? Well is it noted upon the place, we handle, by chrysostom, Jerom, Ambrose, Calvin also, and Bullinger, that the Apostle here speaks of supply of maintenance, & necessaries. That our Assessors should be sustained by the Church's allowance, is not seen at this time nor was ever seen. Neither is it credible, that the Apostle, who every where spares the Churches, burdened enough with poor people, would lay an unnecessary burden on them. Wherefore, if ever, in this place especially, those Assessors had been unseasonably mentioned where a discourse of maintenance is commenced. The words of Paul have been commodiously interpreted many ways by others. The plainest Interpretation is, Maintenance is due indeed to all Presbyters, that rule the Church, that is, feed the Lords flock; but especially to them that wholly neglecting their private affairs, apply themselves to the only care of propagating the Gospel, and spare no labour in it. Here then, are not set down two sorts of Presbyters, but it is declared that the labour of all is not equal. All acknowledge, even Beza too, that the word translated, to labour, 
Ad Mat. 11.  notes not every labour, but that which is most painful. In such labours not vulgar, 
2 Cor. 6.5.  Paul saith, he approved himself the Minister of God; for explication whereof he adds, painfulness, hunger, thirst, watchings, 
11.27.  and all kinds of incommodities, Christ in his Epistle to the Bishop of Ephesus, having said, I know thy works, addeth as somewhat greater, and thy labour. Paul again, ofttimes attributes to himself, to labour; 
Apoc. 2.2.  and the same to certain holy Women, which renouncing the world went up and down for the service of the Gospel. To these Presbyters then, who care for nothing but the Gospel and for its sake expose themselves to all distresses, reason itself will dictate, somewhat more to be due than to the rest. 
1 Thes. 5.12.13.  So also Paul to the Thessaly. ascribeth, to rule, and, to labour, unto the same persons: We beseech you, brethren, to know them, which labour among you, and rule over you in the Lord, and admonish you: And to esteem them very highly in love for their works sake. All the error of the new Interpreters ariseth hence, that they think, in the word and Doctrine, is to be pronounced emphatically, when the Emphasis is in, labour; for explication whereof is added, in the word and Doctrine. Such another hallucination is theirs, who in the words of Paul to the Cor. where he discourses of the Supper: Let a man examine himself: they urge the word, himself; when the Emphasis is not there, but in the word, examine; nor is, himself, put distinctively, but declaratively. Moreover, that clause, in the word and Doctrine, could not so well be joined with the first part of the sentence, as the second, because it hath very fit coherence with labour, not so with rule. I will give you like forms of speech, which no man will charge with unaptness: Masters, that bring up youth, are profitable to the Commonwealth; they especially, that attend this one thing night and day, to make their Scholars good proficients both in virtue and learning. Physicians, who cure the Body, are to be had in great esteem; They above therest, who with no less affection than pains, do their utmost endeavour, to preserve or restore our health. Compare the thread of Paul's discourse herewith, you will see all to be even and square.  

33. Other places need no answer.  Other places, that are wont to be alleged, are more frigid, and vanish of their own accord. Rom. 12. Divers gifts, and according to the measure of gifts, divers actions are reckoned up, but such as do not yet make divers Functions. As the same may be, He that giveth, and, 
Rom. 12.8.  He that showeth mercy: So nothing hinders Him that exhorteth, and Him that ruleth, to be the same. For, out of the two places already produced, it is manifest, that, to rule, is attributed to Pastors, as also, to guide, Heb. 13.7. Likewise, 
1 Cor. 12.28.  to the Corinth. not only divers Functions are enumerated, but also many gifts, which meet in the same Function. As therefore, miracles and gifts of healing do not make divers Functions, so neither do Helps and Governments; but all these are aids and ornaments of the Pastoral Office.  
Thus far, we have endeavoured to make it appear, that the Adsession, we speak of, is not by Divine precept. The fruit of which determination is, that we entertain no worse opinion of the ancient Churches, than is meet, nor of the late reform, who make no use of those Adsessors. Now, on the other side, what we conceive, may be said for that Office, shall fairly be produced.  

34. The Highest Power, or the Church might lawfully institute lay Elders  First, That Office might, lawfully be instituted, either by the Highest Power being Christian, only the Church, where the Highest Power either cared not for the Church, or granted leave to do it. For, seeing it hath the Highest inspection over all the actions of Pastors, as the Custos of both Tables; nor can it execute all things by itself; it was lawful to delegate some, who, in its name, might be among the Presbyters, with that right, which the Highest Power was pleased to communicate unto them. Which, by that, that shall be handled in the next Chapter shall be made more manifest. The Church also is not interdicted by Divine Law, to institute Offices, making for the conservation of order, and for edification: and it hath that liberty remaining, until it be circumscribed by some Law of the Highest Power. These things need no proof; for they shine by their own light and no Divine Law can be showed to the contrary.  

35. This institution not displeasing to God proved by Scripture.  Secondly, Some passages may be found in Holy Scriptures, whereby it may appear, this institution is not displeasing unto God. I prove it, first in respect of the Highest Power, by the constitution of the Judaical Synedry: wherein, with the Priests there sat men chosen out of the people, preposed truly to Civil affairs, but to Sacred too, as hath been showed afore. Wherefo●●, when out of the new Testament, on the contrary part, nothing is alleged, hence we do rightly collect, that Jurisdiction in Sacred things, that is, public judgement, and joined with command, may be committed to some of the people with the Pastors; especially if the better part be deferred to the Pastors, as in Sacred things, 
2 Chron. 19.11.  greater was the Authority of Amariah the Priest, then of Zebadiah the Ruler. By the same argument, is rightly defended the Ecclesiastical Senate, which by the Commission of the Elector Palatine rules the Church affairs with command, and consisteth partly of Pastors, partly of pious Magistrates. In respect of the Church also, the same is thus made good. It was lawful for the Corinthian Church (even without the Apostles Authority, for the Apostle reprehends the Corinthians for not doing that, which now he chargeth them to do) to constitute in the Church, some to determine private controversies. If so much was lawful to the Church for avoiding of contentions, why might not as much be lawful for avoiding of the mischief of Oligarchy? Besides, it is oft times expedient, that the whole multitude of believers be consulted, in the Church affairs, as above we have showed: why may not then the Church adjoin some unto the Pastors, who may consider this, at what time it is needful, that the Church be consulted. It was also lawful for the Church, to make choice of some, 
2 Cor. 8.19 Phil. 2.22.  who might in their name carry and dispose of their money; wherefore, seeing the Pastors have inspection over the Deacons, the Church may, for this purpose join some associates to the Pastors, 
2 Cor. 8.20.  Lest any should blame them in their Administration of the Church's benevolence, that I may speak with the Apostle. Lastly, it was lawful for the Antiochian Church to delegate some out of their Company, 
Acts 19.2.  to be present at the Debate of the Apostles and Presbytery of Jerusalem, by whose testimony they might be assured, all was there done according to God's word, and without partiality.  

36. Examples in the ancient Church drawing toward it.  Thirdly, Examples in pious Antiquity are not wanting, which, if not wholly Consonant, yet come very near unto this custom. On the part of the Highest Powers, it is most evident, the Emperors, appointed Senators and Judges, to sit in Synods, Inspectors and moderators of their actions. Nor this only, but to give sentence together with the Bishops, concerning the deposition of a Bishop, and other matters, as we see it happened in the case of Photinus and Dioscorus. And, why is not that lawful in Presbyteries, which was lawful in Synods; especially, when as no less regard is to be had of Presbyteries in narrower territories, than of Synods in that amplitude of the Roman Empire? But further, by the Emperors were given unto the Churches, at their request, Defendors, which were Laiks, whose Office was to keep off all force and tumult from the Church and Pastors; 
Novel. 56. Conc. Cha●c can. 76.  and to take care, that nothing should be done in the Church, by violence or corruption. These are they, who in the later ages begin to be called the Church's Advocates. So, by the Metroplitans were wont to be given unto the Churches Phrontistae, or Solicitors, who, with the Bishop should keep accounts of the Church's treasure. On the Churches 01 part, we must repeat, what was said afore, that the whole multitude was not always consulted, but sometimes the Elders only. Now, if it was lawful to carry the consultation from the multitude to the Elders, why might it not, the company of Elders being over great, be contracted to a fewer number, especially with consent of the multitude? Moreover in choosing Pastors, it appears, that which was belonging to the multitude was often, by compromise, collated on a few. And, that in Synods Laiks were present, and gave their vote, is so manifest, both by the History of the Great Council and elsewhere, that Pope Nicolas could not deny it. In this point, the judgements not of Melanchthon only and the later Authors, but of Panormitan and Gerson are well known. Why, in Presbyteries may not be allowed as much to Laiks, chosen for that purpose, no reason can be found. But farther yet: It is apparent, in the ancient Church, there were Matrons, to exhort the other women to an honest conversation: whom they called Presbyters; and, because in the Churches they sat above the other women, Precedents. The XI. Canon of the Laodicean Synod abrogated them, when they had continued until that time, as Balsamon notes. And haply, Paul speaks of them, 
Tit. 3.4.  where he requires the Presbytesses, or aged women to be holy in behaviour, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things: That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, etc. If women therefore, partakers of no Church-Office, might nevertheless be appointed by the Church, to be teachers of other women, why might not others, beside the Pastors be assumed by the people, who, abstaining from Pastoral Offices, should with greater diligence perform that, that is not only permitted, but commanded every Christian? And, if those were entitled Presbytesses, we may also in a more general respect, give unto these the appellation of Presbyters. 
37. The English Churchwardens not much, unlike the Adsessors.  Moreover, not much distant from the Office of Adsessors, is the Office of Church Wardens and Sidemen in the Church of England. Upon whom it resteth, to take care, that none disturb the Divine service; that no excommunicate person thrust himself into the Assembly; They are also to admonish inordinate livers, and, if they persevere, to defer their names unto the Bishop. And these are chosen by the Church.  

38. The Adsessors be of good use.  Fourthly, our last position is, that from these assessors no small benefit may accrue unto the Church. For, if we respect the Highest Powers, it is expedient for them to have, in the Assemblies of Pastors, their eyes and ears, by whose Ministry they may explore, whether all things be done with fidelity and according to rule. But, if we look upon the Churches, it is a thing of consequence, that they also have a good opinion of the Pastors; which will then most probably come to pass, when they have witnesses of their actions, and some to beget and keep a right understanding between the Pastors and themselves.  
Upon the premises it follows, that in the Office of Adsessors, who in some places are in use, whom for distinction we may call temporary or Lay-Presbyters, there is nothing to be reprehended. But, we conceive, these cautions are to be remembered. 
39 Yet with certain cau●ions.  1. That the Office be not affirmed of Divine precept; which cannot be said without contumely of the ancient Church, and divulsion of the present. 2. That nothing be attributed to them, which pertains to the Evangelicall Keys; which Christ having given to be exercised by Pastors only, may not be by us transferred to any other. To excommunication therefore, as it is the Pastor's work, they can confer nothing beside their Counsel; but, as excommunication is also the work of the people, who ought to remove from them wicked persons, so far they may make an Act, or Decree, which may be proposed to the people for their approbation. 3. Let none be elected to this adsession, who are unable for Church-Government, and especially for judging controversies. For that is perilous, and undecent for the Church, and the most ready way to Oligarchy. 4. Let not those Adsessors exercise any external Jurisdiction, or Coactive Power, beyond what the public Laws allow them. 5. Let them know their Office, not only as the Pastor's Office, which is instituted by Christ; but, as the things that are of humane Institution, and therefore mutable, is subject to the Authority of the Highest Powers. The two last cautions being not known, or not well observed, great perturbations of the Commonwealth do necessarily follow, alwise men have heretofore admonished, and we have daily experience. For, many men having once imbibed this opinion, that, that Government is of Right Divine, come at last to this, to believe the Highest Powers have little or nothing to do in the Church, as being by God abundantly provided both with Pastors and with Rulers too. Thus is an Invention of humane prudence confronted to the Ordinance of God, and in this two headed Empire is sown perpetual seed of parties and factions: whereunto they cease not to turn their eyes, whosoever either in State or Church seek after Innovations. They that remember, what hath been done, thirty years since, in this our Country, know the truth of what I say. And this consideration principally moved me, not to leave this question untouched. 
40. The Genevian election of Adsessors.  'Tis worthy the Relation, that in Geneva (which City brought forth, if not first this Synedry itself, at least the prime Defenders of it:) the entire right of electing those Elders is in the City Senate, which is called the Little, the Counsel of the Pastors being only heard. Nor are they only elected by the Senators, but from among Senators alone, that is two out of the same little Senate, and ten both out of the Senate of the sixty, and out of the other Senate of two hundred. The election made after this manner, is submitted to the examination of the two hundred: and the Elders elected, although they have no Jurisdiction, yet they give oath to the Republic. He must needs be very ill-sighted, who perceives not, what incommodities the Genevians feared, when they took such a solicitous and wary course for their elections.   

CHAP. XII.  
Of Substitution, and Delegation about Sacred things.  
IT is not enough for the Supreme Governor to know his own Right, unless he know also how to use it in the best way. Now, whereas the Supreme Governor executes his Office, partly by himself, partly by others; in those things which he dispatcheth by himself, 
1. The H. power hath need of Vicars in Spirituals.  how he ought to use the Counsels of wise men is said afore; nor is it unworthy to be here repeated, that the Christian Emperors and other Kings always had, standing by their side, most Religious Pastors, by whose Counsels they did dispose of Sacred affairs, as they did of secular by the advice of others. But, neither by this Help is the Supreme Governor, whose influence is diffused through so many and so great businesses, enabled to dispatch all things, but hath need to use the service of Deputies. The most weighty labours, (saith a wise Author) of him that holds the Imperial Ball, have need of Helps: And, many businesses want many hands. The Disputation makes a great noise in the Law-School, What parts of Authority may be committed to other by the Highest Power? It would be tedious and impertinent to relate all that may be said upon this question. In short, 
2. What Authority may be committed to inferiors, by the Highest Power.  some things there are, which are not possible to be separated from the right of the Highest Power: some things which to communicate to any other, by reason of their greatness, is not expedient. Of the former kind, is the right of amending Laws, though made by others; the right of cancelling unjust judgements, if not by way of appeal, at least by way of Petition; the right to void elections, which are against the good of the State or Church. 
3. Liberty of Religion tolerated sometimes  Of the later sort are these: the choice of Religion, and as well the Election, as the Deposition of the chief Pastors: which the Highest Powers, for the most part, have reserved to themselves, yet not always. For also to certain subjects, whether Princes, or Corporations, we see the choice of Religion hath been granted, when the necessity of the times exacted it. Nor is this so new, when the Persians also, Macedonians and Romans granted the Jews and other Nations, under their Dominions, Liberty of Religion: Moreover, the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople, we know, were not always elected by the Emperors.  

4. Vicar's are either substitutes or delegates.  The ways of committing Right to others are two, Substitution, and Delegation. Substitution I call a mandate given by Law or Privilege: Delegation, by special Grant. That the Highest Powers were accustomed to substitute Bishops, we have showed above; 
5. Bishops substituted, and Cleriks.  for thence ariseth, the right of making Canons, which have the force of Law; the right with Power to depose a Pastor, or to exclude one of the people out of the Congregation: which apparently have been permitted to Synods or Presbyteries. From the same Springhead is the right of the Clergy or Chapters to make elections: as may be proved by many Patents of Emperors and Kings. Wherein verily, their piety is worthy of all honour. For they judged, that unto them, who were most acquainted with Sacred affairs, and to whom the Pastoral Regiment was by God committed, that other Regiment, which flows from the Imperial Power, might also be committed most safely. Would the event had not oft deceived them, in their so honourable design. In the mean time, they, who endure not Pastors to be called, in any part, Vicars of the Highest Powers, are to advised to depose their error, moved either by reason, or the Authority of Laws and Histories. 
6. Pastors and Laymen joined.  Elsewhere we see, the care of holy things was committed to Pastors with others, not Pastors, but pious and learned men, and that not without example of Divine Authority. For the great Synedry of LXX. among the Hebrews, upon whom, among other things, the care of Religion lay, consisted of Priests, Levits, and men chosen out of the people. No doubt, in matters of Religion, (yea in all Judgements, if I mistake not) the High Priest gave his sentence before the rest. Yet so, that the King's Vicegerent, who was entitled Nasi, had the first place, and asked the Votes. After which exemplar, I observe, the Ecclesiastical Senate is composed in the Palatinate. This Conjunction of the lesser Powers with the Bishops I find also in Justinian. 
Nou. 17. c. 11.  Certain it is, in the Deposition of Bishops, the judgements of the Synod, and of the Synators or Judges adjoined by the Emperors, met together. So, Pholinus is deposed by the sentence of the Bishop, and the men of Senators rank, whose names are recorded in Epiphanius. Sometimes therefore, the lesser Powers were associated to the Pastors, only to suppress violence and tumult; sometimes, to give sentence with them. And so, in the election of Bishops, Justinians Law united with the Clergy, the City Magistrates. Which manner had not its first Original then; for Theodoret tells us, After the death of Athanasius, Peter was made Bishop by the suffrages of the Clergy, and of the men in dignity and office. Yea, times have so fallen out, that, by reason of Schisms or the tumour of Bishops, it was necessary, this weighty part, the care of Sacred things with command, should be committed to the inferior Powers, 
7. Sometimes Laymen alone  and that without the Bishops. For, Aelianus Constantin's Proconsul, and Marcellinus, by Commission of Honorius, examined the Laws of the Donatists, and gave sentence 'twixt the parties, as above is noted. And in the Court of CP. one of the Patricians did particularly attend the Church affairs: whence his Office had its name. So also, the Parliaments of France by appeal, the Senate of Spain by way of opposition, the Court of Holland by penal writs, corrected the errors of the Ecclesiastic censure.  

8. The right of Lay-Patrons ancient, and derived from the Regal.  Moreover, that the right of electing or presenting Pastors (the right of ordaining saved to the Pastors, and of probation to the people) was oft times allowed to lay-men alone, is clear enough. And this is the Right of Patronage, which, not with us only, is in force, but in England and the Palatinate, as may be seen in the English Canons and the Palatine Constitutions. Now, as we do not blame their piety, who are solicitous, lest any mischief be done the Church, under colour of this right; so the truth exacteth at our hands, not to let pass in silence the temerarious Assertion of those men, who say this right is a new thing, and depends upon the Authority of the Pope. Surely, Justinian is not a new Emperor, nor lived he under the Pope's Domination, yet hath he established this Right by a Law. 
Nou. 123. c. 18.  If any devout person hath built a House, and will ordain Clerks in it (here to ordain, the Latin Interpreter translated for, to elect) either himself or his Heirs, if they maintain the clerics, and name such as are worthy, the named shall be ordained: but if the presentees are, by the Holy Rules, excluded as unworthy of Ordination, then let the most Sacred Bishop ordain such as he shall find more worthy. This Law was published by Justinian about the year DXLI. at what time the Roman Bishops were at the Emperor's devotion and created by them. There is also another Constitution of the same Emperor set forth as is thought in the year DLU. 
Novel. 157.  and inscribed to the Bishop of C P. Which permits the Founders of Churches, or of maintenance, to appoint Clericks, if yet they be found worthy by the Bishop's examination. And in the year DLIII. a Canon was made is the Council of Tolen, to the same effect. About the year DCCCXXVII. were collected the Constitutions of Charles the Great, wherein we find, If Laic (Patrons) present unto the Bishops Cleriks approved both for their life and learning to be consecrated, and constituted in their Churches, by no means let them be rejected. Not only Pastors of inferior degree, but Bishops also were constituted by the Dukes of Bavaria and Saxonia, by a Right long since derived from the Germane Emperors, as hath been observed by others. When as, without such Grant, the Investiture of Bishops (as Hermoldus of old hath written) is proper to the Imperial Majesty. Wherefore this Right was extracted from the Constitution and Concession of Emperors and Kings, and is an Offspring flowing from the Right of the Highest Power. And it is so far from depending on the Pope's Authority, that on the contrary, the makers and Interpreters of the Papal Law, have opposed or clipped nothing more eagerly, desiring to persuade the world, that all benefices are the Patrimony of the Pope. 
9 Benefices not the Pope's Patrimony.  Panormitan is chief among them: whom I had much rather have for my adversary in such a matter, than my Second. For I know, most of his Comments in this kind are refuted by Covarruvia and Duarenus and other Lawyers: 
Covar. p. 2 Relig. c. Poss. Sect. 10. Duar. 1. 3. de Minist. cap. 11.  and wisemen have herein always differed from the Clergy of those times, even unto our age. See but what the the Holland Senate hath noted in the Trent-acts, as contrary to the old Law of our Nation. 
10. The Custom of Holland  To the IV. Sect. c. 12. In this Chapter the Lay Patrons seem to be grieved. To the xxv. Sect. c. 4. We must beware, lest by uniting Parish Churches and single Benefices, prejudice be done to the Lay Patrons: and in other places more to the like effect. This was then the judgement of the Senate, the Keeper of the old Customs of our Country: which may more justly be defended by us, than what our Ancestors in their unhappy time, esteemed intolerable. But what if the Roman Bishops themselves; what if Panormitan himself durst not require of Lay Patrons, what is now required, by virtue of their Authority? I will not dispute about the word, whether the Collation of the Patron may be called Election 
Cap. nobis de Jur. patr. Ex d. c. nob. , and yet Clement III. called it so. These words are cited: In a conventual Church, the assent of the Patron is better required, not to the election of the Prelate to be made, but after it is made: the following words, which are very material being omitted: unless the custom be otherwise by reason of his Jurisdiction. For, many ages before, and in many places, the custom was otherwise; and namely in our Holland. Witness again the Senate: 
Ad cap. 1. Sess. 5. Syn. Tried.  Note, that if the first Prebend to be void, in Collegiate Churches, be assigned to the Readers of Divinity; the King and other Lay Patrons, whose right it is in the Collegiate Churches of Holland, in every Chapter, should be deprived of the presentation of the Prebend first to be void. In such a Collegiate or conventual Church, the Pope hardly admitted a Lay Patron; but the Emperors, Kings, and the Princes of our Holland, as we now heard, have admitted him, even to the memory of our Fathers; and therefore, the Pope fearing he should not be obeyed, added to his decree the exception of Custom; which many as it now appears, if they had a Papacy, would not add. That our States abrogated the Right of Patronage, neither is true, nor can be said without their injury. For they mention, among the causes of the troubles, the Acts of the Trent Synod; and show, that nothing did more hinder the publication of them, than that the Lay-Patrons complained, their Right was infringed by those Constitutions. What opinion the States themselves had of the business, we have heard their own words. This is a certain truth, that both the election made by the Patrons may, 
11. All Patronages subject to the Highest Power.  upon just causes, be rescinded by the Highest Power, and all this Right, no less than other things which are the properties of private men, is Subject to the Commands of Law. To which restraint, if we add both the exploration of the people, and the Pastoral Ordination, the corruption of the Church need no more be feared, from Noble Patrons, than from Rustic Elders.  

12. Inferior powers have no command by Divine Right.  Two things remain to be spoken, before I conclude this part, concerning derived Right. The one is this, that the Inferior powers have, by Divine Right, us Authority at all about Sacred things. What ere they have, they have it as by the Supreme, which we have elsewhere noted. Wherefore, neither Joseph the Decurion, nor the Proconsul Sergius, could do more in the Church, than any private person. Because, neither the former from the great Synedry, nor the later from the Roman Emperor, had received any Power, to dispose of Ecclesiastical affairs. And no man ought to snatch to himself the sword, or any part thereof. The other is this: 
13. And little is to be given them by the Highest, in Sacred things.  Being the tuition of the Church is a principal part of the Supreme Authority, the Highest Powers will do wisely, if they grant as little as may be of it to the Magistrates. And whatsoever they grant, let them take care at least, to commend these most noble Offices, only to their most noble Peers. For, if the charge of Chequer money and Coin is committed not to the Municipal Judges, but to men of higher place, how much more doth it concern the public safety, and the Church's honour, that Ecclesiastical affairs be not devolved to inferior tribunals. So, in France, no Judges below the Parliament have cognizance of abuses of the Ecclesiastic censure; nor with us, of old, below the Senate of Holland. 
14. None at all unless they be Orthodox.  But, the Inspection of the Church affairs is not easily to be deferred to them, who are not in the Church's books. For, seeing both Jews and Christians held it irreligious, to carry their private complaints before such as were Aliens to their Law; much more unworthy were it and dishonourable, in so great frequency of Right believers, that the wounds of the Church should be committed to the cure of any other persons, but only to the Sons of the Church.   
THE END.  
Soli Deo Gloria.   

Erudito Lectori.  
EX Latinis bonis, Anglica non mala me fecisse, si censueris, est quod gaudeam. Fateor, autem, ne mibi fraudi sit, nonnulla hic omissa: ea nimirum, quae ●ut ipsa Res, aut Lector meus faciliùs abesse pateretur. Nempe, istam navavi operam, in eorum praecipuè gratiam, qui Latina non attingunt. Ingens operae pretium est, ut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (quorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ferre oportet) meminerint, offic●i esse sui, ne quid Resp. Ecclesiastica detrimenti capiat videre, Clero dignitatem conciliare, Et populum antiqua sub Religione tueri. Da veniam, erudite Lector, & Valerius  
Scripsi Decem. 17. 1650.   

The Method of every Chapter.  

CHAPTER. I.  

1. THE State of the question.  
2. An argument from the Unity of the matter, proved by Scripture.  
3. And by Natural Reason.  
4. An argument from the Univer sality of the end, proved by Scripture.  
5. And by Philosophy.  
6. The Right vindicated by direct Authority of Scripture.  
7. By the consent of the Ancient Christians.  
8. And of the Reformed.  
9 And of the Heathens.  
10. With respect unto eternal happiness.  
11. And unto temporal prosperity.  
12. Which follows true Religion by ver●he of Divine providence.  
13. And by its own nature.  
14. More Reasons added.    

CHAP. II.  

1. ALL Functions are under command.  
2. Some by emanation.  
3. The Supreme Authority, and the Sacred Function united in the same person, by the Law of nature.  
4. It was so, before Moses, and after among the nations.  
5. The Supreme Authority, and Sacred Function separated by the Law of Moses.  
6. And by the Christian Law.  
7. Sacred names and Privileges given to the Highest Powers.    

CHAP. III.  

1. Internal actions not subject to the Highest Power, but in relation to external.  
2. Actions either determined or not determined, before any Human Command.  
3. Actions determined by Law Divine, either natural or positive.  
4. Actions undetermined are the matter of Humane Law; and also determined, both because of their adjuncts and of a new Obligation.  
5. Actions, not under Humane Command, are only those that are repugnant to Divine Law.  
6. Commands repugnant to Divine Law, bind to a nonresidence: And wherefore.  
7. Subordinate powers not exempt from that Obligation.  
8. Examples alleged to the contrary answered.  
9 Difference 'twixt Internal actions and external.  
10. What God commands cannot be forbidden by man, with validity.  
11. How Religion is not subject to humane power.  
12. How it is subject.  
13. The Highest Power may determine any actions not afore determined by God.  
14. Resistance, under colour of Religion, unlawful, proved by Scripture and Examples: and Objections answered.  
15. Not so many particulars, in Sacred things as in Secular, under humane power: with the reason of it.    

CHAP. IU.  

1. OBjections answered. And first, that Christ instituted the Pastoral Office.  
2. That the Magistrate is not of the essence of the Church, answered.  
3. An Objection out of Esay answered. Whether Kings are under the Believers, or Church.  
4. That Kings are under the Pastor's function, answered.  
5. The Objection taken from the Kingdom of Christ, answered. What that Kingdom is, and whether he hath Vicars.  
6. Pastoral Government overthrows not the Authority of the Highest powers.  
7. Distinctions of Government: Directive and Constitutive. By Consent and by Command. Supreme and Inferior. By Emanation and by Subjection.  
8. Pastors have no Coactive or temporal power: proved by Scriptures and Fathers.  
9 Their Government suasory and Declarative.  
10. The Church hath no power of Command, by Divine Right.  
11. The Church hath a Government Constitutive, by consent: proved by reason, and examples of Scripture.  
12. The Supreme Authority compatible to the Church: the Inferior only, to Pastors.  
13. The Authority of the Highest powers not overthrown by the directive and Declarative Regiment of Pastors.  
14. Nor by the Constitutive.  
15. Nor by any temporal given them by positive Law.    

CHAP. V.  

1. THe word Judgement, explained.  
2. It pertains to the Highest power.  
3. Notwithstanding that they may err.  
4. And notwithstanding, that Christ is the Supreme Judge.  
5. How the Scripture is Judge.  
6. How the Pastors and the Church is Judge.  
7. Understanding is required to Judge.  
8. The Highest powers capable of sufficient understanding.  
9 Divine things are easy to be understood.  
10. Help from God, by prayer.  
11. Piety also requisite in the Highest powers to enable them to judge.  
12. A distinction 'twixt the Rectitude and the Validity of an action, applied.  
13. Infidel Princes may judge of Sacred things. Examples hereof.  
14. And the Reason of it.  
15. Catechumen not excluded from judgement.  
16. Right to judge is one thing, Ability another. Illustrated by Similes.  
17. The judgement of the Prophet's, I Cor. 14. 31. not privative of the Highest powers.  
18. The Kings of the old Testament judged not as Prophets only, but as Kings.    

CHAP. VI  

1. THe Right of command, and the Use of it distinct.  
2. Pious and learned Pastors to be consulted by the Highest Powers.  
3. Principles of faith; Intrinsecall, Extrinsecall. These Divine, and Humane.  
4. Of Divine Authority proposed by men.  
5. And the state of the question 'twixt Protestants and Papists.  
6. When 'tis fit to rest in Humane Authority.  
7. No man may pin his faith of salvation upon another; proved by Scripture and Reason.  
8. In matters not determined in Scripture, more may be given to humane judgement.  
9 The Prince must use his own judgement; Especially where Counselors do not agree.  
10. An Objection out of Deut. answered.  
11. Another out of Numbers 27.  
12. Care must be had of the Church's Peace, and Unity.  
13. Cautions and rules conducing to Unity. Few divisions in points of Faith.  
14. And those in General Councils.  
15. Ecclesiastical Laws delivered in a persuasive way.  
16. How to preserve Unity in point of Ceremonies.  
17. Highest Powers need the Ministry of others.  
18. prudential rules have their exceptions; and whence.  
19 The distinction of power Absolute, and Ordinary, erroneous.  
20. Highest Powers how far obliged to their own Laws.    

CHAP. VII.  

1. WHat we mean by Synods.  
2. No precept in Scripture for them.  
3. Their Original not from Acts 15.  
4. But from the Law of nature; which is distinguished into Absolute and After a sort.  
5. Synods not from the Law natural absolute.  
6. Synods under the Pagan Emperors: by what right.  
7. Synods called by Christian Emperors.  
8. Three questions about Synods.  
9 Whether the Highest Power may govern without a Synod.  
10. The affirmative proved by examples.  
11. Three ends of Synods, yet not necessary: Counsel, Consent, Jurisdiction.  
12. Synods sometimes not useful.  
13. Accusers may not be Judges in Synod.  
14. Synods sometimes hurtful.  
15. What may serve in their stead.  
16. Other causes to deny Synods, beside the general corruption of Religion.  
17. What is to be done, till a free Council may be called.  
18. Synods not calla without the H. power.  
19 TWO Whether the H. power may choose the Synod-men: and judge in Synod.  
20. The right of the Primitive Church. And, the assembling of Bishops.  
21. The Emperor's encyclic letters to the Metropolitan.  
22. The H. power may elect Pastors for the Synod: proved by reason and examples.  
23. When the election is permitted to others, the H. power hath command over it.  
24. The H. power may judge in Synod.  
25. Whether it be expedient or no, in person.  
26. The Highest powers present in Synods by their Deputies.  
27. III. What is the Highest powers right after Synod: The Epicrisis wherein is the right to change, to add, to take away.  
28. An Objection answered.  
29. The manner of giving the Epicrisis, or final judgement. Of appeal.  
30. The Epicrisis in parts of Religion as well as in the whole.    

CHAP. VIII.  

1. THe several Acts of Authority, are Legislation, Jurisdiction, and another without special name.  
2. Wherein is Legislation  
3. It belongs to the Highest power, about the whole Body of Religion.  
4. Answer to an objection of the change of Religion.  
5. Religion not to be brought in by force of Subjects.  
6. False and Schismatical worship, by the Highest power, sometimes prohibited and punished.  
7. Sometimes dissembled and regulated.  
8. Legislation in the parts of Religion.  
9 Suppression of unprofitable questions. And of words not found in Scripture.  
10. The regulating of Church-mens conversation.  
11. Laws about things undetermined by Divine Law. And that beside the Canons.  
12. Yet are the Canons of use in the making of Laws.  
13. No Legislative power belongs to the Church by Divine right.  
14. Yet may it be granted the Church by Law positive: Cumulatively, not Privatively: and not without subordination and dependence.  
15. How Kings have confessed themselves bound by the Canons  
16. Canons dispensed with by them. Examples hereof, even in the Apostolical.  
17. Divine Laws also moderated by equity.    

CHAP. IX.  

1. Jurisdiction about sacred things belongs to the H. Power.  
2. The effects if it are declared.  
3. Jurisdiction proper belongs not naturally to the Pastors.  
4. Yet by Law positive it belonged to them in some nations.  
5. Pastoral acts of divine right, which seem to come near Jurisdiction, and yet are distinct from it.  
6. The Apostolical rod.  
7. The use of the Keys.  
8. Prescription of the works of penance by way of direction or persuasion.  
9 Nonexhibition of the sacraments.  
10. The Church's acts by Divine right, which seem near Jurisdiction, but are distinguist. Separation from the inordinate brother or Pastor.  
11. Canonical Acts superadded to the former, and distin ●ist from them.  
12. Jurisdiction granted to Pastors by positive Law  
13. The efficacy of this Jurisdiction.  
14. The Jews had the like granted them.  
15. The Accessories of excommunication.  
16. All Pastoral Jurisdiction properly so called flows from the H. Power.  
17. How far those Pastoral acts may be used upon the supreme Governor. Of the use of the Keys.  
18. Under which pretence, cannot be excused seditious Sermons which are refelled by Scripture, and the Objection answered.  
19 All coaction of the H. Power unlawful.  
20. Canonical acts cannot be exercised against the H. Power without Consent.  
21. How the Pastor may satisfy his Conscience.  
22. What is the right of the H. Power about the foresaid acts of Pastors and Churches.  
23. Ecclesiastical Appeals depend upon the H. Power.  
24. Exercise of supreme Jurisdiction by himself or by others.  
25. The H. Power may dispense with Canonical and Legal penalties. And judge whether Excommunication be just or no.    

CHAP. X  

1. Two perpetual functions of presbyters and Deacons. And their defference.  
2. These four distinguished: Mandate, Election, Ordination, Confirmation.  
3. Of ordinatian without a Title.  
4. Ordination only by Pastors.  
5. The H. Power hath authority over it.  
6. Right Immutable or Mutable.  
7. How the election of Pastors belongeth to the Church.  
8. Apostolical Institution subject to change.  
9 Deacons, but not Pastors, elected by the people.  
10. Pastors in the Apostles times elected by the H. Spirit. And Mathias the Apostle.  
11. Popular Elections not proved by Acts 14.23.  
12. Nor by the precept of avoiding false Teachers.  
13. The old way of trying Pastors in the primitive Church.  
14. Cyprian doth not confirm, but overthrow popular Elections.  
15. Pastor's oft chosen by the Bishops, not by the people.  
16. The Election of Bishops, by the clergy: By the comprovincial Bishops.  
17. Mutability in the manner of Election.  
18. In elections the H. Power hath a Legistative right.  
19 And may itself make Election upon just cause.  
20. This proved by Reason.  
21. And by examples: in the state of Natural Law: and under the Mosaical.  
22. Examples of the Roman Emperors, and of the Kings of France.  
23. Objections answered.  
24. Of Investitures. By them is meant the Collation of Bishoprics.  
25. Examples of the Kings of England.  
26. Pastors as well as Bishops may be elected by the Highest Power.  
27. Examples hereof.  
28. The Objection from the abuse of right answered.  
29. The Canons and Fathers answered.  
30. Touching the Right of pagan Kings.  
31. The best manner of Election.  
32. The right of rescinding Election reserved still to the H. Power.  
33. And of Exauctorating pastors, if need be.  
34. Although chosen by others.    

CHAP. XI.  

1. THings necessary to be distingnisht from not necessary.  
2. Of Bishops, and Lay elders.  
3. The word Bishop explained. Here taken for the Overseer of Pastors.  
4. Bishops not against God's word.  
5. Bishop's always in the Catholic Church.  
6. Even in the time of the Apostles.  
7. Bishops allowed by the word of God.  
8. A place of Ambrose examined.  
9 Timothy and Titus were Bishops.  
10. Bb. styled Angels, Apostles, Presidents.  
11. Patterns of Bishops in the natural Law, in the Mosaical: but most probably the Rulers of Synagognes'.  
12. Bb of great use to the Church.  
13. Yet not by divine Command.  
14. Nor always one Bishop in every City.  
15. In whom is the right of Ordination.  
16. For what reasons Bishops were laid-by in some Churches.  
17. Lay-Elders none in the Apostles time.  
18. All the Ancients by Presbyters understand only Pastors. The ambiguity of the word Seniors, and Elders.  
19 The penitentiary Presbyter.  
20. Pastor's may be called Priests.  
21. Who are the Seniors in Tertullian.  
22. Why the ancient Bb. used to consult with the Church.  
23. Who are the Seniors in the suppositious Ambrose.  
24. Liberty to interpret Scripture in the Synagogue.  
25. And in the ancient Church; with the Difference.  
26. Lay-Elders, or Assessors, not commanded by God.  
27. Mat. 18.17. Explained. And the difference 'twixt the Syndery and Consistory.  
28. Lay-Elders not spoken of in the new Testament.  
29. Why Pastors were called Elders by the Apostles.  
30. The Church of Christ compared with the Judaical Kingdom.  
31. The Office of Elders in the new Test.  
32. An answer to that only place for Lay-Elders, 1 Tim. 5.17.  
33. Other places need no answer.  
34. The Highest power, or the Church, might law fully institute Lay-Elders.  
35. This institution not displeasing to God: proved by Scripture.  
36. Examples in the ancient Church drawing toward it.  
37. The English Churchwardens not much unlike the Adsessors.  
38. The Adsessors may be of good use.  
39 Yet with certain cautions.  
40. The Genevian elections.    

CHAP. XII.  

1. THe Highest Power hath need of Vicars in Spirituals.  
2. What Authority may be committed to Inferior Powers by the Highest.  
3. Liberty of Religion tolerated sometimes.  
4. Vicars either Substitutes or Delegates.  
5. Bishops substituted and Cleriks.  
6. Pastors and Laymen joined.  
7. Sometimes Laymen alone.  
8. The right of Lay-Patrons, ancient, and derived from the Regal.  
9 Benefices not the Pope's Patrimony.  
10. The Custom of Holland.  
11. All Patronages subject to the Highest Power.  
12. Inferior Powers have no command by Divine Right.  
13. And little is to be given them by the Highest, in Sacred things.  
14. None at all, unless they be Orthodox.   
THE END.    

An Advertisement to the Stationer.  
SIR,  
IF it be objected (as a friend of mine conjectured it might) that the work is any way opposite to the present Government, speaking so much of Kings and Emperors: The answer is, That the Judicious Author distinguisheth between King's absolute, and such as are confined or bound up by Laws; and cannot act without or against a Parliament. See cap. 3. Sect. 8. So that, This treatise doth not presume to dispute the State's Authority ('tis ill disputing with those that command Legions:) but presupposing that, humbly shows them, what they may and aught to do, on behalf of the Church. And, in the very first page, you find all the Book is written of the Highest power, whether King or Senate. And, these are the Author's words at the end of 15. Sect. Chap. 11. A Senate without a King, is as it were a King. This I thought sit to advertise, to prevent jealousy. Fare you well, And remember, 'tis one of the best pieces of the excellent Grotius.   

Courteous Reader, These Books following are to be sold by Joshua Kirton, at the King's Arms in Paul's Churchyard.  

Books of Divinity and Sermons.  

1. THe Truth of Christian Religion, proved by the Principles and Rules, taught and received in the Light of the understanding, in an exposition of the Articles of our faith, commonly called the Apostles Creed, written by a learned Author lately deceased, in Folio, 1651.  
2. A Concordance axiomatical, containing a Survey of Theological Propositions, with their Reasons and Uses in holy Scripture, by William Knight, in fol.  
3. Certain Sermons or Homilies appointed to be read in Churches in the time of Queen Elizabeth, and now reprinted in folio.  
4. Compunction or pricking of heart, with the time, means, nature, necessity, and order of it, and of Conversion; with motives, directions, signs, and means, of cure of the wounded in heart, with other consequent or concomitant duties, especially self-denial; All of them gathered from Acts 2.37. being the sum of 80. Sermons. With a Postscript concerning these times, and the sutiableness of this text and Argument to the same, and to the calling of the Jews. By R. Jenison, Doctor of Divinity, in quarto.  
5. A plain Discovery of the whole Revelation of St. John, in two Treatises; 1. Searching and proving the Interpretation. 2. Applying the same paraphrastically and historically to the text, with a Resolution of certain doubts, and annexion of certain Oracles of Sibylla; by John N pier, Lord of Marchiston, in quarto.  
6. The Government and order of the Church of Scotland; with an Astertion of the said Government, in the points of Ruling Elders, and of the Authority of Presoyteries and Synods, in quarto.  
7. A Treatise of Miscellany questions; wherein many useful questions, and cases of Conscience are discusted and resolved concerning the Controversies of these times; by George Gillespie of Scotland, in quarto.  
8. An Answer to the ten Reasons of Edmund Campian, the Jesuit, in confidence whereof he ●ftired Disputation to the Ministers of the Church of England, in the Controversy of Faith; by William Whitaker, Doctor of Divinity, in quarto.  
9 Jo. Hen. Alsieduis his discourse of the 1000 apocalyptical years, or the Saints reign on earth a thousand years; Englished by W. Burton, in quarto.  
10. Letters concerning Religion, between the late Earl of Manchester, Lord Privy Se●l, the Lord Faulkland, and Mr. ●a●●er Montaguc, in quarto.  
11. Truth Asserted, by the Doctrine and practice of the Apostles, seconded by the testimony of Synods, Fathers, and Doctors, from the Apostles to this day, viz. that Episcopacy is Jure divino; by Sir Frantis Wortley, in quarto.  
12. An Answer to the chief Arguments for Anabaptism, by Doctor John Bastwick, in quarto.  
13. Two learned Discourses; 1. on Matthew 28.18, 19 2. on 2 Peter 2.13. written by a learned and worthy Gentleman larely deceased, in octavo 1651.  
14. Popular Errors in general points, concerning the Intelligence of Religion, having relation to their causes and reduced into divers Observations, by John D●spagne, Minister of the French Church, in octavo.  
15. New Observations upon the Creed, with the use of the Lords Prayer maintained, by John Despagne, in octavo.  
16. The same in French.  
17. New Observations upon the Commandments, by John Despagne, 1651.  
18. The same in French.  
19 The Abridgement of a Sermon preached on the Fast day, for the good success of the Treaty between the King and Parliament, 1648. by John Despagne.  
20. The same in French.  
21. Sermon Funebre de Jean Despagne sur la mort de sa Femme, in octavo.  
22. Advertissement touth out lafoy fraction & distribution du prin en la S. cene obmises en plusieurs Eglises Orthodoxes, par Jean Despagne, in octavo.  
23. A Monument of Mortality, containing 1. A wakening for worldlings. 2. Meditations of Consolation. 3. Comfortable considerations preparing the sick for an happy change. 4. A Mirror of modesty, with a reproof of the strange attired woman, and the sacred use of Christian Funerals, by M. Day, Doctor of Divinity, in octavo.  
24. Plain truths of Divinity, collected out of the Sacred Scriptures, particularly of the destruction of Antichrist, and the time when, the coming of Christ to Judgement, and his reigning with his Saints for ever upon this earth after the restitution of all things; by John Alcock, in octavo.  
25. Herbert's careful Father, and pious Child, lively represented, in teaching and learning, a Catechism made in 1200 Questions and Answers, in which the Catholic truth is asserted, and above 600 Errors, Heresies and points of Popery are briefly confuted, in octavo.  
26. Herbert's belief and confession of faith made in 160. Articles, in octavo.  
27. Herbert's quadrupartite devotion, for the day, week, month, year, made in about 700. Meditations and Prayers, in octavo.  
28. Meditations on Christ's prayer upon the Cross, Father forgive them, for they know not what they do; by Sir John Hayward, in octavo, 1651.  
29. David's Tears, or Meditations on the 6.32. and 130. Psalms, by Sir John Hayward, in twelves.  
30. The Devotions of the dying man, that desireth to die well, Written by Samuel Gardiner, Doctor of Divinity, in twelves.  
31. A Beautiful Bay-bush, to shroud us from the sharp showers of Sin. containing many notable Prayers and Meditations, in twelves.  
32. A Grain of Incense, or Supplication for the peace of Jerusalem, the Church and State, written by John Reading, in octavo.  
33. An Evening Sacrifice or prayer for a family necessary for these calamitous times, made by John Reading, in octavo.  
34. Character of true blessedness, delivered in a Sermon at the Funeral of Mistress Alice Per●ival, by John Reading, in twelves.  
35. Six Godly Meditations or Sermons, upon certain select texts of Scripture, by Andrew Rivet, Doctor of Divinity, in twelves.  
36. A Meditation on Math. 27.27, 28, 29. or a Pattern for a King's Inauguration, written by King James, in twelves.  
37. Directions to know the true Church, written by George Carleton, Doctor of Divinity, in twelves.  
38. The Singing Psalms in Welsh, in twelves.  
39 A Preparation to Fasting and Repentance, by Peter du Moulin, in 24.    

Sermons.  

1. DOctor Williams, Bishop of Lincoln, on Galathians 6.14. before the Lords of Parliament.  
2. Ejusdem, on Job 42.12. before the Lords of Parliament.  
3. Doctor Andrews, Bishop of Winchester, on Luke 1.74, 75. November 5. 1617. before the King.  
4. Ejusdem, on 1 Cor. 11.16. on Easter day before the King.  
5. Ejusdem, on John 20.11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. on Easter day before the King.  
6. Doctor Laud Bishop of St. David's, on Psal. 22.3, 4, 5. at the opening of the Parliament.  
7. Doctor Robert Willon, on Psal. 2.1, 2, 3, 4. on Nou. 5. before the Judges, at Westminster.  
8. Christopher white, on Rom. 13.1.  
9 Humphrey Sydenham, on Eccles. 12.5. at the Funerals of Sir John Sydenham.  
10. Doctor Christopher Small, on Gen. 28.20, 21, 22. before the King.  
11. Isaac Singleton, on Esay 22.15. upon Gowries Conspiracy.  
12. Peter du Moulin, on Rom. 1.16. before the King.  
13. Doctor Morton, Bishop of Durham, on 1 Cor. 11.16. at St. Paul's.  
14. William Price, on Ezra 9.6, 7, 8. before the Lords of Parliament.  
15. Anthony Cade, on Rom. 2.15. a Visitation Sermon, with an appendix concerning Ceremonies.  
16. Doctor Henry King, on Jer. 1.10. at St. Paul's, on March 27. 1640.  
17. Doctor William Gouge, on Nehem. 5.19. before the Commous of Parliament.  
18. Ejusdem, on Ezekiel 36.11. before the Lords of Parliament.  
19 Ejusdem, on Ezra 8.21. before the Lords of Parliament on the Fast appointed for the good success of the Theary between the King and Parliament, 1648.  
20. Ejusdem, on Exodus 13.3. on Queen Elizabeth's day, Nou. 17. at Paul's.  
21. Ejusdem, on Ezekiel 24.16. at the Funeral of Doctor Ducks wife.  
22. Mathias Milward, on 2 Cor. 2.14. before the Company of the Artillery Garden.  
23. Ejusdem, on Rom. 13.4, at Guild-Hall Chapel.  
24. Henry Miller, on Psal. 124.1, 2, 3, 4. on the fifth of November.  
25. Alexander Rosse, on Matthew 21.13. Two Sermons.  
26. John Pigot, on Luke 19.41, 42, 43, 44.  
27. Nicholas Guy, on John 11.26. at the Funeral of Doctor Gouge's Wife.  
28. Thomas Palmer, on Psalm 37.40.  
29. James wilcock, on Acts 24.13, 14.  
30. Ejusdem on John 20.19, 20. Lam. 5.16. 1 Cor. 10. 16, 17, 1 John 4.1. in 6. Sermons.    

Libri Theologici Latini, etc.  

1. THomae Bradwardini Archiepiscopi olim Cantuariensis de Causa Dei, contra Pelagium, & de virtute Causarum, ad suos Mertonensos', libri tres; Opera & Study D. Hen. Savilii editi, in fol.  
2. De Republica Ecclesiastica pars secunda, cum 2 Appendicibus, 1. de SS. Eucharistia contra Card. Perronium, 2 Responsio ad magnam partem defensionis fidei, P. Francisci Suarez, in folio.  
3. In Acta Apostolorum, & in Singular Apostolorum, Jacobi, Petri, Johannis, & Judae Catholicas' Epistolas Commentarii; Autore R. P. F. Nicolao Gorrano Anglo, in fol.  
4. Miscelan●orum Theologicorum, quibus S. Scripturae & aliorum classicorum Autorum, plurima monumente explicantur atque illustrantur, libri tres, Autore Nicolao Fullero, in quarto.  
5. De Potestate Papae in Rebus temporalibus, sive in Regi●us deponendis usurpata, adversus Bellarminum; Autore foanne Episcopo Roffenst, in quarto.  
6. Papa Anti-Christus, sive Diatriba de Anti christo; Autore Georgio Downamo Episcopo Detensi, in quarto.  
7. Causa Regia, sive de Authoritate, & Dignitate Principum Christianorum differtatio, adversus B●llarminum; Autore Tho. Mortono Episcopo, in quarto.  
8. Antidotum, Adversus Ecclisiae Romanae de Merito proprie dicto ex condigno venenum; Autore Tho. Mortono Episcopo, in quarto.  
9 De Suprema Petestate Regia, Exercitationes habit in Academia Oxoniensi contra Bellarminum & Suarez. Autore Rob. Abbot professor Regio, in quarto.  
10. De Gratia & Perseverantia Sanctorum, Exercitationes habitae in Academia Oxoniensi, & Animadversio brevis, in R. Thomsoni Diatribam, de Amiss●ine & intercisione Justificationis & gra●●a; Autore Roberto Abbot.  
11. Georgii Abbati Archupiscopi Cantuwriensis Explicatio 6. illustrium quastionum, 1. de Mendacin, 2. de Circumcisione & Bapasmo, 3 de Astrologia, 4. de piasentia in cultu I dololatinco, 5. de Fuga in persecutione & peste, 6. An Deiis sit Author Peccati, in quartu.  
12. Stephani Szegedim Analysis, in Psalmos, Prophetas Majores, 4. Evangelia, Acta Apo●●o●orum, omnes Epislulas, & Apoca●ypsin, in quarto.  
13. Liturgia Inglesa, O Libro del Rezodo Publico, de la Administracion de los Sacramentoes, y otros Kitoes y Ceremenias de la yglesia de Ingal●terra, in quarto.  
14. La Liturgy Angloise, owl Livre des Pritres publiques de L'administration des Sacraments, & antres ordies, & Ceremonies de L'Eglise d'Angleterre, in quarto.  
15. Georgii Wicelin Methodus Concordie Eccsiastic●, cum Exhortatione ad Concilium, juxta Exemplar excusum, 1523. in octave.  
16. De Proesulibus Anglia Commentarius, omnium Episcoporum, necnon & Cardinalium o●●sdem Gentas, nomura, tempora, Seriem, atque Actiomes maxim ●●morabil●s, ab ultima antiquitate repetita, complexus, per Franciscum Godwinum Episco●um Landavensem, in quarto.  
17. St. Gregori Nazianzeni in Julianum Invectiv● dua, etc. come Scholies Groecis & notis, R. Montague, in quarto.  
18. Gilberti Foliot Episcopi Lond. Exposion in Canticum Canticorum, unacum Compendiv Alcuini, e Bibliotheca Regia, in quarto.  
19 Dela verity en tant qu'e●●est distincte de la R●●●lation, du uray semblable, du Possible, & du faux, pa● Edovard Herbert, Baron de Cherbury, in quarto.  
20. Loci Communes, D. Martini Lutheri, ex Scriptis ipsius Latinis, in 5. classes distributi, A. M. Thesdosio Fabricio, in quarto, 1651.    

Books of several sorts, of Humane Learning.  

1. GErhardi Mercatoris Atlas, or a Geographick Description, of the Regions, Countries, and Kingdoms of the world, through Europe, Asia, Africa, and America, represented by new and exact Maps, in two large Volumes in folio.  
2. Britain, or a Chorographical Description of the Kingdoms, England. Scotland, and Ireland, and the Islands adjoining, out of the depth of Antiquity: becautified with Maps of the several Shires of England, written by William Camden Clarenceux K. of A. in folio.  
3. An History of the Civil Wars of England, between the two Houses of Lancaster and York, beginning in the Reign of Richard the second, and ending in the Reign of Henry the seventh, written in Italian by Sir Fra. Biondi, Englished by Hen. Earl of Monmouth, in folio.  
4. The Roman History of Amianus Maroellinus, translated into English, by Philemon Holland, Doctor in Physic, in fol.  
5. The Annals and History of Cornelius Tacitus, with the notes of Sir Hen●y Savile, in folio.  
6. Discourses upon cornelius Tacitus, written in Italian by Marquis Virgilio Malvezzi, translated by Sir Richard Baker in folio.  
7. The Life and Reign of King Henry the Eighth, written by Edward Lord Herbert of Cherbury, in folio.  
8. The History of the Houses of Douglas and Angus, written by Mr. David Hume, in fol.  
9 The Siege of Breda, written in Latin by Herman Hugo, translated into English by Colonel Henry Gage, in folio.  
10. The History of the Council of Trent, written in Italian by Pietro Soave Polane, translated by Sir Nathana●l Bront.  
11. The same in Latin.  
12. The Theatre of God's Judgements, collected out of Sacred, Ecclesiastical, and Pagan Histories, by Doctor Thom. Beard, and Doctor Tho. Taylor, in sol.  
13. A French-English Dictionary, Compiled by Master Randle cotgrave, with another in English and French, in folio.  
14. Regiam Majest●●tem. A Collection of the old Laws and Constitutions of Scotland, from King Malcome the second, to King James the first, by Sir John Shene, in fol.  
15. The same in Latin.  
16. Inquiries touching diversity of Languages and Religions, through the chiefe parts of the world, written by Edward Brerewood, in quarto.  
17. The History of the Quarrels of Pope Paul the fisth, with the State of Venice, written in Italian by the Author of the History of the Council of Trent, and Translated by Doctor Christopher Potter, in quarto.  
18. A briet Discourse of the Newfoundland, with the Situation, temperature, and commodity thereof in quarto.  
19 Of Supremary in Affairs of Religion, by Sir John Hayward.  
20. Considerations touching a war with Spain, written by Francis Lord Vanlam, Viscount St. Alban, in quarto.  
21. The Life of Jacob Boesmen, vulgarly called the Germane Prophet, in quarto.  
22. Almansir, the learned and victorious King, that conquered Spain, his Life and Death, published by Robert ashley our of Oxford Library, in quarto.  
23. The Epistle congratulatory of Lysimachus Nica●●● of the S. of Jesus to the Covenanters in Scotland, paralleling their harmony in Doctrine and practice, in quarto.  
24. The Poor Vicar's Plea, declaring that a compe tency of means is due to them cut of the Tithes of their several Parishes, notwithstanding the Impropriations, written by Thomas Ryves, Doctor of Law, in quarto.  
25. A Collection of some modern Epistles of Morsieur de Balzac, carefully translated cut of French, being the fourth and last ●olume, in octavo.  
26. The History and Relation of the bloody Massacre at Paris, and in other places in France, 1572. in Twelve, 1651.  
27. The Free-School of War, a Treatise, whether it be lawful to bear Arms for the service of a Prince of a divers Religion, in quarto.  
28. Instructions for Musters and Arms, and the use thereof, in quarto.  
29. The Key of the Mathematics new filled, with the Resolution of adfected Aequations, the rule of compound Usury and false position, and the Art of Geometrical Dialling, in octavo.  
30. The same in Latin.  
31. A Génerall Treasury of Accounts, for all Countries in Christendom, made by William colson of London.  
32. Accounts of Merchandise ready computed, also, Tables for measuring of Timber, Board, Glass, and Land, enlarged and corrected, by John Penkethman, in twenty fours.  
33. The Merchant's Avizo, necessary for their Sons and Seivants, when first sent beyond Sea, in quarto.  
34. Mystagogus Poeticus, or the Muse's Interpreter, explaining the historical Mysteries, and mystical Histories, of the Ancient Greek, and Latin Poets, written by Alexander Rosse, in octavo.  
35. Observations on that (in its kind) eminent Petition presented to the Commons in Parliament, September 11. 1648. in quarto.  
36. A Perfect plaforme of an Ho●garden, and Instructions for the making and maintenance thereof, with Notes and Rules for reformation of all abuses commonly practised therein; written by Reynold Scot, in quarto.  
37. The Problems of Aristotle, with other Philosophers and Physicians, containing question and answets, touching the estate of man's body, in octavo.  
38. Childbirth, or the happy delively of women, s●tting down the government of women, in their breeding, travel, and lying in, in quarto.  
39 The Marrow of Physic, w●●ten by Tho, Brugis, in quarto.  
40. Pharmacopoea, cu● adjecta sunt Paraphrasis, & miscendorum medicamentorum modus, scripta a Bricio Bauderono, huic accedunt Jo. du Boys Pharmacopier Parisionsi● observationes in methodum misceindorium medicamentorum, in fol.  
41. Observationes Medicoe, de assechbus omissis, Authore Arnoldo Bootio, Med. D. in duodicimo.  
42. Anglia Flagellum, sen Tabes Anglica, Authore Theophilo de Garancieres, D. Medico, in duodecimo.  
43. A Sure Guide to the French tongue, teaching to pronounce French naturally, to read it pufectly, to wine it truly, and to speak it readily, by Paul Cogucau, in octavo, 1651.  
44. Lettres sur la mort de quelques Personnes en qualite & en Merit, tant de l'one, que de l'autre Sex, par ●harles de Beauvais, in oct●vo.  
45. Animadversions on Mr. Seldens History of Tithes, and his R●view thereof, by Richard Tillesly Doctor in Divinity, in quarto.    

Poetry and Plays.  

1. Godsrey of Boulogne or the Recovery of Jerusa●●●, done into English heroical verse, by Edward Fairfax, Gent, with the life of the said Godsicy, in sol.  
2. The crown of all Homer's works, Batrachomyomachia, or the battle of Frogs and Mice, h●s Hymns and Epigrams, Translated by George Chapman, in ●olio.  
3. The Hierarchy of the bl●ssed Angels, their Names, Orders, and Offices, the ●all of Luciser, with his Angels, written by Tho. Heywood, in sol.  
4. Orlando Furioso, in English hetoicall Verse, by Sir John Harrington, with addition of the Author's Epigrams, in fol.  
5. Leoline and Sydanis, a Romance of the Amoreus adventures of Princes, in quarto.  
6. The young man's Looking-glass, Bacchus Banne● displayed, Characters, and Epigrams, written by Richard ●atts.  
7. The most pleasant History of Albino and Bellama, by N. W. in twelve.  
8. Analecta Poëtica Graeca-Latina, or capping of Verses Greek and Latin, in twelves.  
9 Horatius de Arte Poetica, Englished by B. Johnson. An Execration against Vulcan. The Mask of Gypsies, and Epigrams, by the same Author, in twelves.  
10. The Constant Maid, A Comedy, written by James Shirley.  
11. St. Patrick for Ireland, the first part, written by James Shirley.  
12. Landgartha, a Tragicomedy, written by Henry Burnel.    

Books for Schools, and the University.  

1. ANtonii Ruvio Commentarii in universam Aristotelis Dialecticam, in quarto.  
2. Thomoe Lushingtonii Logica Analytica, de Principii●, Regulis, & usu rationis rectae, in octavo.  
3. Elementa Logicae, Autore Edovardo Brerewood, in duodecimo.  
4. Aditus ad Logicam, Autore Samuele Smith, in duodecimo.  
5. Institutionum Peripateticarum, ad mentem Summi viri Kenelmi Equitis Dygboei, pars Theorica, Item appendix Theologica, de Origine Mundi; Authore Thoma Anglo, in duodecimo.  
6. Francisci Baconi, de Sapientia veterum Liber, in duodecimo.  
7. Aemilii Porti Dictionarium lonicum & Doricum Graeco-Latinum, in octavo.  
8. Lexicon Graeco-latinum, in N. T. Dom. nostri Jesu Christi, Autore Georgio Pasore, in octavo.  
9 Novum Testamentum Dom. nostri Jesu Christi, Graecum, Cantabrigiae, in octavo.  
10. Idem, notis Roberti Stephani, Josephi Scaligeri, & Isaaci Casauboni, in octavo.  
11. Novum Testamentum Latinum Theodoro Beza Interpret, in duodecimo.  
12. Elementaria Traditio Christianorum Fidei, aut Catechismus, Grac. Latin. per Tuss. Berchetum, inoctavo.  
13. Paraphrafis Psalmorum Davidis Poetica, Autore Georgio Buchanano, in duodecimo.  
14. Particulae Latinae Orationis, collectae, dispositae, & consabulatiunculis digestae, Autore J. Hawkins Med. D. in octavo.  
15. A brief Introduction to Syntax, showing the use, grounds and reason of Latin construction, collected out of Nebrissa his Spanish copy, with the Concordance, supplied by John Hawkins Med. D. in octavo.  
16. Jo. casa Galateus seu demorum honestate, & Elegantia, notis Nath. Chylnae in octavo.  
17. Isocratis Orationes & Epistolae, Grac. Lat. Interlincat. in octavo.  
18. Analecta Poetica Graeca-latina, or capping of Verses Greek and Latin.  
19 Aeschims' c●ntra Ctesiphontem, & Demosthenes' pro Corona Orationes à Johanne Sturmio illustratae, Graecè, in octavo.  
20. Homerilliav, idest de rebus ad Troiamgestis Graec. Lat. in octavo, Cantabrigia.  
21. M. Fahn Quintihani Institutionum Oratoriarum libri 12, ●accesserunt Quintilianorum Declamatiomes, Dan. Pareo editi, in octavo.  
22. Synonimorum Sylva olim à Simone Pelegromo collecta, nunc H. F. emendata & Aucta, in octavo.  
23. Ca●liop●i●, or a Rich Storehouse of proper choice and elegant Latin words and phrases collected chiefly out of Tully's Works, by Thomas Dray, in octavo.  
24. Bibliotheca Scholastica Instructissima, or a Treasury of ancient Adages and Proverbs collected out of the English, Greek, Latin, French, Italian and Spanish, published, by Tho. Drax, in octavo.  
25. An eas●e Entrance to the Latin tongue, containing the Grounds of Grammar, and their Examination; 2. A vocabulary of common words, English and Latin. 3. Examples appliable to the Rules of Concordance and construction. 4. Collections out of the lowest School Authors. 5. More elegant expressions for children. 6. The first principles of Christianity, by charles Hoole Schoolmaster in London, in twelves, 1651.  
26. A little Vocabulary English and Latin, for the use of little children that begin to learn the Latin tongue, by Charles Hoole, in twelves, 1651.  
27. Alexandri Rossaei Isagoge Grammatica, in Gratiamily lorum qui nolunt memoriam multis & longis regulis gravari concinnata, in octavo.  
28. Jodoci Stunpelii Parnassus Epithetorum, Singula Ravisii, multag, Prosodiae Smetii, Epitheta vario metro pro Studiosis, versus eleganter extempore sine epithetorum quantitatis errore Scriptures, inclusa continens, in duodecimo, 1651.  
29. Quirti Horatii Flacci Poemata, Scholiis five annotationibus Joannis Bond illustrata, in octavo.  
30. Publii Ovidu Nasonis Metamorphoseon, libri 15. notis Tho. Farnabii illustrati, in octavo.  
31. Angeli Caninii Hellenisinus, copios●ssimi Graecarum latinarumque, vocum Indicis accessione per Carolum Hanboesium locupletatus, in octavo, 1651.  
31. Rider's Dictionary English and Latin, and Latin and English enlarged, by Francis Holy-Oke, in quarto.    
FINIS.