longer than a month. That they were kept back by an authoritative restraint, and were cut off if
they did eat in their uncleanness. That some unclean persons were not put out of the camp, nor
from the company of men, but from the tabernacle and holy things only. That all unclean per-
sons were not suspended from all ordinances. That scandalous and flagitious persons were not
admitted to a trespass-offering (which was a reconciling ordinance), much less to the passover
(which was a sealing ordinance) without a public penitential confession of their sin. Mr Prynne's
replies to this argument of mine confuted."

CHAP. XI.—A confutation of the strongest arguments of Erastus, namely, those drawn
from the law of Moses,

The strength of these arguments put together, which is not only enervated, but retorted. That
the confession of sin required, Lev. v. 5, Num. v. 6, 7, was a confession of the particular sin by
word of mouth; and that this confession was required even in criminal and capital cases. That
moral as well as ceremonial uncleanness was a cause of sequestration from the sanctuary, yea,
much more, the moral uncleanness being more hateful to God, more hurtful and infective to
God's people. That the exclusion of the unclean, under the law, could not so fitly signify the ex-
clusion from the kingdom of heaven as from communion with the church in this life. That this
legal type did certainly signify a sequestration of scandalous, or morally unclean persons from
church communion under the New Testament, is proved from Isa. lii. 1; 2 Cor. vi. 14-17, also
from the exposition of Peter's vision, Acts x. That among the Jews such as attended a litigious
action, or at least a capital judgment, upon the preparation day, were thought defiled, and not al-
lowed to eat the passover. That it was not left to a man's free will to judge of his own clean-
ness or uncleanness, nor to expiate his sin when he pleased. That the universal precept for all
that were circumcised to eat the passover, doth admit of other exceptions beside those that were
legally unclean, or in a journey. The great difference between sacraments and sacrifices, which
Erastus confoundeth.

CHAP. XII.-Fourteen arguments to prove that scandalous and presumptuous offen-
ders against the moral law (though circumcised, and not being legally unclean)
were excluded from the passover,

Known presumptuous and obstinate sinners were cut off from among their people, therefore not
admitted to the passover. The Jews themselves held that moral as well as ceremonial unclean-
ness did render them incapable of eating the passover. Who were esteemed heretical or apostate
Israelites. Who Epicurean Israelites. That these and such like were not acknowledged to be in
the communion of the church of Israel, nor was it allowed to speak or converse with them, much
less that they should eat the passover. Grotius's argument, There was an excommunication for
ceremonial uncleanness, therefore much more for moral uncleanness. What God did teach his
people by the purging out of leaven. If the shew-bread might not be given to David's men un-
less they had for some space before abstained from their wives, much less might known adulterers
be admitted to the passover. Ezek. xxii. 26 discussed against Mr Coleman. The original words
explained. Profane church members have the name of heathens and strangers. The qualifica-
tions of proselytes, without which they were not admitted to circumcision and the passover.
That course was taken, Ezra x., that none defiled with unlawful marriages might eat the pass-
over. By Erastus's principles the most scandalous conversation was not so hateful to God as le-
gal uncleanness. The law of confessing sin, Lev. v., Num. v., is meant of every known sin
which was to be expiated by sacrifice, especially the more notorious and scandalous sins.

CHAP. XIII.-Mr Prynne's argument from 1 Cor. x. (which he takes to be unan-
swerable) discussed and confuted,

Mr Prynne, in expounding that text of the passover, differeth both from the apostles and from
Erastus himself. His argument (if good) will necessarily conclude against his own concessions.
If scandalous sinners had been suspended from the manna and water of the rock, they had been
suspended from their ordinary corporal meat and drink. That the scandalous sins mentioned by
the Apostle were committed not before, but after, their eating of that spiritual meat, and drink-
ing of that spiritual drink. The argument strongly retorted. The scandalous sins mentioned
by the Apostle were national sins, and so come not home to the present question, which is of per-
sons, not of nations.

APPENDIX TO THE FIRST BOOK,

The Erastians misrepresent the Jewish government. Their compliance with the Anabaptists in this
particular. Their confounding of that which was extraordinary in the Jewish church with that
which was the ordinary rule. Fourteen objections answered. Mr Prynne's great mistakes of
Deut. xvii., 2 Chron. xix. The power and practice of the godly kings of Judah in the reforma-
tion of religion cleared. The argument from Solomon's deposing of Abiathar, and putting Zadock
in his place, answered four ways. The priests were appointed to be as judges in other cases be-
side those of leprosy and jealousy. 2 Chron. xxiii. 19, further scanned. A scandalous person was
an unclean person both in the Scripture phrase and in the Jewish language. The sequestration
of the unclean from the sanctuary no civil punishment. Of laws and causes civil and ecclesiasti-
cal among the Jews. Of their scribes and lawyers. Some other observable passages of Maimoni-

51

56

62

65

des concerning excommunication. What meant by "not entering into the congregation of the
Lord," Deut. xxiii. 1-3, and by "separating the mixed multitude," Neh. xiii. 2. Five reasons to
prove that the meaning of these places is not in reference to civil dignities and places of govern-
ment, nor yet in reference to unlawful marriages only, but in reference to church membership
and communion. Two objections to the contrary answered. One from Exod. xii. 48. Another
from the example of Ruth. An useful observation out of Onkelos, Exod. xii.

THE SECOND BOOK.

OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH GOVERNMENT.

CHAP. I. Of the rise, growth, decay, and reviving of Erastianism,

The Erastian error not honestis parentibus natus. Erastus the midwife, how engaged in the busi-

ness. The breasts that gave it suck, profaneness and self-interest. Its strong food, arbitrary go-

vernment. Its tutor, Arminianism. Its deadly decay and consumption, whence it was. How

ill it hath been harboured in all the reformed churches? How stiffled by Erastus himself?

Erastianism confuted out of Erastus. The divines who have appeared against this error. How

the controversy was lately revived.

CHAP. II.-Some postulata, or common principles, to be presupposed,

That there ought to be an exclusion of vile and profane persons (known to be such) from the holy

things, is a principle received among the heathens themselves. That the dishonour of God by

scandalous sins ought to be punished, as well, yea much rather, than private injuries. That pub-

lic sins ought to be publicly confessed, and the offenders put to public shame. That there ought

to be an avoiding of and withdrawing from scandalous persons in the church, and that by a pub-

lic order rather than at every man's discretion. That there is a distinction of the office and

power of magistracy and ministry. That the directive judgment in any business doth chiefly be-

long to those who by their profession and vocation are set apart to the attendance and oversight

of such a thing.

CHAP. III.-What the Erastians yield unto us, and what we yield unto them,

They yield that the magistrate's power in ecclesiasticis, is not arbitrary, but tied to the word. That

there may be a distinct church government under heathen magistrates. That the abuse takes not

away the just power. They allow of presbyteries, and that they have some jurisdiction. That the

ministry is jure divino, and magistracy distinct from it. We yield unto them, that none ought

to be rulers in the church but such against whom there is no just exception. That presbyterial

government is not a dominion but a service. That it hath for its object only the inward man.

That presbyterial government is not an arbitrary government, cleared by five considerations.

That it is the most limited and least arbitrary government of any other, cleared by comparing it

with Popery, Prelacy, Independency, and with lawful magistracy. That the civil magistrate may

and ought to do much in and for religion, ordinarily, and yet more in extraordinary cases. That

the civil sanction is a free and voluntary act of the magistrate's favour. That ministers owe as

much subjection and honour to the magistrate as other subjects.

CHAP. IV. Of the agreement and the differences between the nature of the civil

and of the ecclesiastical powers or governments,

Ten agreements between the civil power and the ecclesiastical power. The differences between
them opened, in their causes, efficient, matter (where a fourfold power of the keys is touched), form,
and ends, both supreme and subordinate (where it is opened, how and in what respect the
Christian magistrate intendeth the glory of Jesus Christ, and the purging of his church); also
effects, objects, adjuncts, correlations, ultimate terminations, and divided executions.

CHAP. V. Of a twofold kingdom of Jesus Christ: A general kingdom, as he is the

eternal Son of God, the Head of all principalities and powers, reigning over all

creatures; and a particular kingdom, as he is Mediator, reigning over the church

only,

How this controversy falls in, and how deep it draws. That our opposites herein join issue with the
Socinians. Nine arguments to prove this distinction of a twofold kingdom of Christ; in which of
the eternity, universality, donation, and subordination of the kingdom of Christ. The arguments
brought to prove that Christ as Mediator reigneth over all things, and hath all government (even

75

79

80

85

90

civil) put in his hands, examined and confuted. In what sense Christ is said to be "over all, the
heir of all things," to have "all things put under his feet," to be "the head of every man." A dis-
tinction between Christ's kingdom, power and glory cleared.

CHAP. VI. Whether Jesus Christ, as Mediator and Head of the church, hath placed
the Christian magistrate to hold and execute his office under and for him, as
his vicegerent. The arguments for the affirmative discussed,
96

The decision of this question will do much (yet not all) in the decision of the Erastian controversy.
The question rightly stated. Ten arguments for the affirmative discussed and answered, where
divers scriptures are debated and cleared. How we are to understand that Christ is "King of
kings, and Lord of lords." How "all power in heaven and in earth" is said to be "given to him."
That the governments set in the church, 1 Cor. xii. 28, are not civil magistrates, fully proved.
Eph. i. 21-23, and Col. ii. 10, vindicated.

CHAP. VII.-Arguments for the negative of that question formerly propounded,
The lawful authority of the heathen magistrates vindicated. It cannot be shown from Scripture,
that Christ, as Mediator, hath given any commission of vicegerentship to the Christian magis-
trate. That the work of the ministry is done in the name and authority of Jesus Christ; the
work of magistracy not so. The power of magistracy, or civil government, was not given to
Christ as Mediator, shown from Luke xii. 14; John xviii. 36; Luke xvii. 20, 21. Magistracy
founded in the law of nature and nations. The Scripture holds forth the same origination of hea-
then magistracy and of Christian magistracy.

CHAP. VIII. Of the power and privilege of the magistrate in things and causes
ecclesiastical, what it is not, and what it is,

That no administration, formally and properly ecclesiastical (and, namely, the dispensing of church
censures), doth belong unto the magistrate, nor may (according to the word of God) be assumed
and exercised by him, proved by six arguments. That Christ hath not made the magistrate head
of the church, to receive appeals from all ecclesiastical assemblies. There are other sufficient
remedies against abuses or maladministration in church government. Reasons against such ap-
peals to the magistrate. The arguments to the contrary from the examples of Jeremiah and of
Paul discussed. Of the collaterality and co-ordination of the civil and ecclesiastical powers.
What is the power and right of the magistrate in things and causes ecclesiastical, cleared: first,
generally; next, more particularly, by five distinctions. 1. Tà ï1⁄2w rãs ixxλncías belong to the
civil power, but not rà ow. 2. The magistrate may imperare that which he may not elicere. Dis-
tinguish the directive power from the coercive power. 4. The magistrate's power is cumulative not
privative. 5. He may do in extraordinary cases that which he ought not to do ordinarily. A
caution concerning the arbitrary power of magistrates in things ecclesiastical.

CHAP. IX. That by the word of God there ought to be another government besides
magistracy or civil government, namely, an ecclesiastical government (properly
so called) in the hands of church officers,

The question stated, and the affirmative proved, by one-and-twenty scriptural arguments. Who
meant by "the elders that rule well," 1 Tim. v. 17. Ilgosaràs and goïrrάusvos names of government.
The words youμivos and wibiobas, Heb. xiii. 7, 17, examined. Of receiving an accusation against
an elder. Or rejecting an heretic. Of the excommunication of the incestuous Corinthian, and
the sense of the word ripía. Of the subjection of the spirits of the prophets to the prophets.
The angels of the churches, why reproved for having false teachers in the church. "Note that
man," 2 Thes. iii. 14, proved to be church censure. Of the ruler, Rom. xii. 18, and governments,
1 Cor. xii. 28. A pattern in the Jewish church for a distinct ecclesiastical government. What
meant by cutting off, Gal. v. 12. 'Amonów properly what? Of the ministerial power" to revenge
all disobedience," 2 Cor. x. 6. Kugarai, 2 Cor. ii. 8, what? Of the visible administration of the
kingdom of Christ, by his laws, courts, censures. The arguments for excommunication from
Matt. xviii. and 1 Cor. v. briefly vindicated. That elders are rulers of the flock, 'Eziozoros a name
of government. Ministers why called "stewards of the mysteries of God." Oinovopos a name
of government. Church government exercised by the synod of the apostles and elders, Acts xv.

CHAP. X.-Some objections made against ecclesiastical government and discipline
answered,

Mr Hussey's objection doth strike as much against Paul as against us. The fallacy of comparing
government with the word preached, in point of efficacy. Four ends or uses of church govern-
ment. That two co-ordinate governments are not inconsistent. The objection, that ministers
have other work to do, answered. The fear of an ambitious ensnarement in the ministry, so
much objected, is no good argument against church government. Mr Hussey's motion concern-
ing schools of divinity examined. Church government is no immunity to church officers from
censure. Though the Erastian principles are sufficiently overthrown by asserting, from Scrip-
ture, the may be of church government, yet our arguments prove a must be, or an institution.
Six arguments added, which conclude this point.

107

114

124

143

CHAP. XI.-The necessity of a distinct church government under Christian as well

as under heathen magistrates,

This acknowledged by Christian emperors of old. Grotius for us in this particular. Christian ma-

gistracy hath never yet punished all such offences as are ecclesiastically censurable. Presbyteries

in the primitive times did not exercise any power which did belong of right to the magistrate. No

warrant from the word, that the ordinance of a distinct church government was only for churches

under persecution; but contrariwise, the churches are charged to keep till the coming of Christ

the commandment then delivered. No just ground for the fear of the interfering of the civil and

of the ecclesiastical power. The church's liberties enlarged (not diminished) under Christian ma-

gistrates. The Covenant against this exception of the Erastians. The Christian magistrate, if he

should take upon him the whole burden of the corrective part of church government, could not

give an account to God of it. The Erastian principles do involve the magistrate into the prela-

tical guiltiness. The reasons and grounds mentioned in Scripture upon which church censures

were dispensed in the primitive churches, are no other than concern the churches under Chris-

tian magistrates. The end of church censures neither intended nor attained by the administra-

tion of Christian magistracy, The power of binding and loosing not temporary. They who re-

strict a distinct church government to churches under heathen or persecuting magistrates give

a mighty advantage to Socinians and Anabaptists. Gualther and Mr Prynne for us in this

question.

APPENDIX TO THE SECOND BOOK,

A collection of some testimonies out of a declaration of King James, the Helvetian, Bohemian, Au-

gustine, French and Dutch Confessions, the ecclesiastical discipline of the reformed churches in

France, Harmonia Synodorum Belgicarum, the Irish Articles, à book of Melanchton, and another

of L. Humfredus.

148

153

THE THIRD BOOK.

OF EXCOMMUNICATION FROM THE CHURCHI, AND OF SUSPENSION FROM THE

LORD'S TABLE.

CHAP. I.-An opening of the true state of the question, and of Mr Prynne's many

mistakes and misrepresentations of our principles,

A transition from church government in general to excommunication and suspension in particular.
The present controversy ten ways misstated by Mr Prynne. That which was publicly depending
between the Parliament and Assembly did rather concern the practical conclusion itself than the
mediums to prove it. The strength of the Assembly's proofs for suspension scarce touched by Mr
Prynne. That the power of suspension is neither in the minister alone, nor unlimited. The
question is practically stated by Aretius. The present controversy how different from the prela-
tical? The power desired to elderships, is not to judge men's hearts, but to judge of external evi-
dences. The distinction of converting and confirming ordinances, how necessary in this ques-
tion? Excommunication and suspension confounded by Mr Prynne (as likewise by the Separa-
tists), contrary to the manner both of the Jewish church, and of the ancient and reformed Chris-
tian churches. Mr Prynne's assertion concerning suspension is contrary to the ordinances of
parliament. The question stated as it ought to be stated.

CHAP. II. Whether Matt. xviii. 15-17 prove excommunication,

The Erastians cannot avoid an argument ex consequenti from this text for excommunication, al-

though we should grant that the literal sense and direct intendment of the words is not concern-

ing excommunication. Of the word ixxanoia. That the trespass meant ver. 15, is sometime

known to more than one at first. That the meaning is not of a civil personal injury, but of a

scandalous sin, whether there be materially a personal injury in it or not. This confirmed by six

reasons. That if it were granted these words, "If thy brother trespass against thee," are under-

stood of a personal injury, this could be no advantage to the Erastian cause, in six respects.

Erastus's argument, that the trespass here meant is such as one brother may forgive to another,

answered. That the law of two or three witnesses belongeth to ecclesiastical, as well as to civil

courts. That "Tell the church" here, cannot be, Tell the civil sanhedrim or court of justice among

the Jews. Of the meaning of these words, "Let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a pub-

lican." Mr Pynne's argument retorted. That the heathens might not enter into the temple, to

wit, into the court of Israel, but into the intermurale they might come and worship. That there is

not the like reason for excluding excommunicate persons wholly from our churches. Of Solo-

mon's porch. That Mr Prynne confoundeth the devout penitent publican with the profane un-

just publicans. The objection from the publican's going up to the temple to pray, examined.

Publicans commonly named as the worst and wickedest of men. Another objection, "Let him

be to thee (not to the whole church) as an heathen," &c., discussed.

156

162

CHAP. III.-A further demonstration that these words, "Let him be unto thee as
an heathen man and a publican," are not meant of avoiding civil, but religious
or church fellowship,
170
The great disorder and confusion which Mr Prynne's sense of this text might introduce. That it
was not unlawful to the Jews to have civil company or fellowship with heathens, unless it were for
religious respects, and, in case of the danger of an idolatrous ensnarement, which is cleared by a
passage of Elias in Tishbite. In what sense Peter saith, Acts x. 28, that a Jew might not keep
company, or come unto one of another nation. That the Jews did keep civil and familiar fellow-
ship with Ger toschav, or Ger schagnar, the proselyte indweller, or the proselyte of the gate, who
yet was uncircumcised, and no member of the Jewish church, nor an observer of the law of Mo-
ses, but only of the seven precepts given to the sons of Noah; which cleareth the reason why
the synod of the apostles and elders, who would not impose circumcision, nor any other of the
Mosaical ceremonies upon the believing Gentiles, did, nevertheless, impose this as a necessary
burden upon them, to abstain from blood and things strangled. Christians are permitted by
Paul to eat and drink with them that believe not. Further proofs, that some uncircumcised hea-
thens had civil fellowship with the Jews, and some circumcised Hebrews had not ecclesiastical
communion with the Jews. The question decided out of Maimonides. That these words, "Let
him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican," do imply somewhat negative, and somewhat
positive. The negative part is, that he must not be worse used in civil things than an heathen
man or publican; that excommunication breaketh not natural and moral duties; neither is any
civil fellowship at all forbidden to be kept with an excommunicate person, except under a spiri-
tual notion and for spiritual ends, not qua civil fellowship. The positive part is, that he must be
used in the same manner as an heathen man and a publican in spiritual things, and in church
communion. Heathens five ways excluded from communion with the Jews in the holy things.
"Let him be as a publican," implieth two things more than "Let him be as an heathen;" but ex-
clusion from some ordinances was common both to heathens and scandalous publicans. That the
Pharisee's speech concerning the publican who went up to the temple to pray, showeth that he
was not esteemed a profane publican.

CHAP. IV-A confutation of Erastus and Bilson's interpretation of Matt. xviii. 15-
17, as likewise of Dr Sutcliffe's gloss differing somewhat from theirs,

181

The scope of this scripture wholly spiritual, concerning the gaining of a brother from sin, not civil,
concerning the prosecuting of a personal injury. Rebuke for sin a common Christian duty,
which is necessary in sins committed against God, rather than in injuries committed against
man. That any sin by which thou art scandalised is a trespass against thee. The Erastian inter-
pretation of Matt. xviii. makes it lawful for one Christian to go to law with another before an un-
believing judge, and so maketh Paul contrary to Christ. The same interpretation restricteth the
latter part of the text to those Christians only who live under an unbelieving magistrate, while
it is confessed that the former part belongeth to all Christians. It is contrary also to the law of
Moses. They contradict themselves concerning the coercive power of the sanhedrim. The gra-
dation in the text inconsistent with their sense. The argument of Erastus to prove that the
words, "as a publican," are meant of a publican qua publican, and so of every publican, examined.
Their exception, "Let him be to thee," &c., not to the whole church, answered three ways.
CHAP. V. That "Tell it unto the church," hath more in it than "Tell it unto a
greater number,"
187

The word ixxλncía never given to any lawful assembly simply because of majority of number. This
interpretation provideth no effectual remedy for offences. Kahal by the Hebrews, and ixxλncia
by the Grecians, often used for an assembly of such as had jurisdiction and ruling power. Whe-
ther the two or three witnesses, Matt. xviii. 16, be only witnesses or assistants in the admonition,
or whether the intention be, that they shall prove the fact before the church forensically (if need
be), and whether two or three witnesses must be taken when the offence is known to him only that
gives the first rebuke, discussed. This, their interpretation, brings a brother under the greatest
yoke of bondage. Grotius's interpretation of the word church not inconsistent with ours. Divers
authors of the best note for our interpretation; that is, that by the church here, is meant the
elders of the church assembled. The name of the church given to the elders for four con-
siderations.

CHAP. VI.-" Of the power of binding and loosing," Matt. xviii. 18,

Our opposites extremely difficulted and divided in this point. Binding and loosing, both among
Hebrews and Grecians, authoritative and forensical words. Antiquity for us, which is proved out
of Augustine, Jerome, Ambrose, Chrysostom, Isidorus, Pelusiota, Hilarius, Theophylact. That
this power of binding and loosing belongeth neither to private persons nor to civil magistrates,
but to church officers; and that in reference, 1. To the bonds of sin and iniquity; 2. To the dog-
matical decision of controversy concerning the will of Christ. That this power of binding and
loosing is not merely doctrinal, but juridical or forensical, and meant of inflicting or taking off
ecclesiastical censure. This cleared by the coherence and dependency between ver. 17 and 18
(which is asserted against Mr Prynne), and further confirmed by eleven reasons. In which
the agreement of two on earth, ver. 19; the restriction of the rule to a brother or church mem-
ber, also Matt. xvi. 19; John xx. 23; Psal. cxlix. 6-9, are explained. Another interpretation

190