On the Kingly Office of Christ.

And for Christ's kingly office, who is able to set down the indignities and outrages offered in your church to the sceptre thereof?

For first, where Christ reigneth as the King in Sion, his holy mountain, ruling over his servants and subjects only, as the King of saints, Rev. xv. 3, under his Father, you have gathered him a kingdom, and crowned him the king thereof, contrary to his express will, of known traitors and rank rebels unto his crown and dignity: even of such as do visibly and apparently fight for Satan, and his kingdom, the kingdom of darkness, hating, deriding, and persecuting to the utmost of their power, all such as desire to please and serve Christ in any sincerity. Of such, and none other, doth the body of your church consist, for the greatest part, as all amongst you that fear God will testify with me.

Secondly, Where Christ ruleth over his subjects by the sceptre of his holy Word, which is a sceptre of righteousness, Psa. xlv. 6: in the place of it, the ungodly canons and constitutions of popes and prelates must, and do bear sway. Such subjects, such laws. And say not, Mr. B. as you do, in answer to Mr. Ainsworth, page 259, that "you acknowledge no other lawgiver over your consciences in matters of faith, and obedience, between Christ, and you, save him alone." For what doth your church representative but bind conscience, in binding men to subscribe to the hierarchy, service-book, and ceremonies, sponte et ex animo? in pressing men to the use of things reputed indifferent, absolutely, and whether they offend, or offend not; in tying men to a certain form of prayer, and thanksgiving: excommunicating men for the refusal, and omission of these, and the like observances of their laws? And what do you but loose and unbind the conscience, in tolerating, yea, approving, yea, making and ordaining unpreaching ministers, and in binding the people, under both civil and ecclesiastical penalties, to their ministrations, in their own parishes, and from others? And what do you else in your dispensations for pluralities, non-residency, and the like? Are not these matters of conscience with

you, Mr. B. wherein your laws and lawmakers bind and loose, as they list? All the laws and ordinances for the ministry and government of the Jewish Church, were matters of faith and obedience between God and the church, binding the consciences of the people and is the new testament less perfect than the old? and the laws, and ordinances for the administration of it less excellent, and of a baser foundation than the former? It matters not what your words are, since it appears by your deeds, that you usurp the throne of Christ, in appointing officers, and making laws for the government and administration of his kingdom the church: and those many of them to the abolishing of his, herein rather holding Christ as a captive, than honouring him, as a king.

Third, Where Christ hath given to his church liberty, power, and commandment, every one of them severally, and all of them jointly to reprove and reform disorders, and whatsoever is found whether person or thing, faulty, and disagreeing unto his Word: alas! this liberty is enthralled, this power lost, this commandment made of no force. The prelates have seized all these royalties into their hands, as though they alone were made partakers of Christ's kingly anointing, and were as kings to rule in his church. Here is a king in a great measure without subjects, without laws, without officers, without power.

But here I must needs observe a few things about two answers given by Mr. B. in his second book, pages 260, 261, to two of Mr. Ainsworth's objections about the matter in hand. To the former being about the officers of Christ in the church, he answereth, that they have Christ's officers appointed to govern; the civil magistrate, the king's majesty, the ruling elder, next under Christ, &c. and the ecclesiastical governors under him, the bishops, who are also pastors and doctors.

But you should have considered, Mr. B. that the question is not about civil but ecclesiastical governors. The king indeed is to govern in causes ecclesiastical, but civilly, not ecclesiastically, using the civil sword, not the spiritual for the punishing of offenders. And if the king be a church officer, then he is, first, a king of the church. Second, To be called to his office, and so deposed from it

by the church, or at least by other ecclesiastical persons, by whom alone you will have church officers made. And lastly, if the king be such a ruling elder, as the Scriptures speak of, he is inferior to the teaching elders, and deserves less honour than they. For so the apostle orders things. Rom. xii. 7, 8; 1 Tim. v. 17.

Now in making your bishops, pastors, and doctors, you are doubly forgetful of yourself; and doubly injurious unto them, and which is worse than both the rest, you sin against the Lord, and his truth. For the first, in your former book you made your bishops chief officers in the church, and the successors of the apostles, and evangelists, and here you make them pastors, and teachers, which are the lowest orders of officers that Christ gave for the work of the ministry. Eph. iv. 11. 2. If your bishops be pastors, and teachers of their office, what are you, and the rest of your rank? You and they have not the same office, but you an office under them, and so pastors and teachers being the lowest order that Christ hath left in his church, your order must needs be something under the lowest, and of another's leavings than Christ's. 3. In making your bishops the pastors and teachers of the Church of England, or the particular churches in it, you lay to their charge an accusation, which they will never be able to answer at the day of the Lord, which is, their not feeding of so many thousand sheep committed unto them to be fed, and taught by them. Lastly, Nothing is more untrue, and disagreeable to the Word of God, than that your provincial and diocesan bishops are the pastors and teachers given by Christ to his church. There were no other ordinary officers left or appointed by the apostles in the churches but such as were fixed to particular congregations, ordinarily called bishops or elders, Acts xiv. 23; xx. 17, 28; Phil. i. 1. And if it can be showed, that, by the Word of God any other officers were left, or appointed in the church after the extraordinary officers, apostles, prophets, evangelists, whose gifts and places were extraordinary, besides such bishops, and elders, as were limited to particular churches, I will yield this. whole cause in the point of the ministry, and so profess. The other of Mr. B.'s answer I mind, is, about the power

of Christ against sin, Satan, Antichrist, the want whereof, Mr. Ainsworth and that truly, objecteth against the English assemblies. Mr. B.'s defence summarily is, that, there is in the Church of England, the preaching of the Word, which is the power of Christ, Rom. i. 18, as also excommunication, though not in every parish, yet in the Church of England in which is comprehended all parishes, and all superior power over them.

For which let the reader observe these particulars.

First, A national church since Christ's death, and the dissolution of the Jewish Church, is a monstrous compound, and savours of Judaism.

Secondly, If the main part of the power of Christ be to be administered in a particular congregation, by the ordinary officers thereof, namely, the preaching of the gospel, why not the inferior part, the censures also, save that the bishops to lord it over all, will keep this rod in their own hands?

Thirdly, The ministers whose judgments and reasons you avouch, both say, and prove, in the latter end of your book, page 180, that this power is given to a particular congregation of faithful people.

Fourthly, You yourself lay it down, page 92, as a main ground against popularity, and withal sundry scriptures to prove it, that Christ hath appointed the same sorts of men in his church "for preaching, administration of the sacraments, and government."

Lastly, It is apparent, that the particular church of Corinth gathered together in the name of the Lord Jesus, had the power of the Lord Jesus, 1 Cor. v. 4, 5, for excommunication: and so hath every other faithful assembly in the world, as they had, which since your assemblies are not, they may want this power without any great wrong: the evil only is, that it resteth in a worse place, than the worst parish assembly, the bishop's court, or consistory.

I proceed. Only my desire is, that the things which I have noted touching Christ's kingly office, be the more carefully observed by all the people of God, and servants of Jesus, in respect of that most direct opposition, which in those latter days is made against it, and the administration thereof. For as in the first times after Christ's coming

in the flesh, his prophetical office was directly impugned, by Jews and heathens, so as it was not lawful to speak in his name, Acts iii. 22, 23; iv. 2, 17, 18, and since that, his priesthood by the mass-priesthood, and sacrifices in the popish church, so now in the last place doth Satan in his instruments bend his force most directly against, and with might and main oppose the sovereignty and crown of our Lord Jesus, that he may not rule in his church, by his own officers, and laws.

On Profession of Religion.

The matter, you say, is not false, and to show this you note a difference between true matter, false matter, and no matter. As you speak that, which neither any other, nor yet yourself, can understand of false matter, so you call them no matter, which make no profession of Christ at all, as "Jews, Turks, Pagans;" and "all them true matter, to wit, visible, which openly profess this main truth, that Jesus, the Son of Mary, is the Son of God, Christ the Lord, by whom only and alone they shall be saved."

Many grievous errors are bound up in this invective of Mr. Bernard's, but for profaneness, this one surmounts them all. For what can be spoken more prejudicial to the glory of God, or derogatory to the body of Christ, than that any person, but pronouncing so many words, how filthy and flagitious soever he be in his life, or what errors soever he mingle with this truth, is notwithstanding true visible. matter of the church, or a true member of Christ's body visibly, or so far, as men can judge, and so must be received and acknowledged.

Against this odious and profane error, I will first deal by some clear arguments proving the contrary, and then come to the allegations he makes for his ungodly purpose.

If all, that profess this main truth, Jesus the Son of Mary, &c., be true matter of the church, than are most notable heretics true matter of the church. The Apellites, Cerdonians, and Marcionites holding two contrary beginnings, or Gods, the one good, the other evil: the Macedonians denying the Holy Ghost to be God: the Cerinthians holding that Christ is not yet risen from the dead: the Paternians affirming the inferior parts of the body of