Him in their baptism. And therefore it is that our Saviour saith (Matt. xix. 28) that His apostles should sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel, "When the Son of man shall sit in the throne of His glory: whereby He signified that He should reign then in His human nature; and Matt. (xvi. 27), "The Son of man shall come in the glory of His Father, with His angels, and then He shall reward every man according to his works." The same we may read (Mark xiii. 26, and xiv. 62); and more expressly for the time (Luke xxii. 29, 30), "I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed to me, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." By which it is manifest that the kingdom of Christ appointed to Him by His Father is not to be before the Son of man shall come in glory, and make His apostles judges of the twelve tribes of Israel. But a man may here ask, seeing there is no marriage in the kingdom of heaven, whether men shall then eat and drink? What eating therefore is meant in this place? This is expounded by our Saviour (John vi. 27), where He saith, "Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give you." So that by eating at Christ's table is meant the eating of the tree of life; that is to say, the enjoying of immortality, in the kingdom of the Son of man. By which places and many more, it is evident that our Saviour's kingdom is to be exercised by Him in His human nature.

Again, He is to be king then, no otherwise than as subordinate or vicegerent of God the Father, as Moses was in the wilderness; and as the high priests were before the reign of Saul; and as the kings were after it. For it is one of the prophecies concerning Christ, that He should be like, in office, to Moses: "I will raise them up a prophet,' saith the Lord (Deut. xviii. 18), from amongst their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words into his mouth ;" and this similitude with Moses is also apparent in the actions of our Saviour himself, whilst He was conversant on earth. For as Moses chose twelve princes of the tribes to govern under him; so did our Saviour choose twelve apostles, who shall sit on twelve thrones, and judge the twelve tribes of Israel. And as Moses authorized seventy elders to receive the Spirit of God, and to prophesy to the people, that is, as I have said before, to speak unto them in the name of God; so our Saviour also ordained seventy disciples to preach His kingdom and salvation to all nations. And as when a complaint was made to Moses against those of the seventy that prophesied in the camp of Israel, he justified them in it, as being subservient therein to his government; so also our Saviour, when St. John complained to Him of a certain man that cast out devils in His name, justified him therein, saying (Luke ix. 50), “Forbid him not, for he that is not against us, is on our part."

Again, our Saviour resembled Moses in the institution of " sacraments," both of "admission" into the kingdom of God, and of "commemoration" of his deliverance of His elect from their miserable condition. As the children of Israel had for sacrament of their reception into the kingdom of God, before the time of Moses, the rite of "circumcision," which rite having been omitted in the wilderness, was again restored as soon as they came into the Land of Promise; so also the Jews, before the coming of our Saviour, had a rite of "baptizing," that is, of washing with water all those that being Gentiles embraced the God of Israel. This rite St. John the Baptist used in the reception of all them that gave their names to the Christ, whom he preached to be already come into the world; and our Saviour instituted the same for a sacrament to be taken by all that believed in Him. From what cause the rite of baptism first proceeded, is not expressed formally in the Scrtpture; but it may be probably thought to be

an imitation of the law of Moses concerning leprosy; wherein the leprous man was commanded to be kept out of the camp of Israel for a certain time; after which time being judged by the priest to be clean, he was admitted into the camp after a solemn washing. And this may therefore be a type of the washing in baptism; wherein such men as are cleansed of the leprosy of sin by faith, are received into the Church with the solemnity of baptism. There is another conjecture, drawn from the ceremonies of the Gentiles, in a certain case that rarely happens: and that is, when a man that was thought dead chanced to recover, other men made scruple to converse with him, as they would do to converse with a ghost, unless he were received again into the number of men by washing, as children newborn were washed from the uncleanness of their nativity; which was a kind of new birth. This ceremony of the Greeks, in the time that Judea was under the dominion of Alexander and the Greeks his successors, may probably enough have crept into the religion of the Jews. But seeing it is not likely our Saviour would countenance a heathen rite, it is most likely it proceeded from the legal ceremony of washing after leprosy. And for the other sacrament of eating the "Paschal lamb," it is manifestly imitated in the sacrament of the "Lord's Supper;" in which the breaking of the bread, and the pouring out of the wine, do keep in memory our deliverance from the misery of sin, by Christ's passion, as the eating of the Paschal lamb kept in memory the deliverance of the Jews out of the bondage of Egypt. Seeing therefore the authority of Moses was but subordinate, and he but a lieutenant of God; it followeth that Christ, whose authority as man was to be like that of Moses, was no more but subordinate to the authority of his Father. The same is more expressly signified, by that that He teacheth us to pray, "Our Father, let thy kingdom come;" and "For thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory;" and by that it is said, that "He shall come in the glory of His Father;" and by that which St. Paul saith (1 Cor. xv. 24), " then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father;" and by many other most express places.

Our Saviour, therefore, both in teaching and reigning, representeth, as Moses did, the person of God; which God from that time forward, but not before, is called the Father; and being still one and the same substance, is one person as represented by Moses, and another person as represented by His Son the Christ. For ". 'person" being a relative to a "representer," it is consequent to plurality of representers, that there be a plurality of persons, though of one and the same substance.

CHAPTER XLII.

Of Power Ecclesiastical.

FOR the understanding of "power ecclesiastical," what, and in whom it is, we are to distinguish the time from the ascension of our Saviour into two parts; one before the conversion of kings, and men endued with sovereign civil power; the other after their conversion. For it was long after the ascension, before any king or civil sovereign embraced and publicly allowed the teaching of Christian religion.

And for the time between, it is manifest that the "power ecclesiastical " was in the apostles; and after them in such as were by them ordained to preach the Gospel, and to convert men to Christianity, and to direct them

that were converted in the way of salvation; and after these, the power was delivered again to others by these ordained, and this was done by imposition of hands upon such as were ordained; by which was signified the giving of the Holy Spirit, or Spirit of God, to those whom they ordained ministers of God, to advance His kingdom. So that imposition of hands was nothing else but the seal of their commission to preach Christ, and teach His doctrine; and the giving of the Holy Ghost by that ceremony of imposition of hands, was an imitation of that which Moses did. For Moses used the same ceremony to his minister Joshua, as we read (Deut. xxxiv. 9), And Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom, for Moses had laid his hands upon him." Our Saviour therefore, between His resurrection and ascension, gave His spirit to the apostles; first, by "breathing on them, and saying (John xx. 22), "Receive ye the Holy Spirit ;" and after His ascension (Acts ii. 2, 3), by sending down upon them a mighty wind, and cloven tongues of fire; and not by imposition of hands, as neither did God lay His hands on Moses; and His apostles afterwards transmitted the same spirit by imposition of hands as Moses did to Joshua. So that it is manifest hereby in whom the power ecclesiastical continually remained, in those first times where there was not any Christian commonwealth; namely, in them that received the same from the apostles, by successive laying on of hands.

Here we have the person of God born now the third time. For as Moses and the high priests were God's representative in the Old Testament; and our Saviour himself, as man, during his abode on earth; so the Holy Ghost, that is to say, the apostles and their successors, in the office of preaching and teaching that had received the Holy Spirit, have represented him ever since. But a person, as I have shown before (chap. xiii.), is he that is represented, as often as he is represented; and therefore God, who has been represented, that is personated, thrice, may properly enough be said to be three persons; though neither the word "Person," nor Trinity," be ascribed to him in the Bible. St. John, indeed (1 Epist. v. 7) saith, "There be three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are One." But this disagreeth not, but accordeth fitly with three persons in the proper signification of persons; which is that which is represented by another. For so God the Father, as represented by Moses, is one person; and as represented by His Son, another person; and as represented by the apostles, and by the doctors that taught by authority from them derived, is a third person; and yet every person here, is the person of one and the same God. But a man may here ask, what it was whereof these three bear witness. St. John therefore tells us (verse II) that they bear witness that "God hath given us eternal life in His Son." Again, if it should be asked, wherein that testimony appeareth, the answer is easy; for He hath testified the same by the miracles He wrought, first by Moses; secondly, by His Son himself: and lastly by His apostles that had received the Holy Spirit; all which in their times represented the person of God, and either prophesied or preached Jesus Christ. And as for the apostles, it was the character of the apostleship, in the twelve first and great apostles, to bear witness of His resurrection; as appeareth expressly (Acts i. 21, 22), where St. Peter, when a new apostle was to be chosen in the place of Judas Iscariot, useth these words, "Of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out amongst us, beginning at the baptism of John, unto that same day that He was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of His resurrection :" which words interpret the "bearing of witness" mentioned by St. John. There is in the same place mentioned another Trinty of witnesses in earth, For (1 John v. 8) he saith, "there are

three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood, and these three agree in one :" that is to say, the graces of God's spirit, and the two sacraments, baptism and the Lord's Supper, which all agree in one testimony to assure the consciences of believers of eternal life; of which testimony he saith (verse 10), "He that believeth on the Son of man hath the witness in himself." In this Trinity on earth, the unity is not of the thing; for the Spirit, the water, and the blood, are not the same substance, though they give the same testimony: but in the Trinity of heaven, the persons are the persons of one and the same God, though represented in three different times and occasions. To conclude, the doctrine of the Trinity, as far as can be gathered directly from the Scripture, is in substance this, that the God who is always one and the same, was the person represented by Moses; the person represented by his Son incarnate; and the person represented by the apostles. As represented by the apostles, the Holy Spirit, by which they spake, is God; as represented by His Son that was God and man, the Son is that God; as represented by Moses and the high priests, the Father, that is to say, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is that God. From whence we may gather the reason why those names "Father, "Son," and "Holy Spirit," in the signification of the Godhead, are never used in the Old Testament: for they are persons, that is, they have their names from representing; which could not be, till divers men had represented God's person in ruling or in directing under Him.

Thus we see how the power ecclesiastical was left by our Saviour to the apostles; and how they were, to the end they might the better exercise that power, endued with the Holy Spirit, which is therefore called sometimes in the New Testament paracletus, which signifieth an "assister," or. one called to for help, though it be commonly translated a "comforter." Let us now consider the power itself, what it was, and over whom.

Cardinal Bellarmine, in his third general controversy, hath handled a great many questions concerning the ecclesiastical power of the Pope of Rome; and begins with this, whether it ought to be monarchical, aristocratical, or democratical: all which sorts of power are sovereign and coercive. If now it should appear that there is no coercive power left them by our Saviour, but only a power to proclaim the kingdom of Christ, and to persuade men to submit themselves thereunto, and by precepts and good counsel to teach them that have submitted what they are to do that they may be received into the kingdom of God when it comes; and that the apostles and other ministers of the Gospel are our schoolmasters, and not our commanders, and their precepts not laws but wholesome counsels : then were all that dispute in vain.

I have shown already, in the last chapter, that the kingdom of Christ is not of this world: therefore neither can His ministers, unless they be kings, require obedience in His name. For if the supreme king have not his regal power in this world, by what authority can obedience be required to his officers? "As my Father sent me," so saith our Saviour (John xx. 21), "I send you." But our Saviour was sent to persuade the Jews to return to, and to invite the Gentiles to receive, the kingdom of His Father, and not to reign in majesty, no not as His Father's lieutenant, till the day of judgment.

The time between the ascension and the general resurrection is called, not a reigning, but a regeneration; that is, a preparation of men for the second and glorious coming of Christ at the day of judgment; as appeareth by the words of our Saviour (Matt. xix. 28), "You that have followed me in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of His glory, you shall also sit upon twelve thrones;" and of St. Paul (Ephes. vi. 15), Having your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace.'

And is compared by our Saviour to fishing, that is, to winning men to obedience, not by coercion and punishing, but by persuasion: and there. fore He said not to His apostles He would make them so many Nimrods, "hunters of men ;" but "fishers of men." It is compared also to leaven, to sowing of seed, and to the multiplication of a grain of mustard-seed; by all which compulsion is excluded; and consequently there can in that time be no actual reigning. The work of Christ's ministers is evangelization; that is, a proclamation of Christ, and a preparation for His second coming, as the evangelization of John the Baptist was a preparation to His first coming. Again, the office of Christ's ministers in this world is to make mon believe and have faith in Christ; but faith hath no relation to nor dependence at all upon compulsion or commandment; but only upon certainty or probability of arguments drawn from reason, or from something men believe already. Therefore the ministers of Christ in this world have no power, by that title, to punish any man for not believing or for contradicting what they say; they have, I say, no power Ly that title of Christ's ministers to punish such; but if they have sovereign civil power by politic institution, then they may indeed lawfully punish any contradiction to their laws whatsoever: and St. Paul, of himself and other the then preachers of the Gospel, saith in express words (2 Cor. i. 24), “We have no dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy."

66

Another argument, that the ministers of Christ in this present world have no right of commanding, may be drawn from the lawful authority which Christ hath left to all princes, as well Christians as infidels. St. Paul saith (Col. iii. 20), "Children, obey your parents in all things; for this is well pleasing to the Lord;" and (verse 20), "Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eye-service, as men-pleasers, but in singleness of heart, as fearing the Lord; "this is spoken to them whose masters were infidels; and yet they are bidden to obey them "in all things." And again, concerning obedience to princes (Rom. xiii., the first six verses), exhorting "to be subject to the higher powers," he saith, "that all power is ordained of God;" and "that we ought to be subject to them, not only for fear of incurring their wrath, but also for conscience sake." And St. Peter (1 Epistle ii. 13, 14, 15), “Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man, for the Lord's sake, whether it be to the king, as supreme; or unto governors, as to them that be sent by him for the punishment of evil doers, and for the praise of them that do well; for so is the will of God." And again St. Paul (Titus iii. 1), “Put men in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, and to obey magistrates." These princes and powers, whereof St. Peter and St. Paul here speak, were all infidels : much more therefore we are to observe those Christians, whom God hath ordained to have sovereign power over us. How then can we be obliged to obey any minister of Christ, if he should command us to do anything contrary to the command of the king, or other sovereign representant of the commonwealth whereof we are members, and by whom we look to be protected? It is therefore manifest that Christ hath not left to His ministers in this world, unless they be also endued with civil authority, any authority to command other men.

But what, may some object, if a king, or a senate, or other sovereign person forbid us to believe in Christ? To this I answer that such forbidding is of no effect; because belief and unbelief never follow men's commands. Faith is a gift of God, which man can neither give nor take away by promise of rewards, or menaces of torture. And if it be further asked, what if we be commanded by our lawful prince to say with our tongue, we believe not; must we obey such command? Profession with the tongue is but an external thing, and no more than any other gesture

H