3. That saying, "Do as you would be done to," is often misunderstood; for 't is not thus meant that I, a private man, should do to you, a private man, as I would have you do to me, but do as we have agreed to do one to another by public agreement. If the prisoner should ask the judge, whether he would be content to be hanged, were he in his case, he would answer "No": "Then," says the prisoner, "do as you would be done to." Neither of them must do as private men, but the judge must do by him as they have publicly agreed that is, both judge and prisoner have consented to a law, that if either of them steal, they shall be hanged.

EVIL SPEAKING.

1. HE that speaks ill of another, commonly, before he is aware, makes himself such a one as he speaks against; for if he had civility or breeding, he would forbear such kind of language.

2. A gallant man is above ill words: an example we have in the old lord of Salisbury, who was a great wise man. Stone had called some lord about court, fool; the lord complains, and has Stone whipped: Stone cries, "I might

have called my lord of Salisbury fool often enough, before he would have had me whipped."

3. Speak not ill of a great enemy, but rather give him good words, that he may use you the better, if you chance to fall into his hands. The Spaniard did this when he was dying. His confessor told him, to work him to repentance, how the devil tormented the wicked that went to hell: the Spaniard replying, called the devil, my lord; "I hope my lord the devil ist not so cruel." His confessor reproved him. "Excuse me," said the Don, "for calling him so I know not into what hands I may fall, and if I happen into his, I hope he will use me the better for giving him good words."

EXCOMMUNICATION.

1. THAT place they bring for excommunication, "Put away from among yourselves that wicked person," 1 Cor. v. chapter, 13th verse, is corrupted in the Greek for it should be tò πονηρόν, put away "that evil" from among you, not τὸν πονηρὸν, “ that evil person." Besides, ó лorηgos is "the devil" in scripture, and it may

*Selden is incorrect in this statement. The reading which he mentions has hardly any evidence in its favor. See Griesbach's N. T. Vol. I. p. 237, note.

be so taken there; and there is a new edition of Theodoret come out, that has it right, to лоnçóv. 'T is true the Christians, before the πονηρόν. civil state became Christian, did by covenant and agreement set down how they should live ; and he that did not observe what they agreed upon, should come no more amongst them, that is, be excommunicated. Such men are spoken of by the apostle, Romans i. 31, whom he calls ἀσυνθέτους καὶ ἀσπόνδους· the Vulgate has it "incompositos et sine fædere": the last word is pretty well, but the first not at all. Origen, in his book against Celsus, speaks of the Christians' ovvýŋ: the translation renders it "conventus," as if it signifies a meeting, when it is plain it signifies a covenant; and the English bible turned the other word well, "covenant-breakers." Pliny tells us, the Christians took an oath amongst themselves to live thus and thus.*

2. The other place, "Dic ecclesiæ," Tell the church, is but a weak ground to raise excommunication upon, especially from the sacrament, the lesser excommunication; since when that was spoken the sacrament was not insti

* "Seque sacramento non in scelus aliquod obstringere, sed ne furta, ne latrocinia, ne adulteria committerent, ne fidem fallerent, ne depositum appellati abnegarent." (Plinii Epistolæ, lib. x. 97.)

tuted. The Jews' "ecclesia" was their sanhedrim, their court so that the meaning is, if after once or twice admonition, this brother will not be reclaimed, bring him thither.

3. The first excommunication was one hundred and eighty years after Christ, and that by Victor, bishop of Rome : but that was no more than this, that they should communicate and receive the sacrament amongst themselves, not with those of the other opinion; the controversy, as I take it, being about the feast of Easter. Men do not care for excommunication because they are shut out of the church, or delivered up to Satan, but because the law of the kingdom takes hold of them. After so many days a man cannot sue, no, not for his wife, if you take her from him; and there may be as much reason to grant it for a small fault, if there be contumacy, as for a great one. In Westminster-hall you may outlaw a man for forty shillings, which is their excommunication, and you can do no more for forty thousand pounds.

4. When Constantine became Christian, he so fell in love with the clergy, that he let them be judges of all things; but that continued not above three or four years, by reason they were to be judges of matters they understood not, and then they were allowed to meddle with nothing but religion. All jurisdiction belonged

to him, and he ścanted them out as much as he pleased, and so things have since continued. They excommunicate for three or four things ; matters concerning adultery, tithes, wills, &c., which is the civil punishment the state allows for such faults. If a bishop excommunicate a man for what he ought not, the judge has power to absolve, and punish the bishop. If they had that jurisdiction from God, why does not the church excommunicate for murder, for theft? If the civil power might take away all but three things, why may they not take them away too? If this excommunication were taken away, the presbyters would be quiet; 't is that they have a mind to, 't is that they would fain be at.

FAITH AND WORKS.

'T WAS an unhappy division that has been made between faith and works. Though in my intellect I may divide them, just as in the candle I know there is both light and heat ; but yet put out the candle, and they are both gone; one remains not without the other so 't is betwixt faith and works. Nay, in a right conception "Fides est opus: " if I believe a thing because I am commanded, that is "opus."