with necessaries, or liad failed either in Respect or Affection, or Obedience or Submission to liim, or had acted contrary to some Article of the Contract made between them, or to some point of Discipline which the Churcli was engaged to observe, as well as he, and so on, &c. (for I liave now touch'd upon the present Case) And hereupon each of the Parties might imagine themselves respectively to have a Right to annul their Bargain, and to provide themselves otherwise ; whence a Thousand ill Consequences would follow, easie to be imagined, and very prejudicial to tlie Quiet, Peace, Edification and Preservation of the Church.

Besides, we might by tliis means abolish the Exercise of Charity, of Christian Toleration, of mutual Forbearance, and of the Forgiveness of Injuries and Faults, &c. We might thus introduce the manner of Turks and Barbarians, and even worse, into all Christian Churches. I should think it would be much better to follow herein charitable Counsels, and to remember what the Apostle St. James tells us. That he shall have Judgme7it without Mercy, that hath shewed no Mercy, oh. 2. v. 13.

The Third and last Restriction or Limitation which must be applyed to tlie Principle here advanced by the Answerers, is, That tlie Cognizance of ail these Differences, which often have an Influence on Civil and Temporal Concerns belongeth either to Ecclesiastical Judges, or to Civil and Lay Judges. So that where the Ecclesiastical .Judges, to whom generally the Determination belongetli, are too remote, as hath been often said upon this occasion, the Cognizance thereof naturally devolveth upon the Civil and Lay Judges, who have likewise some Right, Power and Inspection over Ecclesiastical Affairs, according to our Discipline and Books of Divinity, as appears by the Passages which 1 have already cited.