Galatians 1:2

The Exposition.

By brethren we are to vnderstand such as seperated themselues from the Pagans, and receiued the faith of Christ, 1. Cor. 5. 11. And here more specially such as taught and professed the faith, that is, both pastors and people, whether of Antioche (as some thinke) or of Rome, as others.

And Paul writes his Epistle as well in their names as in his owne, and with their consent, for two causes. One was, that he might not be thought to deliuer any priuate doctrine deuised of his owne head. And this care he had alwaies: and therefore taught nothing but that which was in the writings of Moses and the Prophets, Act. 26. 22. And this was the care of Christ: who saith, My doctrine is not mine but his that sent me. Joh. 7. 16. And at this daie, this must be the care of the Ministers of the Gospell, to deliuer nothing of their owne. First therefore their doctrines must be founded in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles: and secondly, that they may be sure of this, they must haue the consent of the true Church, specially of such as haue beene the Restorers of the gospell in this last age. This rule Paul giues Timothie, to continue in the things which he had learned of Paul and the rest of the Apostles, 2. Tim. 3. 14. Hence it appeares to be a fault in sundrie priuate persons, when they read the Scriptures, to gather priuate opinions, to broch them to the world. This practise hath beene the foundation of heresies and schismes in the Church.

Secondly, Paul writes with consent, that he might the better mooue and perswade the Galatians to receiue his doctrine which he is nowe to deliuer.

Hence it appeares, that the Consent of Pastors and people is of great excellencie. For the better conceiuing of it, and the meaning of the text, I will handle three points. The first is, what is the force of consent? wherein stands it? and where it is nowe to be found? For the first: Consent is of force to prepare the heart, and to mooue it to beleeue: as Augustine saith, I had not beleeued the Gospell, except the authoritie of the Church had mooued me. And this is all it can doe. For it is the word, that is the obiect and the cause of our faith: the word it selfe workes in vs that faith whereby it is beleeued. And Paul in this place vseth consent, not to worke a faith in the Galatians, but onely to stirre vp a liking of his doctrine. Two errors of the Church of Rome must here be auoided. One, that Consent is a certaine marke of the Church. It is false: for Consent may be among the wicked, in the kingdome of Antichrist, Reuel. 13. 16. In the kingdome of darkenesse, all is in peace. Againe, dissention may be among the godly; as betweene Paul and Barnabas, Paul and Peter: in the church of Corinth there were schismes 1. Cor. 11. Consent therefore simply, vnles it be ioyned with true faith and true doctrine, is not of force to declare vnto vs the true Church. The second errour is that the catholike consent of beleeuers in pointes of religion is the true and liuely scripture, and that the written word is but a dead letter to it, and to be iudged by it for his sense and meaning. But all is contrary. For the written word is the first, & perfect pattern of the mind and will of God: and the inward consent in the hartes of men is but a rude and imperfect extract, and draught of it.

The second point is wherein standes this consent? it must haue his foundation in Christ, & thence flow to the members, as the oile from Aarons head, to his garments. Psal. 133. and it standes in three things, consent in one faith and doctrine: consent in affection, whereby men be of one hart. Act. 2. 47. consent in speach. 1. Cor. 1. 10.

The third point is where it is now to be found? The Papists say that they haue true and perfect consent among themselues, and that fathers and Councells be on their side: and that we haue no consent among our selues. I answer first, that they haue not the cōsent which they pretend, for the proper points of Popery were not known to the apostles nor to the Apostolicall churches, but were taken vp in the ages following by little and litle. Secondly, such doctrines as the papists make articles of faith, are but opinions and coniectures in the fathers and Councles. Thirdly, the things which the Papists hold are the same peraduenture in name, but they are not the same indeede with that which the fathers hold, neither are they holden in the same manner: as for example the purgatory which the fathers hold is a thing far different from the purgatory of the papists, and so all the rest. Of consent they may bragge, but they cannot shew it. As for our selues, we all consent in the foundation of religion. There is difference about the descent of Christ into hell. The thing we all hold, namely a descent: the difference is in the manner, whether it be vertually or locally. There is difference about the paines of Christ in his agony and passion: yet all acknowledge the infinite merit and efficacy of the death of Christ. There is difference about the gouernement of the visible church on earth. For the substance of gouernemant all agree, but for the manner of execution and administration, they doe not. That Christ is present in the Eucharist, & that his body and blood is there to be eaten and drunken, all our churches agree: and the difference is only touching the manner of his presence; namely, whether it be spirituall or locall. And this is the mercy of God that in all our differences the foundation of religon is not rased. Let vs pray for the continuance, and increase of this consent.

Thus much of the persons that write: now follow the churches to which the Epistle is sent [to the churches of Galatia]. At this time the Galatians had made a reuolte, and were fallen from iustification by the obedience of Christ: so as Paul was affraid of them, Chap. 4. and yet he called them churches still vsing great meekenes & moderatiō. His example must we follow in giuing iudgement of churches of our time. And that we may the better doe this and the better releeue our consciences: marke three rules. The first is, that we must rightly consider of the faultes of churches. Some are faultes in manners, some in doctrine. If the faults of the Church be in manners, and these faults appeare both in the liues of ministers and people, so long as true religion is taught, it is a church, & so to be esteemed: and the ministers must be heard: Math. 23. 1. Yet may we seperate from the priuat company of bad men in the church. 1. Cor. 5. 11. and, if it be in our liberty and choise, ioyne to churches better ordered. If the errour be in doctrine, we must first consider, whether the whole church erre, or some few therein. If the errour be in some and not in all, it remaines a church still, as Corinth did, where some denied the resurrection, because a church is named of the better part. Secondly, we must consider whether the church erre in the foundation or no. If the errour or errours be beside the foundation of religion, Paul hath giuen the sentence that they which build vpon the foundation haie and stubble of erronious opinion, may be saued. 1. Cor. 3. 15. Thirdly, inquiry must be made whether the church erre of humane frailty or of obstinacie. If it erre of frailty, though the error be in the foundation, yet it is stil a church, as appears by the example of the Galatiās. Yet if a church shall erre in the foundation openly, and obstinately, it seperates from Christ and ceaseth to be a church, and we may seperate frō it & may giue iudgement that it is no church. When the Iewes resisted the preaching of Paul, and had nothing to say but to raile, Paul then seperated the Church of Ephesus, and Rome from them, Act. 19. 8. & 28. 28. It may here be demaunded, why Paul writes to the Galatians as brethren, and calls them Churches, seeing they haue erred in the foundation, and are as he saith, vers. 6. remooued to another Gospel. I answer, he could doe no otherwise. If a priuate man shall erre, he must first be admonished, and then the Church must be told of it. If he heare not the Church, then iudgement may be giuen that he is a Publican, and not before: much more then, if the Church shall erre, there must first be an examination of the errour, and them sufficient conviction: and after conuiction, followes the censure vpon the Church, and iudgement then may be giuen, and not before And Paul had nowe onely begun in this Epistle to admonish the Church of Galatia. Great therefore is the rashnes, and want of moderation in many, that haue beene of vs, that condemne our Church for no Church, without sufficient conuiction going before. If they say that we haue beene admonished by bookes published: I say againe, there be grosser faults in some of those books, then any of the faults that they reprooue in the Church of England: and therefore the bookes are not fit to conuince, specially a Church.

And though Paul call the Galatians Churches of God, yet may we not hence gather, that the Church of Rome is a church of God. The name it may haue; but it doeth in trueth openly, & obstinately oppugne the manifest principles of Christian religion.

If any demaunde what these Churches of Galatia are? I answer, that they were a people of Asia the lesse: and though they were famous Churches in the daies of the Apostle, yet now the countrie is vnder the dominion of the Turke. This shewes, what God might haue done to vs in England long agoe for the contempt of the Gospell. This againe shewes, what desolation will befall vs vnlesse we repent and bring forth better fruits of the Gospell.