Laying on of Hands Cypr. Epist ad Pleb num xii before they had repented lest he should make himself liable to other Mens sins ver 22. In like manner S. Paul advises Titus his Vicegerent and Successor in Crete concerning those Jewish Seducers who subverted many and concerning those Cretians who were seduced by them To rebuke them sharply (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Titus i. 13. See 1 Cor. xiii 10. that they might be sound in the Faith And more plainly Chap. iii. 10. he commands him After the first and second Admonition to reject a Man that is an Heretick which is a direction for depriving him of the Communion of the Church since whomsoever the Bishop did reject he was necessarily excluded from Divine Offices and all the Faithful who cleaved always to their Bishop renounced such a Man's Consersation for in so doing they observed our Saviour's Order that when any would not hear the Church they should count him as an Heathen man and a Publican Matth. xviii 17. which was the Case of an obstinate Heretick that would not hear the Bishop's Admonitions And as the more Religious Jews would not eat with Publicans or Sinners i.e. Gentiles so the Faithful were enjoyned by the Apostles with notorious Criminals no not to eat 1 Cor. v. 11. that is not to eat a common Meal with them as the Jews would not eat with one Excommunicated by Niddui and indeed eating was a sign of Friendship which Orthodox Christians were not to have with these who were an abomination to them Genes xliii 32. and Galat. ii 12. Now it is in my Opinion a very weak Enquiry to ask here Whether this eating be meant of the Lord's Supper or no Because it is certain à minori ad majus that if a Christian might not eat an ordinary Meal with an excommunicate Person in a private House much more ought he to avoid his Company in so high an Act of Religion as eating the Lord's Supper For no doubt whosoever was under Censure so as to be shut out of the Houses of Christians were not admitted to their Religious Assemblies For these Disturbers of Christian Unity like dead Branches or gangren'd Members were to be wholly cut off from the Body of Christ's Church as S. Paul speaks Galat. v. 12. in so much that S. John expresly forbids the Faithful to shew any kindness by way of common Civility to those who hold not the right Faith saying If any come to you and bring not this Doctrine do not receive him into your House nor bid him God speed 2 Epist S. John ver 10. Which aversation and utter disclaiming all Testimonies of Friendship were grounded on those Anathema's pronounced by the Apostles against all such notorious Hereticks who were by all to be esteemed as excommunicated ipso facto And hence arose that usage in the Ancient Church not to salute any that was excommunicated as we see in Synesius's Epistles (r) Synesij Epist 58. p. 503. and in the Capitulars (s) Capitul Francor lib. 5. cap. 42. p. 96. and we may be sure if they would not pray for them in way of usual Civility they would not endure them in their Houses of Prayer it being recorded of this S. John That he leapt out of the Bath unwashed when he saw Cerinthus the Heretick come in thither (t) Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 3. And truly it was useful and safe for the Orthodox Christians thus totally to renounce all Conversation with these Seducers whose words might easily infect them if once they held communication with them But if any Scruple yet remain concerning the excluding the excommunicated from Religious Assemblies and consequently from Prayers and Sacraments in the time of the Apostles the Instance of Diotrephes will sufficiently remove it for he bearing himself as a Bishop would not communicate with those who came from S. John and if any did hold Communion with them he Cast them out of the Church 3 Epist S. John ver 10. or Excommunicated them by forbidding them to come into the Christian Assemblies and denying to them the participation of Divine Offices which was the principal part of the Penalty in that Exclusion And his doing this to such as he counted false-Teachers and Men walking disorderly shews it was frequently practised in that time Thus we have seen how the Apostles exercised that Authority which our Lord Jesus gave them as often as there was Occasion And by what hath been said we may observe That they made Christ Jesus the Author of this holy Discipline and the Apostles with their Successors the sole Ministers thereof That they inflicted this Censure for Heresie Schism and for gross Impieties and Immoralities and counted the Person who was thus Censured in a very deplorable and damnable Condition and one who was no Member of the Church and so would have no Communion with him in Civil or Religious Actions yet in all this they aimed only at his Repentance and upon unfeigned signs of that the Church Governours were ready to Absolve him and take him in again which being the Pattern of our Excommunication proves it to be of Divine Right § II. By what is Recorded in S. Paul's Epistle to Timothy and Titus it doth appear That the Apostles communicated that Power of hearing Complaints and of rebuking and censuring Offenders which they had received from Christ unto those Persons whom they fixed as Bishops in the Churches they had planted And it was necessary they should do so because otherwise they had not invested them with sufficient Power to discharge their Duty nor to keep the Churches committed to them in good order And as an undoubted Proof that the Primitive Bishops who succeeded the Apostles had this Authority vested in them we shall now shew That they did exercise this Power of the Keys in the purest Ages of the Church and declared they did it by Commission from Christ and his Apostles which considering the Charity and Integrity of those Ages none can imagine they would have pretended if it had not been really so The first Instance we shall remark is that famous Excommunication of Aquila of Pontus who had translated the Old Testament into the Greek Tongue and who was Converted and Baptized by the Disciples of the Apostles at Jerusalem yet continuing his former vain belief of Astrology and also drawing Schemes of his own Nativity he was admonished and rebuked by all the Doctors of the Church for this and not amending but rather opposing them and contentiously disputing with them about Fate they cast him out of the Church as one unlikely to be saved saith Epiphanius (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. de ponder mensuris This happened about the year of Christ 120. in the Reign of Adrian and about twenty years after S. John's death In which Relation we note First That this Censure was inflicted by the Doctors of the Church that is the Bishops met perhaps in a Synod at
they might retain his Sins that is declare him unsit for and unworthy of pardon and consequently of the Churches Communion wherein forgiveness is to be obtained and while the Offender remains impenitent Christ declares his Guilt remains on him and his Sin shall not be pardoned But if the party submit and repent so that the Governours of the Church judge him sincere and take off this Sentence by declaring him penitent then his Sin shall be forgiven in Heaven as well as his Censure is reversed on Earth Which promise no doubt our Saviour makes good as often as these his Stewards do judge by the Rules and Measures he hath given them And since Christ gave his Apostles and their Successors no Temporal Power nor any other way to punish Offenders but this they who would rob them of this Power do what they can to strip them of all Authority and bring the Church by Anarchy into Confusion 'T is true these words are repeated to every Priest in his Ordination and the Power is committed to him so far as may enable him to serve the necessities of single Persons whose faults are made known to him by private complaint or voluntary confession But for orders sake where the Offence is publick and the Scandal evident there the Bishop only exercises this Power of remitting and retaining and it is this latter Power which only concerns Excommunication and which was given originally to the Apostles as Governours of the Church And while there are Offences and Offenders in the Church as there will be to the Worlds end this Power must remain in the Church Governours for the preservation of this holy Society which as Jesus did found so he hath we see taken care to endue those he set over it with such kind of Coercive Power as is necessary for the good ordering thereof CHAP. II. Of the Practice of Excommunication § I. SInce our blessed Saviour had thus in as clear words as could be spoken given his Apostles this Power of Excluding Offenders out of that Christian Church which they were to plant and rule it is plain they had Authority to exercise this Discipline by Divine Right and therefore it must be a gross Error in the Learned Mr. Selden to affirm their Right was derived partly from the Jews and partly from the Roman Emperours Edicts which allowed the Jews liberty to observe their own Rites (n) Selden Syned c. 8. p. 120. For though we grant that the Christians did for some few years after our Lord's Resurrection observe some of the Jewish Ceremonies and were by the Gentile Writers grosly mistaken for a Sect of the same Religion many years after yet they had a distinct Name within Ten years after Christ's Resurrection (o) Baron Annal Eccles An. 43. and were long before that Excommunicated and persecuted by the Jews Acts viii 1. Chap. ix 2. and the Synod at Jerusalem had declared that the Gentile Converts need not observe the Ceremonial Law So that the Christians were a distinct Society and had Officers of their own and Assemblies proper to themselves and these Officers did exercise a Jurisdiction over them and openly declared they derived their Power not from the Jews but from Christ 2 Cor. x. 8. 1 Cor. v. 4. So that it is ridiculous to assert That the right of Apostolical Excommunication was from the Jews there is a vast difference between their imitating some of the Jewish Forms or Customs in the exercise of these Censures and their deriving a right from them even as the Church of England doth imitate some of the Forms of the Roman Church in her Excommunications but it doth not follow therefore that she derives her Right to excommunicate from the Pope or the Church of Rome And for the Edicts of the Emperours which were made in favour of the Jews there is no proof that ever the Christians claimed any benefit by them yet if they did these Edicts gave them no right to Govern a Society set up on purpose to abrogate the whole Worship and Ceremonies peculiar to the Jews and though they might give them a liberty from Secular Compulsion in the exercise of that right which Christ had given them yet they did not convey that right to them So that these are meer Subterfuges contrived to escape the force and strong evidence of a Divine Right which is so clear not only from our Saviour's Institution but the Apostolick practice grounded thereon to which we shall now proceed The Apostles principal work was to bring Converts into the Church and yet when need required they also exercised that other Power of Casting notorious Offenders out of it S. Peter to whom Christ directed his first promise of this Authority was the first who exercised it and the first Sin which he retained was the Sacriledge of Ananias and Saphira which was joyned with a hope to deceive the Holy Ghost which dwelt in the blessed Apostle and that our Lord might make his Officers Rebukes more dreadful an immediate Judgment followed the Censure for Ananias and his Wife were struck with sudden death and the effect of this was That great fear came upon all the Church Acts v. 11. And though Christ had given no Secular Power to his Apostles this great Example did make the Christians reverence the Persons and fear the just Reproofs of those he had set over them The next Instance was that of Simon Magus who had pretended to believe and was baptized Acts viii 13. but it seems he had dissembled with God and Men and only designed to make a gain of the Power of Miracles which he vilely offered Money for as if it had been only an Art which might be bought and sold whereupon S. Peter declares him accursed ver 20. saying His Money and he should perish together By which Phrase he intimates he was as the Jews speak under Cherem and that he might separate him from the Church he declares ver 21. Thou hast neither part nor lot with us in this matter which are the very words of the Tribes beyond Jordan who express their fear of their Posterity's being rejected from Communion with the other Tribes because of their distance by this very Phrase They will say unto them Ye have no part in the Lord (p) Josh xxii 5. Cal. Par. Non estis inter quos est verbi divini Communitas LXX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in the like form of Speech the Bond of Society in Civil Matters was declared void 2 Sam. xix 1. 1 Kings xii 16. Yea our Lord thus threatens to reject S. Peter if he would not admit his washing saying If I wash thee not thou hast no part in me John xiii 8. And further as a Reason of this destruction denounced and this Separation inflicted on Simon Magus the Apostle shews he is still 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under the Bond of his Sin which by this Declaration was retained according to the Power given by Christ yet
Jerusalem Secondly That it was after two Admonitions as Christ advised Matth. xviii Thirdly That hereby he was thrust back into that same estate he was in before his Baptism About thirty years after Cerdon the Heretick came to Rome in the time of Hyginus An. 153. and at first confessed his Error in the Church and lived orderly but being found out to have taught it in secret often and often to have recanted it again he was at last admonished and turned out of the Assembly of the Faithful (w) Iren. lib. 3. cap. 4. ex eo Euseb l. 4. c. 11. Soon after came Marcion to Rome also whose Father being Bishop of Sinope in Pontus had Excommunicated this Son of his for the Crime of Fornication and refused to receive him in again Nor would the Presbyters of the Roman Church who had conversed with the Apostles receive him into Communion though he had offered 200 Sesterces to their Church (x) Epiph. Panar l. 3. Tom. I. haeres 42. p. 135. Tertul. de praescript haeret c. 30. p. 212. semel atque iterum ejecti novissime in perpetuum dissidium relegati Tertul. ibid. but rejected him and his Offering also which was in the time when Hyginus their Bishop was dead An. 155. And Tertullian adds That Valentinus and Marcion having been once and again cast out at lest they were for ever Excommunicated by that Church which he saith was in the time of Eleutherius whos 's next Successor Victor about the year 192. excommunicated Theodotus the Heretick then living at Rome for denying the Divinity of our Saviour (y) Euseb Hist l. 5. c. 27. p. 145. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Eusebius relates And had he exercised this Power only upon those of his own Church he had not met with so much opposition but he about the year 198. Excommunicated the Bishops of Asia for not agreeing with him in the time of keeping the Feast of Easter (z) Euseb ibid. l. 5. c. 23. p. 142. which rash act of his displeased many even of the Western Bishops and Irenaeus particularly who sharply rebukes him for it shewing that none of his Predecessors had ever done such a thing to Excommunicate Foreign Churches for a difference only in a Matter of Ceremony yet still this shews the practice of Excommunication was frequent in these early times And the manner of inflicting these Censures is soon after An. 200. described by Tertullian who speaking of the Religious Assemblies of the Christians saith There are Exhortations Rebukes and the Divine Censure for they judge with great Authority as being assured of God's Presence among them so that if any so offend as to be excluded from communicating in Prayers from the Assemblies and from all Sacred Commerce it is a strong presumption of their Condemnation in the last Judgment The Presidents of these Assemblies are divers ancient and approved Persons (a) Tertul. Apol c. 39. p. 31. In which eminent Testimony we see there were Admonitions first and then sharper Rebukes preceding the Censure according to our Saviour's Method And for the Authority of these Censures it is expresly said to be Divine and upon Christ's Promise to be with those who met together on this occasion in his Name Matth. xviii 20. Tertullian affirms they are certain of God's Presence with them in this Act yea since our Lord had said What they bound on Earth should be bound in Heaven he reckons that the last dreadful Judgment will go according to this Ecclesiastical Sentence And as to the Effect of this Excommunication on Earth the Party under it is neither to come into the Church nor to pray or have any commerce with the Faithful Finally The Bishop and his Clergy are the Dispensers of this Discipline and the Governours of Christian Assemblies and if any doubt of this last particular the same Tertullian speaking of what was in the Apostles days and his own too in the Bishops Power expresly saith It was in his power to Excommunicate (b) Ut extra Ecclesiam quis detur erat in Praesidentis officio Tert. de pudicit c. 14. p. 556. which are so clear Confutations of all our Innovators in this Matter that these places alone might silence them Yet there are more passages in this Father to this purpose As where he saith Whoredom and Murder are interdicted and the Gladiators are driven out of the Church (c) Tertul. de Idololat c. 11. p. 91. And where he affirms That Christians marrying with Heathens are counted guilty of Whoredom and are to be excluded from all Communion with the Faithful according to the Orders of the Apostle who saith With such no not to eat (d) Arcendos ab omni communicatione fraternitatis Tert. ad uxor l. 2. c. 3. And for other unlawful Lusts he saith They did not only exclude them from the Church Porch but allowed them not to come near that holy place being not barely Vices but monstrous Crimes (e) Non modò limine verùm omni Ecclesiae tecto submoveâ—nus Tert. de pudicit c. 4. p. 557. And Albáspinaeus hath observed That in the first Ages of the Church Murtherers Adulterers Apostates and such like notorious Offenders were irreversibly Excommunicated and if they were admitted to remain among the Penitents yet they would not Absolve them nor restore them to the Communion of the Church so long as they lived till by degrees the Discipline of the Church slackened (f) Albaspin observ l. 2. c. 8. c. and then certain years of Penance were enjoyned those Offenders and if they gave signs of great Sorrow and hearty Repentance after that time they were by certain steps restored to the Communion of the Church And now we have mentioned that Learned Author it may not be amiss to hear his description of the state of Excommunicate Persons in these times of which we now speak They were not only driven from Religious Assemblies but all despised abhorred and fled from them as putrid Members fit to be cut off It was counted a sin to treat or make bargains with them none would salute them or call them Brethren none would look on them speak to them or invite them to a Meal yea so strict were they that none would joyn with them in Prayers to God (g) Albaspin l. 1. obs 1. p. 2. Which Character is the more to be esteemed because he there proves all this by the Canons of very ancient Councils which Excommunicate those who pray with these Persons (h) Apost Can. 10. Laodic Can. 33. Antioch 1. Can. 2. Carthag 4. Can. 73. and those who have any Conversation with them or be in the same House or Feast with them or speak to them (i) Antioch 1. Can. 2. Arelat 2. Can. 30. Antissiod Can. 39. as may be seen more at large in that Author All which abundantly proves That the Christians of that Time did look upon the Excommunicate to be in a damnable Condition
Cyprian and the African Bishops and not only so but also rebuked and confuted yea Excommunicated by all the holy Bishops of the whole World (w) Novatiano nuper retuso refutato per totum orbem à Sacerdotibus Dei abstento Cypr. Stephan lib. 3. Ep. 13. And he advises Stephen Bishop of Rome to send Letters into France to declare Marcion Bishop of Arles one of Novatus his followers Excommunicate and that another might be put in his place (x) Idem ibid. Which passage about Novatian or Novatus as he is sometimes called is also in Eusebius who saith By a Roman Council of Sixty Bishops and more than so many Priests and by the Bishops of divers other Provinces in their Synods he was declared Excommunicate (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 6. cap. 35. pag. 178. And he also mentions his Excommunication by the African Bishops as before Which Zonaras expresseth by his being Cast out and Anathematized (z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zonar in 8. Can. Concil 1. Niceen words of the same import with the former and implying his being declared Accursed as well as cast out of the Church To this we might add more out of the same Father as where he calls Papianus his judging of his Bishop making himself a Judge of God and of Christ who saith to his Apostles and so to all Bishops that succeed them in that Office He that heareth you heareth me (a) Te judicem Dei constituas Christi qui dicit ad Apostolos ac per hoc ad omnes Praepositos qui Apostolis Vicariâ Ordinatione succedunt c. Cypr. Epist lib. 4. Ep. 9. And where he saith No Man can have God for his Father who hath not the Church for his Mother and if any could escape out of Noahs Ark then they may escape who are out of the Church (b) Cypr. lib. de simplie Praelat But these are sufficient to shew that S. Cyprian believed the Bishops were the Apostles Successors and Christs Vice-gerents and had their power from him to Censure the disorderly who by that Sentence were put out of the Church in which alone Salvation could be had About the year 270 that numerous Council of Bishops and Clergy assembled at Antioch and deposed Paulus Samosatenus from the Bishoprick of that City for Heresy and other heinous Crimes yea they deprived him of the Communion of the whole Catholick Church under Heaven (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 7. cap. 23. pag. 205. and when he would not yield up his Possession to that Successor which the Council had placed in his stead they intreated Aurelian who was then Emperor to compel him thereunto who decreed the Possession should be granted to him whom the Bishops had chosen (d) Idem ibid. cap. 24. for he though an Idolater thought it just that he who would not obey the Sentence of those of his own Faith should be deprived of having any part with them (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haeret. sab 8. Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a Dividend or Share of the Profits of the Church So that Mr. Selden might have spared that note (f) Seld. Synedr l. 1. cap. 13. pag. 274. De voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vid. Jul. Polluc l. 15. c. 13. That this looked not like an Opinion of Divine Right for the Bishops to desire an Heathen Emperor to do that which they could not effect For they had first rejected this Heretick according to the Power given them by Christ and if he yet kept possession of the Church and the profits it was no diminution of their Spiritual Power to call in the Secular Magistrate to compel him to quit the place and temporal advantages which is all that is meant by Eusebius his saying That he was with extream disgrace driven out of the Church by the Secular Power (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 7. c. 24. But his being Excommunicated by the Council and by the Judgment of all the Bishops is mentioned also by Theodoret who further observes That Lucian who was Paulus his Scholar in this Error remained a long time Excommunicated for the same viz. during the time of three Bishops (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apost Can. 10. I will not trouble my self to produce any more instances of the practice of this Discipline during the time that the Empire was in the hands of Heathens only I shall note what those famous Apostolical Canons which were undoubtedly made in this Period by the Primitive Bishops say with respect to this matter And first the tenth Canon is remarkable which saith He that prays with an Excommunicate Person though it be in a private House shall be Excommunicated himself (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 5. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 29 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 51. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 73. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 79. By which we see that whatever the Jewish Custom were the Christians renounced all Communion with the Excommunicate in Religious Offices In the rest of those Canons there is frequent mention made of Excommunication under divers Phrases yet to the same purpose viz. Of being separated being wholly cut off from the Church and wholly cut off from the Communion being cast out of the Church being punished with separation not being allowed to pray with the Faithful And in all those Canons the penalty for the greatest Crimes in the Clergy is to be deposed in the Laity to be Excommunicated And particularly He that receives one that is Excommunicated in one City when he comes to another City without commendatory Letters is to be Excommunicated himself (k) Apostol Can. xii xiii In the Case of Simony perpetual Excommunication is decreed (l) Ibid. Can. xxix In the Case of Schism three Admonitions must precede the Censure (m) Ibid. Can. xxxi And none must absolve but the same Bishop who Excommunicated (n) Ibid. Can. xxxii To enter into a Synagogue of the Jews or a Meeting of Hereticks to pray with them is Excommunication (o) Ibid. Can. Lxiv Which with many other Canons do shew that the Discipline of the Church was then strictly observed when the Bishops had no Authority from Secular Powers and when it was only the belief of a Divine Commission granted to them which prevailed upon the People to submit to it To these Canons we will add the Council of Elliberis which was held before Constantine began to Reign Anno 305. And in this Council there are many plain Evidences concerning the use of this Rite For there it is Decreed That Apostates to Idolatry Murtherers Adulterers and such like heinous Offenders should be Excommunicated and never received into the Church again Can. 1 2 5 6 7 c. Parents that marry their Daughters to Jews or Hereticks were to be Excommunicated for five
Men suppose that Enoch did thus excommunicate the wicked Wretches of his Generation when he could not convert them by his Preaching for his Prophecy begins with Maran-atha (z) Jude ver 14. vide Bertram de R. P. Juda. cap. 2. Molinaei Vates From all that hath been said we may now conclude That from the Divine Precedents and from the most early Examples the Jews did exercise this Power of Excommunication as a Spiritual Punishment upon scandalous Offenders the Power residing commonly in the Sacerdotal Colledge of old and of later times in the Rabbi who is the Master of the Synagogue and that such as were under this Censure were believed to be out of the Divine Favour and unworthy of Human Conversation till they were restored by those who had sentenced them And the general dread the Jews had of this Censure together with their Aversation to those who were under it plainly declares they did believe it was of Divine Original and was of great Efficacy Which being the general Notion of the Jewish Nation in our Saviour's time this Opinion did make way for the receiving of this Institution as Christ was to set it up in the Christian Church of which we are next to treat § IV. The third ground of Excommunication and to us the principal is Our blessed Saviour's positive Institution of it for which we have divers clear places of Holy Scripture And yet the Learned Grotius thinks if there were no express Precept for it it must be supposed since when the Society of the Church is once constituted by Christ all those things must be supposed to be commanded without which that Society cannot preserve it self pure (a) Grot. in Luc. vi 22. p. 379. But we need not fly to that refuge for none can deny but that our Lord appointed his Apostles to call and convert a Society out of the World and that he made them the Governours of this Society giving them Rules to govern it by and promising to be with them and their Successors to the end of the World Matth. xxviii 20. And since he conferred this Office on them we must enquire what Power he communicated to them to enable them to perform it First therefore When Peter had in the name of all the Apostles confessed Christ to be the Son of God Matth. xvi 15 16. our Lord declares that he had made good his Name of Peter signifying a Rock in laying this sure Foundation and assures him he would build his Church upon this Rock that is this Confession of Faith in Christ the Rock of Ages (b) Super hanc Petram firmae fidei Epiphan haer Cathar p. 224. Super hanc Confessionis Petram Hilarius vid. Aug. Retract lib. 1. cap. 21. Isidor Peleus l. 1. ep 235. So that it should stand for ever in despite of all the opposition Hell could make against it ver 18. And since so well-grounded and durable a House ought to have some to Rule it our Lord shews in the next verse who shall have the Government of it saying And I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven ver 19. Here the Metaphor is continued and the Church being compared to a House its usual emblem 1 Tim. iii. 15. Ephes ii 20. the power of ruling this House is set forth by giving the Keys which are given to those who are chief Stewards and Managers of the Family So when God would express his committing the Government of the House of David to Eltakim he saith And the Key of the House of David will I lay upon his shoulder Isai xxii 21 22. And our Lord 's having the Keys of Death and Hell Revel i. 18. is to manifest his Power to Condemn thither or to Save from thence And these Keys here granted are called The Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven as well because the Church and Kingdom of Grace on Earth is called by that Name Matth. iii. 2. as because the Church is the Gate to the Kingdom of Glory and we cannot regularly come into the Kingdom of Heaven above but by and through this Gate of the Church on Earth and so by Consequence the Power of the Keys of the Church contain in them the right to admit Men into this houshold of God by Baptism and so making them Heirs of the Kingdom of Heaven and to exclude men out of this houshold by Excommunication for notorious and scandalous Offences and consequently to deprive them of the Priviledges which belonged to them while they were regular Members of God's Family And as a Prince when he makes a Deputy or Vice-Roy usually declares in his Commission That what he doth in such a Province in his Name and by his Power the Prince will ratifie and confirm So our Saviour here tells Peter and in him the rest of the Apostles that whatever he binds or looses on Earth shall be bound or loosed in Heaven meaning that he will hold their Judicial Acts for good and valid so long as they keep to the Laws and Rules which he hath left them to govern by And if any think the change of the Metaphor from Keys which are to open and shut to binding and loosing be somewhat harsh the Exposition of S. Chrysostom doth well reconcile that difference for he supposes the Power of a Vice-Roy to be here signified (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost in loc and as he can Lock up Men in Prison or Release them according as they deserve and hath the Power of the Keys committed to him to separate the Innocent from the mischievous So Christ here gives his Apostles like Authority in order to the well governing of his Church only this is no Temporal Coercive Power as many other Texts of the New Testament do declare but a Spiritual Power suitable to the nature and ends of this Sacred Society This being therefore the plain and natural Sense of the place it is clear that our Lord did here give his Apostles a Commission as well to exclude notorious Criminals out of his Church by Excommunication as to readmit them upon their Repentance promising to confirm their Acts so long as they judged by his Rules and this may well be reckoned a proof that Excommunication is of Divine Institution I confess this Text hath been strained too high by the Romanists who though they cannot easily prove themselves Peter's Successors yet would gladly ground their unjust claim to a Universal Monarchy over the whole Church upon this weak pretence That Peter himself is the Rock on which Christ was to build his Church and that this Priviledge of the Keys is granted only to him and his Successors at Rome which others have largely and learnedly confuted And I need only say That some of their own Communion a few Ages since did confess This Power was given
not to Peter only but to all the Apostles yea to all the Clergy and the whole Church (d) Haec autem ligandi solvendi potestas quamvis soli Petro data videatur à Domino tamen caeteris Apostolis datur necnon etiam in Episcopis Presbyteris toti Ecclesiae Raban Maurus And our Saviour himself to anticipate this unjust Claim doth afterwards twice grant the same Power to all the Apostles which here he seems only to give to S. Peter Matth. xviii 18. John xx 21 22. Yet this false Gloss of the Romanists with the wild and extravagant Inferences deduced from thence hath put some Learned Protestants into the other extream that is into denying there is any Power granted to the Apostles here more than the Power of a Doctor or Teacher and they will have the Key to be only the Key of Knowledge Luke xi 52. and out of the Talmud they go about to prove that binding and loosing signify nothing else but determining what things are lawful and these are said to be loosed and what things are unlawful which are said to be bound (e) Gamero in loc item Lightfoot horae Hebr in Matth. But we must not let the Sense of the Fathers and the Power of the Keys to be at once wrested out of our hands by this Novel fancy For first the place cannot bear this Sense since it is ridiculous to affirm that Christ gave his Apostles such a Power That whatever they declared or taught to be unlawful on Earth should be unlawful in Heaven and whatever they taught was lawful God would make that lawful this were to give them a power which God himself never did assume viz. to change the eternal and unalterable Rules of Good and Evil And besides in the parallel place where these words are repeated by Christ Matth. xviii 18. they are applyed to Offenders refusing to Repent upon the Churches admonition which obstinate sinners are to be avoided as Heathens and Publicans by private Christians and if they value not this as being an Act only of their Equals Christ supposes his Apostles will then bind them by Excommunication and to shew the weight of that Censure he saith Whatsoever they bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven ver 18. which being spoken of the validity of the Punishment inflicted on evil Men can never be drawn to signifie only Teaching yea after our Lords Resurrection he who is the best expounder of his own meaning declares that binding and loosing signifies remitting or retaining of sins John xx 21. and turns the Whatsoever ye shall bind c. into Whosesoever sins ye remit c. Again since the Misna which is the oldest part of the Talmud was written 150 years after the destruction of Jerusalem which is later than any Canonical part of the New Testament (e) Sixt. Senens Biblioth lib. 2. pag. 148. those Learned Men above mentioned ought not to expound the more ancient Phrases of the Gospel by these Talmudical expressions yet even in the Talmud Binding and Loosing is often used for Excommunicating and Absolving (f) R. Samuel status cornu ligat et flatus cornu solvit Talm. Bab. Moed Katon c. 3. fol. 16. Os quod solvit est os quod ligat Tract Demai cap. 6. §. 11. which is the more obvious and natural Sense of the Words and because the doing things forbidden by the Rabbins caused Men to be Excommunicated or bound by this Censure Therefore by a Trope the things themselves were said to be bound So that we may conclude That our Saviour doth actually here give Authority to his Apostles and to their lawful Successors to shut Men who are scandalously wicked out of his Church and to let them in again upon their Repentance declaring their Sentence shall be ratified in Heaven And thus the Ancients generally expound this place and from thence they frequently speak of the Power of the Keys given by Christ to the Church in order to the Excommunicating and Absolving of Sinners Of which because there are innumerable Instances one or two shall suffice (g) Ecclesia quae fundatur in Christo claves ab eo regni coelorum accepit in Petro i. e. potestatem ligandi solvendique peccata Aug. Tract 124 in Johan Cum excommunicat Ecclesia ligatur in Coelo excommunicatus Aug. in Psal 108. Vid. Ambros de poenit l. 1. c. 6. that so Reason and Authority both may shew our Exposition of this Place is true and certain which will be further confirmed by considering the second place where this Power is mentioned viz. Matth. xviii 18. Verily I say unto you whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever ye shall loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven the very same words with those spoken to Peter Chap. xvi 19. But if we look back to the occasion of them here it will appear they can be meant of nothing but of Ecclesiastical Discipline For in this xviiith Chapter Our Lord first labours to prevent the doing Injuries and Offences to the meanest of his Disciples ver 1. to ver 14. But secondly in case Injuries be done or any Scandal or Offence given Christ teaches the offended Person what method to take viz. First privately to admonish the Offender ver 15. If that prevail not the grieved party must rebuke him before witness ver 16. And if this also prove unsuccessful and the Offender remain obstinate then he must complain to the Church which is supposed to rebuke and if need be to Censure the stubborn Criminal and if he do not hear the Church that is submit to its Sentence and make reparation then Private Christians are to renounce all Communion and Commerce with that Man and carry themselves toward him as the Jews did to a Heathen or Publican with whom they would not discourse nor eat Matth. ix 11. Galat. ii 12. nor yet suffer them to come into that Court of the Temple where they were wont to pray Acts xxi 28. for on the Gate was written Let no Stranger go into the Holy Place (h) Joseph Bell. Jud. lib. 6. cap. 14. That is they must no longer count this Man a Member of the Christian Church nor call him a Brother but esteem him as a Pagan and one who never yet was admitted or a Publican who for living in open Sins was cast out and with such a Man the rest of the sound Christians were not to have any Commerce in Civil or Religious Matters But if all this will neither shame nor terrifie the wicked Wretch so as to bring him to Repentance because he may think this Sentence inflicted by the Church is but an Human Act and pronounced only by Mortal Men Our Lord declares That this Sentence is of Divine Authority and though it be pronounced only by Men yet it shall be confirmed in Heaven For saith he Verily I say unto you whatsoever ye shall bind c. ver 18. And
because Christ was to be in Heaven he assures them ver 19. 20. That whatever Publick Acts of Discipline they did when they were assembled and desired his Confirmation of them he would grant it to them yea when they met together in his Name and by his Authority committed to them did proceed to Censure Offenders he declares he was present there virtually and effectually ver 20. Now here seems to be no room for evasion yet those who love to find knots in the Bulrush do object to this plain Exposition First That this is meant of private Injuries when the Believers had no Judicatures to right them but Jewish or Heathen and though in that Case they were to use this Method yet now Christians have Magistrates and Laws of their own this order is void of it self To which Grotius replys That Christian Tribunals do not take away the power of judging from the Church because the Civil Laws do only punish the grosser Crimes and such as are most contrary to Civil Societies but there are many Offences against Charity Meekness and Patience not forbid by the Civil Laws but only by Christ's Laws by which the Church judgeth so that Constantine and his Successors did well to leave this power of Judging to the Church and to confirm it by their Laws as may be seen in the Acts of the Councils and in the Code (i) Grot. Com. in Luc. vi 22. To which I shall add That Christ here speaks not only of Injuries but of all kinds of Sins which are called Scandals or Offences because they may be an occasion of our Brethrens falling into Apostacy or evil Practises if these go unpunished and many Sins must be unpunished if none be taken notice of but those which the Civil Laws forbid (k) Rom. xiv 13. 1 Cor. viii 10. and therefore Scandals and Trespasses are used promiscuously (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matth. xviii 7. but ver 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So also 1 Cor. viii 12. So that many evil things which are scandalous and offend weak Christians are still to be punished by the Church and since the ends of Church Censures are to bring the Offender to Repentance to clear the Church from the blot contracted by this Crime and to warn others not to follow so ill an Example and the nature of them is more gentle and more spiritual than the Civil Punishments doubtless they may well subsist together in the same Nation without subverting one another Secondly The Learned Mr. Selden seeks many Glosses for those words Tell the Church which he sometimes expounds of the Jewish Magistrates in the Synagogue and sometimes of the whole Assembly manifestly designing to take this Power out of the Bishops hands But for his first Notion how improbable is it that Christ should allow his Disciples who were not to sue for their very Cloaks Matth. v. 40. to go to their mortal Foes the unbelieving Jews to complain of Injuries and according to Mr. Selden's Notion of a Synagogue for a Court of Justice they were more like to be scourged or receive new Injuries than to get right there and Christ would rather have said Tell it to the Synagogue than tell the Church But an easie Prolepsis will solve this seeming difficulty for it was usual with our Lord whose words were to be writ for after times to allude to things not then instituted as he doth to Baptism John iii. 5. and to the Eucharist John vi 51. so we may reasonably believe he gave this Rule with respect to those Assemblies of Christians which he foresaw would soon after grow into a distinct Society and be ruled by his Apostles and their Successors to whom these Complaints were then to be made For I must venture to prefer S. Chrysostom's Exposition before that which Mr. Selden writ under a Rebellious Democracy and that holy Father tells us expresly that by the Church here is meant the Governours of the Church (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 69. in Matth. Tom. II. p. 385. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. whom Theophilact agrees with And St. Augustine expresly affirms That it is the Governours of the Church which have received this power from Christ in this place of St. Matthew xviii 17 18. (m) Augustin de Civ Dei lib. 20. c. 9. p. 213. And common Speech confirms this explication of the Fathers for we say He complains to the City who complains to the Governours of it But our Saviour puts it past all dispute that he intended this Power only for his Apostles and their Successors because to them and no other he grants a Commission to remit and retain sins John xx 23. 'T is true the Apostles and Primitive Bishops were wont to exercise this Discipline in the Presence of the People and with their Approbation but the Authority was wholly in the Governour and the Judicial Act was solely his St. Peter and S. Paul did pass the Censure and the Bishops their Successors But they did this in and before the Assembly for greater Solemnity and because the People were to know and avoid these Offenders as also that the openness of the shame might make the Criminals sooner repent and be a more effectual warning to others not to follow so bad an Example But from this presence of the whole Assembly to infer their joyning in the Authoritative part is a very weak Consequence and confuted both by Scripture and Antiquity as we shall see in the sequel For this shall suffice here to prove that in this second place our Lord Jesus hath left Power with the Governours of his Church to receive Complaints concerning scandalous Offenders and to bind them with the Bond of Excommunication till they do repent and that he hath commanded the People to refuse all Communion with these in Sacred Civil Actions while they remain obstinate yea and declared that they who remain obdurate and impenitent under this Sentence shall not only be excluded from Communion with the Church on Earth but be bound in Heaven also and excluded from thence if they do not submit and repent Thirdly these two places being only promises of a future Priviledge we may read the fulfilling of them when Christ ordained the Apostles for Governours of his Church after his Resurrection for he sent them with Authority as his Father sent him John xx 21. and to give them inward ability to exercise this high and holy Office he gives them the Holy Ghost by the Ceremony of breathing on them ver 22. Finally to oblige all the Society to revere and obey them he grants them the power of binding and loosing without a Metaphor saying Whosesoever Sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whosesoever sins ye retain they are retained ver 23. Which place evidently makes them Judges under Christ concerning such Offences as are committed by those in the Church so that if they should find any Man obstinate in his evil ways
he doth not cut off this Sinner but to shew he did this for his Amendment he still exhorts him to Repentance ver 22. 23. Upon which the Offender immediately submits and fearing some Judgment would follow this Apostolical Excommunication desires the Apostles as the Primitive Penitents did the Faithful afterwards to pray for him ver 24. which is a plain description of this Rite * Vide Apostol Can. 29. And Mr. Selden mentions some ancient Arabick Manuscripts which in the Form of Excommunication say Let him be accursed and excommunicated as Peter excommunicated Simon Magus (q) Seld Synedr l. 1. c. 8. p. 119. The next Example is that of the Incestuous Corinthian 1 Corinth v. 1 2. who had scandalously married his Fathers Wife yet the Church of Corinth connived at this notorious Crime and had high thoughts of themselves though this gross Scandal had been done among them whereas they ought rather to have lamented the deplorable condition of the Sinner and cast him out of their Church by Excommunication for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here and ver 13. doth not signifie to take him away by death but to drive or take him away from assembling with them Only because this was a kind of Spiritual death therefore the Ancient Church use to inflict this Censure with weeping and lamenting over the Offender as if he had been really dead (r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. constit lib. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. in Cels lib. 3. p. 142. which was not unlike the Custom of the Pythagoreans who set a Coffin in the place of him that had forsaken their School And if the Corinthians had been thus truly sensible of the sad estate of this vile Wretch they would no doubt have cut him off from their Body as a common Annoyance as (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theophilact Theophilact speaks or as a gangren'd Limb. But since the Schism there had loosened the Discipline our Apostle though absent in Body yet as present by his Authority decrees he shall be Excommunicated ver 3. and directs them how to proceed ver 4. When they were assembled for Publick Worship in Christ's Name for these Censures as we noted before were inflicted in Publick to produce the greater shame and terror in the Offender then according to the Sentence which S. Paul had pronounced by the Spirit and by virtue of that Power which our Lord Jesus had committed to him and which he now delegates to the Rulers of the Corinthian Church he chargeth them ver 5. to deliver this incestuous Man over to Satan that he might inflict some bodily pains and diseases on him to bring him to a sense of his Sin that so his Soul might be saved at the last and dreadful day of Judgment As to which Phrase of delivering to Satan it is certainly meant of Excommunication both here and 1 Timoth. i. 20. for as by Baptism Men were delivered from the power of Satan Acts xxvi 18. whence those Primitive Exorcisms and solemn Renunciations of the Devil So when Apostates and Evil men broke this Covenant and were cast out of the Church again they were as it were delivered back to Satan they became as Heathens Matth. xviii 17. and were under the Dominion of the Prince of Darkness Yet to shew this Discipline was not to destruction but to edification the Apostle declares this delivering to Satan was not for the damnation of their Souls but that Satan by God's permission and as God's Executioner might torment their Bodies by some grievous Disease whereby they might be humbled and brought to Repentance in order to their final Salvation It is well known that the Jews generally did believe Satan was the Inflicter of all Diseases Joh. ii 4 5 6 7. Luke xiii 16. Mark ix 17. And in the Infancy of the Church God was pleased to give greater credit to his Apostles and instead of Temporal Power to second their Censures with Diseases and so to confirm their Sentence in that Age of Miracles and though now the Gospel is sufficiently attested these miraculous Attestations as needless are withdrawn yet still those who are cast out of the Church are really exposed to Satan's malice until they submit and by repentance be received in again But the Apostle proceeds ver 6. that they must not glory of their Purity while such contagious and spreading Vices remained uncensured but ver 7. must clear themselves from these vicious Persons that they might be fit to communicate with Christ their Passoever He also adds That in a former Epistle now not extant he had enjoyned them to avoid the company and conversation of Fornicators that is that the Church should Censure them and the People have no Conversation with them but he now explains himself that he means not this should be extended to the Jews or Pagans who were no professed Christians and so not liable to its Discipline and by whose Faults no Scandal could fall on the Church but he now tells them who are to be Excommunicated and avoided viz. those who pretend they are Christians and yet are Fornicators Covetous Idolaters Railers Drunkards and Extortioners (t) Habes hic praecipuas excommunicationiz causas Grot. in locum with these though through the Schisms at Corinth the Bishop could not so well Excommunicate them the faithful People must not so much as eat a common Meal and sure much more not admit them to their Religious Worship and eat with them at the Lords Table ver 11. Now if any say S. Paul is partial in being more severe against Christians than Strangers for the same Crimes he answereth ver 12. That his Commission extended not to them that were without they were to be left to God's Judgment but he and they by Authority delegated from him had power to judge and sentence those who were Members of their own Society and so he concludes ver 13. That leaving the Unconverted to God's Judicature they must proceed to Excommunicate and take away by Excommunication this and other evil Persons and so by the severity of these Divine Censures they might in time obtain that end of punishment in all Societies even the taking away of Evil from among them so often mentioned in Moses's Law and by the LXX often rendred in the Masculine Gender (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 LXX Deut. xvii 17. xxi 21. xxiv 7. Haec itaque est vera lectio hujus loci non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod D. Seldeno placet yet sometimes in the Neuter (w) Deut. xix 19. xxii 21. To conclude This Chapter contains full and clear directions for this holy Discipline and an Example which admits of no evasion For if this were to be executed by S. Paul's Order and by the Power of Christ on all notorious and scandalous Offenders and if the Church were to cast out such from their Society and the People to refrain from conversing with them if
the Church was to judge them and its Members were to avoid them then Excommunication was practised as it is now in the main even in the Apostles days and their Rules and Actions are our Warrant for it But since Christ gave his Apostles not only a power to retain but also to remit Sins we have a further account in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians That this Incestuous Person for of him the Fathers generally agree S. Paul speaks 2 Corinth ii 6. (x) Origen in Psal xxxvii Ambros Hieron Theoph. in loc who had grieved the Church of Corinth was exceedingly grieved himself and in danger to be swallowed up of too much sorrow wherefore S. Paul desires his Censure may be taken off declaring that this publick Reproof and severe Sentence (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. ii 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocantur Poenae Canonicae in Act. Consiliorum ap Chrysost de Sacerd. Grot. in the presence of the whole Congregation having brought him to Repentance was a sufficient Penalty and now he requires them to forgive him and grant him Absolution ver 7. expecting they should obey him in all his Orders as well the former for censuring as these for absolving ver 9. First Because in all his Orders he had respect unto their good And secondly Because he commanded them by the Authority and as the Ambassador of Christ who in all these Judicial Acts of Excommunicating and Absolving did represent the Person of Christ himself (z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ver 10. Non in mea persona sed Christi qui dixit Quaecunque solveritis in terra erant soluta in Coelo Hieron Ut factum Apostoli factum sit Christi Ambros 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. who had given this Commission to his Apostles That whatsoever they should bind on Earth should be bound in Heaven So the Fathers expound this Phrase in the Person of Christ And we may observe That as S. Paul did Cast him out of the Church not by their common Suffrages as S. Ambrose speaks but with the Power of our Lord Jesus Christ that is by his Authority and Sentence whose Ambassador on Earth the Apostle was (a) Ambros Comment in 1 Cor. v. p. 358. So he restores him again upon his Repentance not by any Suffrage of the Church Members but by Christ's Authority and as his Representative which shews that the People are meerly witnesses in this Case but the Governours of the Church only act by Authority The Peoples presence tends to the Solemnity not to the validity of Excommunication or Absolution which in this Instance are both plainly founded by S. Paul upon a Divine Authority and deduced from that Commission granted by Christ to his Apostles and consequently to their Successors I have been the larger on this because it is a fair Precedent drawn by the Hand of an Apostle of the Practice of these two great Points of Jurisdiction and a clear Commentary upon our Saviour's Commission as well as a strong Proof that Church Censures are of Divine Right Many other Expressions there are in these Epistles relating to this Matter which we will only briefly remark viz. all those which speak of S. Paul's coming to them in sorrow (b) 2 Cor. ii 1 2 3 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. and making them sorry that is by ordering Offenders to be censured which Act was alway done with sorrow as the receiving them in again was with joy So he saith He fears when he comes again God will humble him among them and that he shall bewail many who have sinned already and have not repented (c) 2 Cor. xii 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Teoph Eugere dicitur pro excommunicare Grot. in 3 Cor. v. 2. which the Ancients expound of Excommunicating them And in that sense we are to understand those places where S. Paul speaks of making them sorry with an Epistle 2 Cor. vii 8. and of the godly sorrow which worketh Repentance to Salvation not to be repented of ver 10. Again To this belongeth that Authority which made him ready to revenge all disobedience 2 Cor. x. 6. which he calls The Authority which the Lord had given him for edification and not for destruction ver 8. For whereas the Temporal Sword destroys the Criminals these Spiritual Censures are designed to bring Offenders to Repentance and Salvation and therefore the Apostle useth this Phrase again Chap. xiii 10. where having as our Saviour directed Matth. xviii 15 16. admonished them twice by his Epistles he assures them that when he comes which would be the third Application made to them He will not spare the Impenitent 1 Cor. xiii 2. but would use sharpness or severity ver 10. (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vid Tit. i. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. that is proceed immediately to Excommunicate them according to that Power wherewith Christ had invested him for edification and not for destruction For which cause they ought not to think much at this Power which Christ had given the Governours of his Church because the end of it was not the destruction but the reformation of Offenders And if they would amend without it our Spiritual Fathers would be much better pleased Further we may note That not only for wicked practices but for Heretical Opinions and false Doctrines also the Apostles used Excommunication as in that place If we or an Angel from Heaven preach any other Gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you let him be Anathema or Accursed Galat. i. 8. And to shew this was no rash but a deliberate Judicial Act he repeats it ver 9. And here it will be seasonable to enquire into the Sense of this word Anathema so often used concerning Excommunication (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 87. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theophâ—e Chrysost Abominabilis sit Hieron Condemnatus devotus detestabilis Aug. The Ancients explain it Accursed Excommunicated Separated Alienated Abominable Detestable and Devoted all which respect Persons Excommunicated And the LXX do generally thus translate the Hebrew Cherem (f) Josh vii 1. Deut. vii 26. alibi the name of one Species of Excommunication among the Jews 'T is true it sometimes signifies a thing dedicated to God The reason of which different Senses S. Chrysostom thus gives As no man dares touch a Gift offered and devoted to God so no man dares touch one that is Anathematized but this is done for different reasons None will come near the holy Gift because it is Consecrated to God but all men separate from the Excommunicated as being unholy and alienated from God (g) ap Theoph. in Rom. ix 3. ipse Chrysost hom 16. in 9. Rom. ita etiam Theodor. in loc And Theodoret notes that Anathema signifies not only that which is offered to God but that which is alienated from him and in the latter Sense he applies it to
Excommunication which Alienates men from the Common Body of the Church and as S. Chrysostom speaks Separates them from all and alienates them from all in Rom. 9. And in this Sense those who Apostatized from the Faith did call Jesus Anathema 1 Cor. xii 3. that is renounce all Communion with him and agree to that Sentence of Cherem which the Jews had pronounced against him as an Accursed Person And S. Paul in the height of his Charity to his Country-men wishes himself Anathema from Christ so they might be saved Rom. ix 3. that is he could be content to be cut off and excommunicated from the Church and Body of Christ so they were all united to it Upon the whole Matter we may conclude That this Anathema in the Galatians is a Formal and Solemn Excommunication denounced against all who preach false Doctrines instead of the true Gospel and such another Sentence is thundred forth against all That love not the Lord Jesus Let them be Anathema Maran-atha 1 Cor. xvi 22. only there is added an intimation That the Lord will come and take Vengeance on those who are thus Accursed deservedly by the Church for corrupting the Faith But of this Maran-atha we spake before However it may be proper here to observe That from this Apostolical practice the Primitive Church was wont in her Canons which concerned Matters of Faith or were levelled against notorious Crimes to annex an Anathema to them intimating those Doctrines and Practices were accursed and deserved Excommunication So in the end of the Nicene Creed the holy Catholick and Apostolick Church Anathematizes the Arrians And the first Council at Constantinople pronounces an Anathema against every Heresie (h) Conc. Constant Can. I. Bever Tom. I. p. 85. So doth the Council of Gangra close every Canon with this Anathema (i) Conc. Gangrens ibid. p. 415. which Balsamon explains to be for the subversion of those Heresies being a Declaration that for such Opinions and Practices they shall be Excommunicated And it is very certain that the Apostles themselves did actually excommunicate Men for Heresie For Hymenaeus was an Heretick 2 Tim. ii 17. denying the Futurity of the Resurrection and Alexander had made Shipwrack of his Faith too yea both of them were void of good Conscience wherefore S. Paul excommunicates these two 1 Tim. i. 19 20. delivering them to Satan that they might learn not to blaspheme And that the same thing is meant by delivering to Satan and Anathematizing we may learn from Balsamon and Zonaras who say that an Anathema is nothing else but a kind of dedicating one to Satan (l) Anathema dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Praef. ad Concil Gangr And more largely Such an one is an Anathema that is separated from God For as that which is offered to God is called an Anathema and is separated from common uses so he who is Anathematized is torn off and cast out from the Society of the Faithful who belong to God and from God himself and is set apart for the Devil or rather sets himself apart for him (m) Zonar in Can. 3. Goncil Constant Bever Tom. I. p. 363. Balsamon ibid And for this Exposition they cite the Apostle S. Paul in the places before produced But because some late Authors would have this delivering to Satan peculiar to the Apostles times I shall grant that the being seized with Diseases which was the miraculous effect of it was peculiar to those first Ages while these wonderful and supernatural Penalties were necessary for confirming the New-planted Gospel but the Title which Satan hath to such as are deservedly Excommunicated for Heresie or gross Crimes is as real though not so visible now as we may learn from Theophylact How saith he did he deliver them to Satan He cast them out of the Church he turned them out of the Sheepfold and exposed them naked to the Wolf for as once the Cloud overshadowed the Tabernacle so doth the Spirit the Church of Christ Therefore if any be out of the Church he is deserted by the Spirit and so becomes miserable and an easie Prey to Satan Such is the Punishment of Excommunication (n) Theophylact in 1 Tim. i. 20. For the Devil is always ready to take those into his Power who are alienated from God saith S. Ambrose (o) Ambros Com. in eundem loc And so dreadful a thing was it accounted in the Primitive Times to be thus Anathematized and delivered to Satan That they generally used these Anathema's rather against Opinions and Practices at large than against Persons contenting themselves with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a bare Separation of those from the Communion whose Repentance they could possibly hope for Which perhaps those charitable Bishops might learn from the Apostles who though they did Anathematize the most notorious Criminals and the Ringleaders of Heresie and deliver them to Satan by the worst sort of Excommunication like the Jewish Cherem yet they were content only to warn the Faithful to avoid the Society of other Sinners agreeable to the lower sort of Jewish Excommunication by Niddui For as to the Authors of Schism the Apostle bids them mark and avoid them Rom. xvi 17. which being to be done by all the Christians of that Church it must amount to an excluding them from their Religious Assemblies and Civil Conversation also Though Grotius thinks there was yet no fixed Government of the Church at Rome if there had S. Paul had ordered these to be Excommunicated which not being in the Peoples power all they could do was to avoid them The like Rules the Apostle gives to the Thessalonians whom he commands in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ to withdraw themselves from every Brother who walketh disorderly 2 Thess iii. 6. which being pronounced so solemnly in Christ's Name and by his Authority is a kind of general Sentence of Excommunication upon which they were to avoid such Mens Company So again ver 14. He who obeyed not the Apostles Orders they were to signifie his name to S. Paul in an Epistle (p) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ver 14. of Complaint and by forbearing to hold any Communion with him shame him into amendment Yet not to hate him during this his Separation and Exclusion but to admonish him that if possible he might be reduced before he was utterly cut off from being a Brother For these Admonitions did regularly precede the Solemn Excommunication as we learn from S. Paul's directions to Timothy Bishop of Ephesus where the Bishop was openly before all the Congregation to rebuke notorious Offenders for a terror to others 1 Tim. v. 20. And if this would not prevail but he was forced to Excommunicate them he then enjoyns him as in the Presence of God and Christ and his holy Angels who were present in the Church where these Consures were laid on to proceed impartially ver 21. and not hastily to Absolve them again by the Ceremony of
years Can. 16. To be absent from Church for three Sundays together was punished with Excommunication Can. 21. A Convert from Heresie was to repent three years before he were received to the Churches Communion Can. 22. To keep Idols in their Houses was punished with Exclusion from the Church Can. 41. And no Bishop must receive any Criminal into the Church but he which cast him out Can. 53. These with many other Rules there prescribed shew that Excommunication was the proper Ecclesiastical Penalty for all Crimes and that it was laid on for longer or shorter time according to the nature of the Offence And since the Bishops who used these Censures were Men of so great Integrity and Piety and many of them Martyrs for the Faith we cannot suspect they would have falsly assumed a Power as of Divine Right which Christ never gave them Nor would the Faithful have submitted to the severities of those Primitive Penances nor have esteemed Excommunication so dreadful or desired Absolution so Earnestly if they had not firmly believed that their Bishops Acted by Authority from Christ and his Holy Apostles And indeed the Evidence for this Opinion in this Age is so clear that Mr. Selden confesses it saying Excommunication was even then believed to rely upon Divine Right and express command of God (p) Jure etiam divino eoque praeceptivo eam niti existimatum jam est Seld. Synedr lib. 1. cap. 9. pag. 139. Which Testimony is the more to be valued because it comes from a Man who with more Learning than Success most industriously labours to prove the Primitive Christians mistaken in this Notion In which dispute I must briefly note there are many Evidences of his partiality For first when he professes to write of the use of Excommunication before Constantine he spends not two Pages on that Copious Subject viz. Lib. 1. Chap. 9. pag. 139 140. and saith this is enough and too much and so indeed it is enough to confute his Novel Fancy and too much to be answered by those slight Evasions there made use of For he spends all the rest of that Chapter to shew the Error of the Primitive Doctors in this point Secondly He would gladly perswade us that Christian Excommunication was a Branch of the Jewish derived from it and standing on the same grounds with it being the very Transcript of it Yet he grants two essential differences First That the Jews did not deny Communion in holy things to such as were Excommunicated but he owns that the Christians did exclude them from Religious assemblies and Offices before the times of Origen Tertullian and Irenaeus also Ibid. pag. 141. That is as early as we have any Records to instruct us and consequently the Christian and Jewish Excommunication if his supposition as to the Jews be true differed in the main point from the beginning Secondly He saith every Private person among the Jews could Excommunicate and hath not given one instance of any such thing among Christians as any private Mans assuming this Power yet he pretends he knows not when this Custom ceased in the Christian Church which doubtless never began there For he confesses That it is plain in Irenaeus Origen and Tertullians time none but the Governors of the Church could rightly Excommunicate Seld. Synedr pag. 143. yea it is plain That Tertullian saith it was only in the Presidents power to Excommunicate in the Apostles days As for that African Custom of the Martyrs Absolving some in Prison S. Cyprian who mentions the practice condemns it as irregular and it proceeded only from a Superstitious conceit of the interest the Martyrs would have in Heaven after their decease to obtain remission for the lapsed And therefore Albaspinaeus observes their Absolution was not thought good till after their Martyrdom But this usage quickly ceased and was nothing like the Jewish Custom We conclude therefore that Christian Censures were not grounded upon the practice of the Synagogue Thirdly We must observe how unseasonably he labours to pervert those places of holy Scripture which the Fathers brought to prove the Divine Right That of Deut. xvii 12. of putting him to death that disobeyed the Priest is alledged by S. Cyprian (q) Cypr. lib. 1. ep 11. by S. Hierom and S. Augustine also only by way of allusion and they argue only by parity of reason That if the Legal Priests had Temporal the Evangelical ought to have Spiritual coercive Power The next place viz. Math. xvi 19. about the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven he would evade by pretending the Key is not an Instrument of Excluding c. whereas all know it is the Instrument of Opening and Shutting and he himself cites Artemidorus to prove it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 148. yea he grants the Key is an Emblem of great Power and Authority among the Eastern Nations and he quotes for this Isai 22.22 pag. 147. whence it follows That our Lord made the Apostles his Vicegerents and Stewards and gave them this Power to lock Men up in the Bonds of their Sins and keep them out of the Church on Earth yea and out of the Kingdom of Heaven too if they did not repent Nor will Mr. Selden easily perswade the World that all those holy Fathers who thus explained this place spoke that which was not good Sense Again That other Text Math. xviii 17. Tell the Church he would have to signifie Tell it to the Jewish Consistory as if our Saviour would send his injured Disciples to complain to their Mortal Foes who would injure them much more And though he use a gross Prolepsis in explaining 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Gospel by the Talmudical Phrases of later date and by Modern Translations yet he will not allow an easy Prolepsis to the Fathers who think Christ spake with respect to the Christian Church shortly to be instituted and which was to continue to the end of the World Nor a Common Trope by which the name of the Society is put for the Governing part In the same verse He labours to prove that Heathens and Publicans were not interdicted the Jewish Worship now by Heathens is not meant Proselytes but Idolaters the Proselytes being called by a gentler Name And these Idolatrous Heathens were denied access to all parts of the Temple which were accounted Holy as we shewed before and the pious Jews would neither eat nor willingly converse with them nor Publicans often blaming our Saviour for doing this though only in order to their Conversion So that our Lord means that they must have no Conversation with those who would not repent upon the Churches Admonition So for binding and loosing Matth. xviii 18. which the Ancients make one main ground of Excommunication he forgets Christs own Exposition of it by remitting and retaining Sins and runs out into the later Rabinical Notion of Permitting and prohibiting as a Teacher which cannot be applied to this place of S. Matthew where Christ is not
it Yet that none may think this Instance favours the bold Fact of later Popes in Excommunicating Soveraign Princes and then Absolving their Subjects from their Allegiance to them We must observe that S. Ambrose did then offer to suffer quietly if the Emperor would oppose his Sentence nor did he pretend either to use force against him or allow any to do so But went in a way of perswasion and advised him to submit to this which was only a Spiritual Penalty for his Souls health And he was only under the least kind of Excommunication and barely suspended from receiving the Sacrament So also Pope Innocent dealt with Arcadius and Eudoxia for the injuries they had done to S. Chrysostom Interdicting them in this Gentle Form I the meanest of all and a Sinful Man to whom the Throne of S. Peter is now given do separate and reject you and your Empress from partaking of the Immaculate Mysteries of our Lord Christ (h) Michael Glycas Annal. par 3. An. 407. This was all And this is far from giving countenance to that impious usage of the later Popes who have Anathematized Soveraign Princes and stirred up Foreign Force against them as well as incited their own Subjects to Perjury and Rebellion yea to Murder them and take their Kingdoms from them Which is to turn the Spiritual into a Carnal Sword and prostitute a Divine Institution to serve the ends of Avarice Injustice and Ambition Yea to use it to quite contrary purposes than Christ intended it for viz. to make it to serve for Destruction and not for Edification But though this accursed practice receive no advantage from these Instances yet they do abundantly prove That Bishops in this Age did not as Mr. Selden would perswade us derive their Power to Excommunicate from the Emperors being Pontifices maximi and so from their Grants To proceed S. Chrysostom flourished about this time An. 390. and we are to enquire into his Opinion the rather because some have pretended he was against the use of Excommunication 'T is true he hath an Oration with this Title Concerning the unfitness of Anathematizing the living or the dead (i) Chrysost Tom. 6. hom 37. pag. 439. In which he severely inveighs against the rash use of this dreadful Curse which he thinks the Apostles used not against Persons but Opinions And indeed in the best Ages of the Church the accursing particular Persons was very rare and this highest sort of Excommunitating by Anathema's so much used by the Roman Church against particular Men is seldom to be met with and accordingly it is totally disused by the Church of England as not well agreeing with the Spirit of Christianity Luk. ix 55. nor with the Primitive Practice It sufficeth us as it did generally satisfie the Ancient Christians to exclude notorious Offenders from Sacred Offices and Assemblies till they repent And against this sort of Excommunication S. Chrysostom had no Objection for he himself practised it in divers Cases as the History of his Life shews and particularly in the Case of Eudoxia the Empress to whom he denyed access to the Church because being admonished to restore a Widows Vineyard unjustly taken away she refused it (k) Baron Annal An. 401. §. 9. And for his Opinion Mr. Selden says That S. Chrysostom as well as the other Fathers of this Age doth often own and admit the use of Excommunication (l) Seld. de Synedr lib. 1. cap. 10. pag. 212. Yea he reckons it of Divine Right for he saith concerning Binding and loosing Matth. xviii What greater honour can be given to the Church than this when Heaven it self takes the beginning of its Judgment from Earth The Judge sits on Earth the Master follows the Servant and what he judges below his Lord ratifies above (m) Chrysost hom 5. in Jesaiam Tom. V. pag. 152. Again he explains the Leaven which S. Paul orders the Church of Corinth to purge out to be an Advice to Bishops who suffer much of the old Leaven to remain within when they do not cast out of their Borders that is out of the Church the Covetous and Extortioners and such as shall be excluded out of the Kingdom of God (n) Idem Tom. III. hom 15. in 1 Cor. pag. 337. Which by the way gives the reason of his strict proceeding against Eudoxia And elsewhere speaking of the Discipline and Worship used in his time he saith They expelled those out of the holy Place who could not partake of the Lords Table (o) Chrysostom Tom. III. hom 18. in 2 Cor. pag. 647. Again he threatens those who gave scandal to Infidels by their excessive mourning for the dead making them think the Christians did not believe the Resurrection that he would proceed against them by Ecclesiastical Censures if they did not amend upon his Admonitions citing that method of proceeding which Christ prescribes Matth. xviii 15 16 17. for his Commission bidding them remember the power of binding and loosing which Christ had granted to him ver 18. and not dare to despise the Bonds of Church Censures For saith he it is not a Man which binds but Christ which gave us this power and entrusted Men with this Priviledge even as saith he a little after when a Prince orders his Officer to bind a Criminal it is not the Officer but the Prince which truly binds the Offender (p) Idem hom 4. in Epist ad Hebr. Tom. IV. pag. 455. This is so direct and full to our purpose that we need not seek any further to assure us That S. Chrysostom did believe the power of Excommunication was from Christ and that it was granted only to the Bishops and was of great use in the Church Many more passages in him do confirm these Truths but omitting them we go on to his Contemporary S. Hierom who fully agrees with him in this Opinion For speaking of the Clergy as they are distinct from the Laity he saith God forbid I should speak evil of these who succeed the Apostles and consecrate the Body of Christ with their Mouths who make us Christians and having received the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven do in a sort judge before the day of Judgment And soon after he saith They have power to deliver a man to Sathan for the destruction of the Flesh that the Spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (q) Hieron ad Heliodor ep 1. Tom. l. pag. 5. Where we may note That though some fancy the delivering to Sathan proper to the Apostles time yet even when the miraculous Penalty on the Offenders Body was ceased the Fathers still called Excommunication by this Name as S. Hierom doth here And so Origen before him saith A man is delivered into the power of the Devil when his fault is manifest and the Bishop drives him out of the Church that being observed by all he may be ashamed and converted so that at length his Soul may be
saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (r) Origen hom 2. in libr. Judic And we may also here remark That all those places which we produced before out of Scripture to prove the Divine Right of Excommunication are so expounded and applied by the Fathers But to proceed with S. Hierom He having declared Vigilantius an Heretick wonders very much Why he was not Excommunicated by his own Bishop (s) Hieron ep 53. advers Vigil Tom. II. pag. 154. And speaking of John Bishop of Hierusalem who had undeservedly censured as he thought some who held the right Faith he there informs us wherein the Censure did consist For he saith that this Bishop had prohibited them to enter into the Church and forbid any to receive them into their Houses while they lived or to bury them when they were dead (t) Hieron adv error Joan. Hi. Tom. II. pag. 258. In another place he reckons this Censure to be from the Lord saying If we be cast out of the Congregation of our Brethren and out of the House of God for any Sin we ought not to resist but to bear the Sentence patiently and to say with the Prophet I will bear the Indignation of the Lord Mich. vii 9. (u) Idem in Ezek. lib. 5. Tom. IV. pag. 844. And in another place he tells us That it was the Custom in his Time for the Bishops to expel out of the Church Fornicators Adulterers Murtherers and other vicious persons (w) Idem Com. in Tit. cap. 3. Tom. VI. p. 466. These with many more places in this Father do still confirm our Opinion of the practice and the Original of Excommunication To him we may add S. Augustine who grew Eminent for his Learning and Piety about the year 410. And he interdicted his friend Bonifacius a Count of the Empire from the Communion for taking a Criminal by force from the Altar before the Bishop had seen him and the Count owns his fault with sorrow and sending the Man to S. Augustine begs his Pardon and intreats he may not be shut out of the Church nor his Oblation rejected which he had made (x) Augustin Epist 187 188. Tom. II. pag. 166. b In another place he saith It was usual for offenders in the Church to be removed from the Sacrament of the Altar by Ecclesiastical Discipline (y) Idem de Genes ad literam lib. 11. cap. 40. Tom. III. pag. 152. b And again to shew the Custom was universal he tells us Men must repent of Sins after Baptism that if they be Excommunicated they may be received again as they which are properly called Penitents do in all the Churches (z) Id. ep 108. Tom. II. pag. 105. a Yea he grounds the right of Excommunication upon the express commands of Christ and of his holy Apostles affirming That as Phineas under the Law slew the Adulterers so now the visible Sword is ceased from the Church we do the same thing by Excommunication (a) Idem de fide oper cap. 2. Tom. IV. pag. 13. which in another place he saith doth the same under the Gospel as putting to death did under the Law (b) Id. quaest in Deut. lib. 5. Tom. IV. pag. 62. Again he reckons up three deadly Sins which are especially to be punished with Excommunication Uncleanness Apostasie and Murder (c) Idem de fide oper cap. 19. And for his Sense of the efficacy of this Divine Sentence he teacheth That When the Church doth Excommunicate the person is bound in Heaven and when he is restored by the Church this reconciliation makes him loosed in Heaven (d) Idem Tract in Johan 50. Tom. IX pag. 80. b Which he proves by Christs promise to S. Peter and in him to the whole Church as S. Augustine there observes And to the same purpose in another place The Church which is founded on Christ did from him in Peter receive the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven that is the power of binding and loosing Sins (e) Idem Tract 124. ibid. p. 123. And it is observable that this Eminent Father always grounds Excommunication upon the power of Binding and Loosing which Christ gave the Church As in that Epistle where he reproves a young Bishop Auxilius for Excommunicating a whole Family for the Masters fault by which means as S. Augustine notes if a Child should be born in that House it could not be baptized no not though it were in danger of Death such was the force of this Sentence which he there calls A Spiritual Penalty binding the Soul according to that of our Saviour Whatsoever ye bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven (f) Aug. Epist 75. Tom. II. pag. 71. a So that we see this was the constant and currant Opinion of the whole Church and thus the most eminent Fathers did expound holy Scripture Here therefore we might conclude but only we must not omit that solemn Instance of Synesius Bishop of Ptolemais his Excommunicating Andronicus the Prefect of Pentapolis in Egypt under Theodosius An. 411. for horrible Impieties and Cruelties which he and his Companions had been guilty of the Form of which is contained in the Tractatorian Epistle which the Bishop sent in the name of the Church of Ptolemais to all her Sister Churches throughout the World in these Words Let no Church of God be open to Andronicus and his Companions to Thoas and his Associates let every holy place Chappel and Church-yard be shut against them The Devil hath no part in Paradise and if he privily creep in he would be cast out again I therefore admonish all private persons and Rulers that they neither dwell in the same House nor eat at the same Table with them And especially I charge all Priests neither to speak to them while they live nor attend them to their Graves when they dye And if any despise this as the Church of a little City and Communicate with these Excommunicate Persons as if he need not obey so poor a Place he makes a Schism in the Church which Christ would have to be but one And if he be a Deacon Priest or Bishop we will account him in the same state with Andronicus and will never shake hands or eat with such a Man much less will we Communicate with them in the holy Mysteries who take part with Thoas and Andronicus (g) Synesij Epist 58. pag. 203. An. 411. Where we see how strictly Excommunicate Persons were to be avoided and how perfectly they were excluded from all Civil and Religious Converse and Communion Yea Synesius saith No man ought to call or count Andronicus for a Christian (h) Idem ibid. pag. 201. for this put him into the state of a Heathen and wholly cut him off from the Body of Christs Church Afterward writing to his Metropolitan Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria he informs him that he had separated Lamponianus a Priest from the Communion of the Church for