O Generation of Vipers who hath forewarned you to flee from the wrath to come Which insinuateth a coincidency of these two stories related Matth. 3. and Iohn 1. Salmeron thinks that message was sent to Iohn out of honour and respect to him and he endeavours to confute the Centurists but among all his answers he doth not averre which had been his best reply if he had thought it probable that those words O Generation of Vipers were not spoken to the Pharisees that were sent from Ierusalem to Iohn Yea Salmeron himself doth in another place observe divers coincidencies between the story of that which passed between Iohn and the Pharisees that came to his baptism and the story of that which passed between Iohn and the Pharisees that were sent to him from Ierusalem 4. Erastus argueth from the admission of a generation of Vipers to Baptisme to prove the lawfulnesse of admitting a generation of Vipers to the Lords Supper But I argue contrariwise Such persons as desire to be received into the Church by Baptisme if they be prophane and scandal us persons ought not to be baptized but refused baptisme as Augustine proveth in his Book De Fide Operibus Therefore prophane and scandalous persons ought much lesse be admitted unto the Lords Supper Of which Argument more before I conclude with the Centurists Iohn did not cast pearls before swine he did not admit rashly any that would to Baptisme but such as confessed their sins that is onely such as were tryed and did repent but the contumacious and the defenders of their impieties or crimes he did reject CHAP. XVII Antiquity for the suspension of all scandalous persons from the Sacrament even such as were admitted to other publik Ordinances MR. Prynn in his first Quaere would have us beleeve that in the primitive times scandalous sinners were ever excommunicated and wholy cast out of the Church and sequestred from all other Ordinances as well as from the Sacrament And since saith he in the primitive times as is evident by Tertullians Apologie cap. 39. De poenitentia lib. and others scandalous persons were ever excommunicated and wholy cast out of the Church extra gregem dati not barely sequestred from the Sacrament But for further clearing of the ancient discipline concerning suspension I have thought good here to take notice of the particulars following First That great Antiquary Albaspinaeus proving that Church communion or fellowship was anciently larger than partaking of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper he proves it by this Argument because many of those who had scandalously fallen were admitted to communion with the Church in prayer and all other Ordinances the Eucharist onely excepted Next It is well known to the searchers of Antiquity that there were four degrees of publike declaration of repentance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which the Latines call flâ—…us auditio substratio consistentia After all which followed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the participation of the Sacrament which they were at last admitted unto and is therefore mentioned by some as the fifth degree though to speak properly it was not poenal nor any degree of censure as the other four were First The penitent was kept weeping at the Church door beseeching those that went in to pray for him thereafter he was admitted to hear the Word afar off among the Catechumens In the third place there was a preparatory reconciliation or reception into the Church with prayer and imposition of hands which being done the man was in some sort admitted into Christian fellowship and acknowledged for a brother yet after the Word and Prayer he went forth with the Catechumens before the Sacrament But there was a fourth degree after all this he might stay in the Church and see and hear in the celebration of the Sacrament after the Catechumens and the three first sort of penitents were dismissed yet still he was suspended from partaking of the Sacrament for a certain time after he was brought to this fourth and last step So cautious were those Ancients in admitting of men to the Sacrament till they perceived lasting continuing clear and real evidences of true repentance Three of the degrees above-mentioned are found in the Canons of the Councel of Ancyra and of the Councel of Nice namely the three last The first which did not admit a man so much as into the Church to the hearing of the Word as it was afterwards added so it is not so justisicable as the other three But here is the point I desire may be well observed that of old in the fourth and fifth yea in the third Century men were admitted not only to the hearing of the Word but to prayer with the Church who yet were not admitted to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper The Councel of Ancyra held about the year 308. Can. 16. appointeth some scandalous persons to shew publike signes of repentance for 15. years before they be admitted to fellowship with the Church in prayer and for 5. years thereafter to be kept off from the Sacrament The Councel of Nice doth plainly intimate the same thing That some were admitted to Prayer but not to the Sacrament The different steps of the reception of those that had fallon may be likewise proved from the Councel of Arles I. Mich. Dilherrus Lib. 2. Electorum Cap. 1. After the mention of those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth observe that as Antiquity did goe too far so the later times have fallen too short And this is a chief cause why Christian Religion doth hear very ill among many because Ecclesiastical Discipline hath waxed cold So much by the way This of the several degrees of Penitents I shall yet further insist upon because this alone will prove that we have Antiquity for us Gregorius Thaumaturgus in his Canonical Epistle concerning those who in the time of the incursion of the Barbarians had eaten things sacrificed to Idols and had committed other scandalous sins doth plainly distinguish these five things thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The weeping is without the gate of the Church where the sinner must stand beseeching the faithfull that come in to pray for him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The hearing is within the Gate in the Porch where the sinner may come no nearer then the Catechumens and thence go out again c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The substration is that standing within the Church door he go forth with the Catechumens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The consistency is that he stand still together with the faithful and do not go forth with the Catechumens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the last place the participation of the holy Mysteries or Sacrament He that will read the Epistles of Basilius magnus to Amphilochius will find these five degrees more particularly distinguished applyed to several cases and bounded by distinct intervalls of time It were too long to transcribe all
these two things 1. It is the opinion of divers who hold two Sanhedrins among the Jewes one Civill and another Ecclesiasticall that in causes and occasions of a mixed nature which did concerne both Church and State both did consult conclude and decree in a joynt way and by agreement together Now Ezra 10. the Princes Elders Priests and Levites were assembled together upon an extraordinary cause which conjuncture and concurrence of the Civill and the Ecclesiasticall power might occasion the denouncing of a double punishment upon the contumacious forfeiture and excommunication But 2. The objection made doth rather confirme me that Excommunication is intended in that place For this forfeiture was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a making sacred or dedicating to an holy use as I have shewed out of Iosephus The originall word translated forfeited is more properly translated devoted which is the word put in the margin of our bookes The Greek saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 anathemstizabitur which is the best rendring of the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was not therefore that which we call forfeiture of a mans substance Intellige saith Grotius ita ut Deo sacra fiat And so the excommunication of a man and the devoting of his substance as holy to the Lord were joyned together and the substance had not been anathematized if the man had not been anathematized I doe not say that Excommunication ex natura rei doth inferre and draw after it the devoting of a mans estate as holy to the Lord. No Excommunication can not hurt a man in his worldly estate further than the Civill Magistrate and the Law of the Land appointeth And there was Excommunication in the Apostolical Churches where there was no Christian Magistrate to adde a Civill mulct But the devoting of the substance of Excommunicated persons Ezra 10. as it had the authority of the Princes and Rulers for it so what extraordinary warrants or instinct there was upon that extraordinary exigence we can not tell Finally M. Selden de Jure nat Gentium lib. 4. cap. 9. p. 523. agreeth with Lud. Capellus that the separation from the Congregation Ezra 10. 8. plane ipsum est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fieri it is the very same with casting out of the Synagogue which confuteth further that which M. Prynne holds that the casting out of the Synagogue was not warranted by Gods word but was onely a humane invention I know some have drawne another argument for the Jewish Excommunication from Nehem. 13. 25. I contended with them and cursed them id est anathematizavi excommunicavi saith C. a lapide upon the place So Tirinus upon the same place Mariana expounds it anathema dixi Aben Ezra understands it of two kinds of Excommunication Niddui and Cherem For my part I lay no weight upon this unlesse you understand the cursing or malediction to be an act of the Ecclesiasticall power onely authorised or countenanced by the Magistrate Which the words may well beare for neither is it easily credible that Nehemiah did with his owne hand smite those men and plucke off their hayre but that by his authority he tooke care to have it done by civill Officers as the cursing by Ecclesiasticall Officers The Dutch annotations leane this way telling us that Nehemiah did expresse his zeale against them as persons that deserved to be banned or cut off from the people of God Another Text proving the Jewish Excommunication is Luke 6. 22. When they shall separate you and shall reproach you and â—…ast out your name as evill It was the most misapplied censure in the world in respect of the persons thus cast out but yet it proves the Jewish custome of casting out such as they thought wicked and obstinate persons This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beda upon the place understandeth of casting out of the Synagogue Separent Synagoga depellant c. yet it is a more generall and comprehensive word then the casting out of the Synagogue It comprehendeth all the three degrees of the Jewish Excommunication as Grotius expounds the place Which agreeth with Munsterus Dictionar Trilingue where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the onely Greeke word given both for the three Hebrew words Niddui Cherem and Shammata and for the Latine Excommunicatio Wherefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place is extermino excommunico repudio which is one of the usuall significations of the word given by Stephanus and by Scapula It is a word frequently used in the Canons of the most ancient Councels to expresse such a separation as was a Church-censure and namely suspension from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper For by the ancient Canons of the Councels such offences as were punished in a Minister by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is deposition were punished in one of the people by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is segregation or sequestration Zonaras upon the 13 th Canon of the eighth generall Councell observeth a double 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used in the ancient Church â—ne was a totall separation or casting out of the Church which is usually called Excommunication another was a suspension or sequestration from the Sacrament onely Of which I am to speak more afterward in the third Booke I hold now at the Text in hand which may be thus read according to the sence and letter both when they shall excommunicate you c. Howbeit the other reading when they shall separate you holds forth the same thing which I speake of separate from what our Translators supply from their company but from what company of theirs not from their civill company onely but from their sacred or Church assemblies and from religious fellowship it being a Church-censure and a part of Ecclesiasticall discipline in which sence as this word frequently occurreth in the Greeke fathers and ancient Canons when they speake of Church discipline so doubtlesse it must be taken in this place 1. Because as Grotius tels us that which made the Jewes the rather to separate men in this manner from their society was the want of the Civill coercive power of Magistracy which sometime they had And I have proved before that the civill Sanhedrin which had power of criminall and capitall judgements did remove from Ierusalem and cease to execute such judgement forty yeeres before the destruction of the Temple 2. Because in all other places of the new Testament where the same word is used it never signifieth a bare separation from civill company but either a conscientious and religious separation by which Church members did intend to keep themselves pure from such as did walke or were conceived to walke disorderly and scandalously Acts 19. 9. 2 Cor. 6. 17. Gal. 2. 13. or Gods separating between the godly and the wicked Matth 13. 49. 25. 32. or the setting apart of men to the ministery of the Gospell Acts 13. 2. Rom. 1. 1. Gal. 1. 15. Thirdly a Civill separation is for a Civill injury but this separation
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Greek Scholia which he useth to cite hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fourthly Peter addeth not as being Lords or over-ruling 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we might understand he condemneth the ruling power of the Lord Bishop not of the Lords Bishop of Episcopus Dominus not of Episcopus Domini Just as Ezek 34. 4. the shepheards of Israel are reproved for lording it over the flock with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them It was their duty to rule them but it was their sin to rule them with force and with cruelty The twentieth Argument I take from 1 Cor. 4. 1. Let a man so account of us as of the Ministers of Christ and Stewards of the mysteries of God Moreover it is required in Stewards that a man be found faithfull And Tit. 1. 7. a Bishop is the Steward of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This name doth exclude Lordship and dominion but withall it noteth a ministeriall rule or government as in the proper so in the metaphorical signification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a name diverse times given by Aristotle in his Politicks to the civil Magistrate The Septuagints have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as fynonymous with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Esthâ—…r 8. 9. To the Lieutenants and the Deputies The 70. thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The holy Ghost by the same word expresseth Government Gal. 4. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is under Tutors and Governors Rom. 16. 23. Erastus is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theophylact thinks he was Governour of the City Erasmus that he was praefectus aerario Town-Treasurer The English Translators call him the Chamberlain of the City Yea setting aside the metaphorical signification of this name often used for a name of rule the very literall and native signification of the word will serve to strengthen this Argument in hand Ministers are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is house-stewards or over the house but what house Aristotle at the beginning of the second book of his Oeconomicks distinguisheth a fourfold oeconomy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 kingly noble civil private The Ministers of Christ are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the first sort They are stewards in the house of the great King He that is steward in a Kings house must needs have a ruling power in the house 1 Kings 4. 6. Ahishar was over Solomons houshold 1 Kings 18. 3. And Ahab called Obadiah which was the Governour of his house 2 Kings 18. 18. Eliakim which was over the houshold In all which places the 70. have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I hold therefore with Peter Martyr upon 1 Cor. 4. 1. that Ministers being by their calling and office stewards in the house of God ought to cast out prophane impure persons out of the house and receive them again upon their repentance And why are they called Stewards of the mysteries of God surely the Sacraments are part and a chief part of those mysteries and Christ hath made his Ministers not the civil Magistrates stewards of these mysteries to receive unto or to exclude from the Sacraments and as they may not keep back any of the children of the house so they may not suffer dogs to eat at the childrens Table The one and twentieth Argument which shall claudere agmen shall be drawn from Act. 15. where we find an Ecclesiastical Assembly or Synod of the Apostles Elders and other choice brethren snch as Iudas and Sylas These did so assemble themselves and proceed with authority in a businesse highly concerning the truth of the Gospel Christian liberty the healing of scandal and the preserving of peace in the Church as that it is manifest they had and executed a power of government distinct from Magistracy Mr. Selden de Jure natur Gent. lib. 7. cap. 12. hath sufficiently expressed that which is the ground of my present Argument and I rather choose to speak it in his words then in my owne Now a dispute being had of this thing at Antioch Paul and Barnabas who having used many Arguments against that Pharisaical opinion yet could not end the controversie are sent to Hierusalem that there the thing might be determined by the Apostles and Elders It is agitated in a Synod In it it is determined by the Apostles and Elders that the Gentiles who had given their names to Christ are not indeed bound by the Law of Moses or of the Hebrewes as it is Mosaicall and prescribed to the Church or Common-wealth of the Iewes but that they ought to enjoy their Christian liberty And so much for that which the Synod loosed them from But what dorh the Synod bind upon them The Synod doth also impose certain things namely abstinence from fornication and from things offered to Idols and from blood and things strangled VT QUAE NECESSARIO OBSERVANDA EX AUTHORITATE SYNODI saith Mr. Selden BEING SUCH AS WERE NECESSARILY TO BE OBSERVED IN REGARD OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE SYNOD by those who giving their names to the Christian Religion should live with the Jewes they also giving their names to the Christian Religion and so enter into religious fellowship with them I shall adde two other Testimonies of Mr. Prynns The first I shall take out of his twelve considerable serious Questions concerning Church-Government pag. 5. where arguing against the Independency of particular Congregations he askes whether the Synodâ—…l Assembly of the Apostles Elders and Brethren at Hierusalem Act. 15. who MADE AND SENT BINDING DECREES to the Churches of the Gentiles in Antioch Syria and Cilicia and other Churches be 〈◊〉 an apparent subversion of Independency So that by Mr. Prynns confession the Scripture holds forth other Governours or Rulers in the Church beside Magistrates and the authority of these other Governours to be such as to make and send to the Churches BINDING DECREES in things and causes Ecclesiastical Another Testimony I take from his Independency examined pag. 10 11. where he argueth against the Independents and proveth from Act. 15. the authority of ordinary Ecclesiastical Synods bringing also six Arguments to prove that the Apostles did not there act in their extraordinary Apostolical capacity or as acted by a spirit of infallibility but in their ordinary capacity Thereafter he concludeth thus Therefore their assembling in this Councel not in their extraordinary capacity as Apostles onely buâ—… as Elders Ministers and the Elders Brethrens sitting together in Councell with them upon this Controversie and occasion is an undeniable Scripture authority for the lawfulnesse use of Parliaments Councels Synods under the Gospel upon all like necâ—…ssary occasions and FOR THEIR POWER TO DETERMINE CONTROVERSIES OF RELIGION TO MAKE CANONS IN THINGS NECESSARY FOR THE CHURCHES PEACE AND GOVERNMENT Loe here Mr. Prynn gives us an undeniable Scripture authority for a diataktick governing power in the Church distinct from Magistracy How he will draw from Act. 15. the use of Parliaments or their authority I do not imagine It is enough
I shall onely give you some most plain passages to prove that there was in Basils time a suspension from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper alone or that a man was suspended from the Sacrament when he was not suspended from hearing and praying among the faithful For further confirmation of the same thing read Conc. Ancyr Can. 4. Can. 5. Can. 6. Can. 7. Can. 8. Can. 9. Coâ—…t Nican Can. 11. Can. 12. Can. 13. Can. 14. I do not mean to approve the too great severity of this ancient Discipline nor do I hold it agreeable to the Will of Christ that such as give good signes of true Repentance and do humbly confesse and really forsake their sin having also made publike declaration of their Repentance to the Church for removing the publike scandal ought notwithstanding of all this to be suspended from the Sacrament when they desire to receivâ— it For the Word doth not warrant the suspending of scandalous sinners from the Sacrament until such a set determinate time be expired but onely till they give sufficient evidence of Repentance But setting aside this and such like circumstances the thing it self the suspending of a scandalous person from the Sacrament who is not nor ought not to be suspended from assembling hearing and praying with the Church is the Will of Christ as I have proved and was the commendable practice of the Ancient Church which is the point I now prove against Mr. Prynne The Councel of Ancyra Can. 5. 16. doth also appoint the time of suspension from the Sacrament to be made shorter or longer according as the signes of true Repentance should sooner or later more or lesse appear in the offender So doth the Councel of Nice Can. 12. And the Councel of Carthage held under Honorius and Theodosius the lesser Can. 46. If any man shall objâ—ct against me and say Peradventure the Penitents before spoken of were onely such as did manifest their repentance after excommunication and these several degrees afore-mentioned were but the degrees of their reception or admission into the Church so that all this shall not prove the suspension from the Sacrament of persons not excommunicated I answer he that will think so will be found in a great mistake and my Argument from Antiquity will yet stand good for suspending from the Sacrament persons not excommunicated For first neither do the Canons of the Councels of Ancyra and Nice nor of Gregorius Thaumaturgus and Basilius magnus nor yet the Commentators Zonaras and Balsamon apply these five degrees above mentioned to persons who had been excommunicated but they speak generally of persons who had committed scandalous sins and afterward were converted and appeared penitent for instance those who did backslide and fall in time of persecution as multitudes did under Licinius and other persecuters when they converted and professed repentance they were received again into the Church by certain steps and degrees some more some fewer according to the quality of their offence No man that hath searched antiquity will say that all who did fall in time of persecution were excommunicated for that offence nor yet that they were all put to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the weeping at the Church door but yet all of them even those whose offence was least as the Libellatici who had taken Writs of protection from the Enemy or Persecuter were put to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or consistentia which was a suspension or abstention from the Sacrament even when the person was admitted to hear and pray with the Church Wherefore the degrees afore-mentioned were degrees of receiving into the Communion of the Church scandalous persons professing repentance Secondly The 61. Canon of Basil to Amphilochius speaketh thus He that hath stolen if repenting of his own accord he accuse himself shall be for a year restrained from the Communion of the holy Mysteries onely But if he be convict the space of two yeers shall be divided to him unto substration and consistency then let him be thought worthy of the Communion Will any man imagine that a penitent theef accusing himself was excommunicated It is more then manifest that here was a suspension of an offender not excommunicated For assoon as the offence was known by the offenders accusing of himself he was suspended from the Sacrament alone for a year and then admitted to the Sacrament Yea he that was convict of theft was not by this Canon excommunicated nor yet put either to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but onely to the third and fourth degrees Thirdly By the 13th Canon of Basil to Amphilochius he that had killed another though in a lawful war was for the greater reverence to the Sacrament suspended for three yeers and by the 55. Canon he also that killed a Robber was suspended from the Sacrament I do not justifie these Canons but only I cite them to prove that by the Ancient Discipline Persons not excommunicated were suspended from the Sacrament for no man can imagine that a Souldier shedding blood in a lawful war or a man killing a Robber on the high way was therefor excommunicated Fourthly The eighth general Councel called Synodus prima secunds held about the yeer 869. in the thirteenth Canon speaking of certain turbulent Schismaticks not being of the Clergie as the Canon speaketh but Laicks or Monks appointeth this censure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let them be totally or altogether separated from the Church Which intimateth that there was a lesser degree of being separated or suspended from communion with the Church Zonaras upon that Canon doth so understand it and distinguisheth a double 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For it is also a separation saith he to be excluded or restrained from the receiving of the Divine Mysteries onely But there is another separation which is to be cast out of the Church which the Canon calleth a total separation as being the heavier or greater Censure Which is the very same distinction with that which was afterward expressed under the terms of major minor the greater and lesser excommunication For which also I shall give you another proof as clear and older too taken from the 61. Canon of the sixth general Councel where it is decreed that those who resort to Magicians Charmers Fortune-tellers and such others who professe curious and unlawful arts shall fall under the Canon of six years separation But as for those who perâ—…ist in such things and do not turn away nor flee from these pernicious and Heathenish studies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We appoint them to be altogether cast out of the Church Mark the gradation in the Canon and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And hear Balsamon his explanation upon it Note from this present Canon saith he that he who sinneth and converteth obtaineth favour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is punished in a lesser measure But he who persevereth in the evil and is not willingly reduced to
is misapplied by him His tenth concerning the ends of the Sacrament yeeldeth the cause and mireth himselfe His eleventh a grosse petitio principii His twelfth appealing to the experience of Christians rectified in the state and repelled for the weight That this debate concerning the nature end use and effect of the Sacrament doth clearely cast the ballance of the wholecontroversie concerning Suspension Lucas Osiander cited by M. Prynne against us is more against himselfe CHAP. XV. Whether the admission of scandalous and notorious sinners to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper be a pollution and prophanation of that holy Ordinance And in what respects it may be so called THe true state of this Question cleared by five distinâ—ions Nine Arguments to prove the affirmative That the admitting of the scandalous and prophane to the Sacrament gives the lie to the word preached and looseth those whom the word binddeth That it is a strengthning of the hands of the wicked T is a prophanation of Baptisme to baptise a Catechumene Jew or a Pagan being of a known prophane life although he were able to make confession of the true faith by word of mouth That such as are found unable to examine themselves whether through naturall or sinfull disability or manifestly unwilling to it ought not to be admitted to the Lords Supper The reason for keeping backe children and fooles holds stronger for keeping back known prophane persons Hag. 2. 11 12 13 14. explained A debate upon Matth. 7. 6. Give not that which is holy to dogs c wherein M. Prynne is confuted from Scripture from Antiquity from Erastus also and Grotius CHAP. XVI An Argument of Erastus drawn from the Baptisme of John against the excluding of scandalous sinners from the Lords Supper examined THat Iohn baptised none but such as confessed their sinnes and did outwardly appeare penitent T is a great question whether those Pharisees who came to his Baptisme Matth. 3. were baptised The coincidency of that story Matth. 3. with the message of the Pharisees to Iohn Baptist Ioh. 1. The Argument retorted CHAP. XVII Antiquity for the Suspension of all scandalous persons from the Sacrament even such as were admitted to other publique Ordinances Oâ— the foure degrees of Penitents in the ancient Church and of the Suspension of some unexcommunicated persons from the Lords Supper who did joyn with the Church in the hearing of the word and prayer Proved out of the ancient Canons of the Councels of Ancyra Nice Arles the sixth and eighth General Councels out of Gregorius Thaumaturgus and Basilius Magnus confirmed also out of Zonaras Balsamon Albaspinâ—…us The Suspension of all sorts of scandalous sinners in the Church from the Sacrament further confirmed out of Isidorus Pelusiota Dionysius Areopagita with his Scholiast Maximus and his paraphrast Pachimeres Also out of Cyprian Justin Martyr Chrysostome Ambrose Augustine Gregorius Magnus Walafridus Strabo CHAP. XVIII A discovery of the instability and loosenesse of M. Prynne his principles even to the contradicting of himselfe in twelve particulars AN Argument hinted by M. Prynne from the gathering together all guests to the wedding Supper both bad and good examined and foure answers made to it That M. Prynne doth professe and pretend to yeeld the thing for which his Antagonists contend with him but indeed doth not yeeld it his Concessions being clogged with such things as do evacuate and frustrate all Church Discipline That M. Prynne contradicteth himselfe in twelve particulars Foure Counter-quaerees to him A discourse of M. Fox the Author of the Booke of Martyrs concerning three sorts of persons who are unwilling that there should be a Discipline or power of Censures in the Church The Names of Writers or Workes cited and made use of in this Tractate IS Abrabanel Melchier Adamus Ainsworth Aeschines Albaspinaeus Albinus Flaccus Alcuinus Alex. Alensis Algerus Ambrosius Ambrose the Monke Ammonius Alexandrinus Ampsinâ—ius Dutch Annotations English Annotations Apollâ—nius Aquinas Arabick N. T. Aretius Arias Montanus Aristótle Arnobius Irish Articles of faith Augustinus Azorius B BAlsamon Io. Baptista derubcis Baronius Basilius Magnus M r Bayne Becanus Becmanus Beda Bellarmine Bertramus Beza Bilson Brentius Brochmand Brughton Mart. Bucerus Gers. Bucerus Budoeus Bullingâ—r Buxtorff C CAbeljavius Cajetanus Calvin I. Camero Camerarius Canons of the African Church L. Capellus D. Carthusianus Cartwright I. Casaubon The Magdeburgian Centurists Chaldee Paraphrase Chamiâ—rus Chemnitius Chrysostomus D. Chytraeus Is. Clarus Fr. à S. Clara Clemens Clemens Alexandrinus Nic. de Clemangis Iudocus Clichtoveus I. Cloppenburgius I. Coch M r Coleman Aâ—gid de Coninck Barthol Coppen Balthasar â—orderius Corpus Disciplinae M r Cotoon Tomes of Councels Richardus Cowsin Cyprian Cyrill D DAnâ—us R. David Ganz Demosâ—henes M. David Dickson Didoclavius Lud. de Dieu Mich. Dilherrus Diâ—dati The Directory of both Kingdomes Dioâ—yfins 〈◊〉 Synâ—d of Dort Iesuits of Doway I. Drusius Duâ—renus Durandus Duranâ—s E ELias R. Eliâ—ser C â— Empereur Erastus Erasmus C. Espenâ—us Esâ—ius Euthymius Aben Ezra F FAâ—ritius M r Fox Ch. Francken Hist. of the troubles at Franckeford The Disciplin of the reformed Churches of Franâ— D r Fulkâ— G P. Galatinus Phil. Gamachaeus Gelenius Laws and Statuâ—es of Genevah Genebrardus Geo. Genzius I. â—rhardus Gesnerus Sâ—l Glassius Godwyn Gomarus Gorranus Gregorius Magnus Gregorius Thaumaturgus Professors of Groning Grotius Gualther H HArmony of confessions Harmonia Synoderâ—n Belgicarum Haymo Helmichius Hemmiugius Heshusius Hesychius Hierâ— Hilarius M. Hildersham P. Hinkelmannus Fraâ— Holy-Oke 〈◊〉 Honnius Hâ—go de S. Uictâ—re Hugâ— Cardiâ—lis L. Humfredus Aegid Hâ—ius M. Hussey Hutterus I KIng Iames Iansenâ—us I'lyricus Iâ—nocentius 3. Iosephus Iosuae levitae Halichoth Olam Isidorus Hispâ—lensis Isidorus 〈◊〉 Iulius Caesar Fr. Iunius Iustinus Martyr K KEâ—erm â—nnus D r Kâ—llet C. Kirâ—erus L COrn a Lapide Lavater Laurentius de la barre M r Leigh Nieolaus Lambardus Lorinus Lutheâ—us Lyrâ— M MAccovius Maimonides Maldonat Manâ—sseh Ben. Israel Conciliaâ—or Marianae Marlorat Martial M. Martinius P. Martyr Maximus Medina Meisnerus Menochius Mercerus P. Maulin Munsterus Musculus N G. Nazianzen I. Newenklaius Nonnus Novarinus O OEcumenius Origen Luc. Osiander P PAchymeres M r Paget Pagnin Paraeus Parker Pasor Pelargus Pellicanus Pemble Philo the Iew Piscator Plato Polanus M r Prynne R RAbanus Maurus Raynolds The Remonstranâ—s Revius Rittangelius D. Rivetus Rupertus Tuitiensis M. Rutherfurd S EManuel Sa Salmasius Salmeron M. Salâ—marsh Sanctius Saravia I. Scaliger Scapula Schindlerus Ionas Schlichtingius The Booke of Discipline of Scotland Scotus Subtilis M. Selden The 〈◊〉 â—eius F. Socinâ—s â—ipingius Fr. Spanbemiâ—t Spelman Stegmannus Strigelius Suarez Suidas Suâ—livius Syariacâ— N. T. T TAcianus The Talmud Tannerus Tertullian Theodoretus Theophylactus Tilenus Tirinus Titus Bostrorum Episcapus Toletus Tostatus Tossanus Trelcatius Triglandius Tully W WAlaeus Walafridus Strabo M r Io. Welsh Mr Iohn Weyâ—es of Craigton Mr Iohn Weimes of Lathoâ—ker Westhemerus Whitgift Whittakerus Willet I. Winkelmannus Wolphius V GR. de Valentia Vatablus Uazquez Uedelius Uictor Antiochenus
civill Court of Justice had then removed from Hierusalem and had lost its authority in executing Justice I. Coch annot in Exc. Gem. Sanhedrin cap. 1. sâ—…ct 13. beareth witnesse to the same story above mentioned that forty yeeres before the destruction of the Temple the Sanhedrin did remove from its proper seat where he also mentions the ten stations or degrees of their removing and Iam tum cessarunt judicia capitalia saith he Now at that time the capitall judgements did cease Thus we have three witnesses singularly learned in the Jewish Antiquities Unto these adde Casauâ—…on exerc 16. anno 34. num 76. He holds that though the Councell of the Jewes had cognizance of the offence for otherwise how could they give a reason or cause when they demanded justice in which respect the Councell did judge Christ to be guilty of death Marke 14. 64. yet their Councell had then no more power of capitall punishments which saith he the more learned moderne writers doe demonstrate è Iuchasin and from other Talmudicall writings he addeth that this power of putting any man to death was taken from the Jewes some space before this time when they said to Pilate It is not lawfull for us to put any man to death for this power was taken from them saith he forty yeeres before the destruction of the second Temple as the Rabbinicall writers doe record I have thus largely prosecuted my last argument drawn from the New Testament mentioning the Councell of the Priests Elders and Scribes And I trust the twelve arguments which have been brought may give good satisfaction toward the proofe of an Ecclesiasticall Jewish Sanhedrin The chiefe objection which ever I heard or read against this distinction of a Civill Sanhedrin and an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jewes is this That neither the Talmud nor the Talmudicall writers mention any such distinction but speake onely of one supreme Sanhedrin of 71 and of other two Courts which sate the one at the doore of the Court before the Temple the other at the gate which entereth to the mountaine of the Temple There were also Courts in the Cities where capitall cases were judged by three and twenty pecuniall mults by three Answ. It must be remembred that not onely the Talmudicall Commentators but the Talmud it selfe is much later than the time of the Sanhedrin and the integrity of the Jewish government Yea later by some Centuries than the destruction of the Temple and City of Ierusalem So that the Objection which is made is no stronger than as if one should argue thus There is no mention of Elderships constituted of Pastors and Ruling Elders without any Bishop having preeminence over the rest neither in the Canon Law nor decretals of Popes nor in the Booke of the Canons of the Roman Church Therefore when Paul wrote his Epistle to the Church of Rome there was no such Eldership in that Church constituted as hath been said But if the Ecclesiasticall Government either of the Church of Rome or of the Church of the Jewes can be proved from Scripture as both may it ought to be no prejudice against those truths that they are not fouâ—d in the Writers of afâ—ertimes and declining ages Howbeit there may be seen some footsteps of a Civill and Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin even in the Talmudicall writers in the opinion of Constantinus L'Empereur and in that other passage cited by D. Buxtorf out of Elias Of which before And so much concerning an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jewes If after all this any man shall be unsatisfied in this particular yet in the issue such as are not convinced that there was an Ecclesiasticall Sanhedrin among the Jewes distinct from their civill Sanhedrin may neverthelesse be convinced not by the former arguments but by other Mediums that there was an Ecclesiasticall government among the Jewes distinct from their civill government For it belonged to the Priests not to the Magistrates or Judges to put difference between holy and unholy and between unclean and cleane And the Priests not the Magistrates are challenged for not putting difference between the holy and prophane Ezech. 22. 26. And this power of the Priests was not meerly doctrinall or declarative but decisive binding and juridicall so farre as that according to their sentence men were to be admitted as cleane or excluded as uncleane Yea in other cases as namely in trying and judging the scandall of a secret and unknown murther observe what is said of the Priests Deut. 21. 5. by their word shall every controversie and every stroke be tried Yea themselves were Judges of controversies Ezech. 44. 24. And in controversie they shall stand in judgement and they shall judge it according to my judgements Where the Ministers of the Gospell are principally intended but not without an allusion unto and parallel with the Priests of the old Testament in this point of jurisdiction Suppose now it were appointed by Law that Ministers shall separate or put difference between the holy and prophane that by their word every controversie concerning the causes of suspension or sequestration of men from the Sacrament shall be tried that in controversie they shall stand in judgement and judge according to the word of God Would not every one looke upon this as a power of government put into the hands of Ministers And none readier to aggravate such government then the Erastians Yet all this amounts to no more then by the plaine and undeniable Scriptures above cited was committed to the Priests Suppose also that men were kept backe from the Temple and from the Passeover not for any morall uncleannesse but for ceremoniall uncleannesse onely which is to be afterwards discussed yet the Priests their judging and deciding of controversies concerning mens legall uncleannesse according to which judgement and decision men were to be admitted to or kept backe from the Temple and Passover yea sometime their owne houses as in the case of leprosie could not choose but entitle them to a power of government which power was peculiar to them and is not in all the old Testament ascribed to Magistrates or Judges And as the exercise of this power did not agree to the Magistrate so the commission charge and power given to those who did keepe backe the uncleane was not derived from the Magistrate for it did belong to the intrinsecall sacerdotall authority 2 Kings 11. 18. The Priest Iehojada appointed Officers over the house of the Lord. The 70 thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These Officers or overseers over the Temple were appointed by Iehojada for keeping backe the uncleane as Grotius upon the place following Iosephus hath observed Compare 2 Chro. 23. 19. And he Iehojada set the Porters at the gates of the house of the Lord that none which was uncleane in any thing should enter in For the same end did he appoint these overseers over the Temple 2 Kings 11. It was also appointed by the Law that the man who should doe any thing
the Talmud it selfe proving that whether the sinne was expiated by Sacrifice or by death it was alwayes to be confessed from the same example of Achan doth P. Galatinus lib. 10. cap. 3. prove that Declaration of repentance was to be made by word of mouth and that the sinne was to be particularly confessed which he further proveth by another rabbinicall passage In the fourth place Io. 9. 24. seemeth to hold forth a judiciall publike confession of sinne to have been required of scandalous sinners The Pharisees being upon an examination of him that was born blind and was made to see they labour to drive him so farre from confessing Christ as to confesse sinne and wicked collusion Give God the Praise say they we know that this man is a sinner Which is to be expounded by Ios. 7. 19. Give glory to the Lord God of Israel and make confession Fifthly as the Jewes had an Excommunication so they had an absolution and that which interveened was Confession and Declaration of Repentance And hence came the Arabik 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nadam he hath repented and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nadim a penitent the Niddui made the nadim for when a man was excommunicated by the lesser Excommunication the Consistory waited first 30. dayes and then other 30. dayes and as some thinke the third time 30. dayes to see whether the offender were penitent which could not be known without confession and would seek absolution which if he did not but continued obstinate impenitent then they proceeded to the greater excommunication Which doth prove a publike Confession at least in the case of the excommunicated Sixthly we find a publike penitentiall confession Ezra 10. 10. 11. And Ezra the Priest stood up and said unto them ye have transgressed and have taken strange wives to encrease the trespasse of Israel Now therefore make confession unto the Lord God of your Fathers and doe his pleasure and separate your selves from the people of the land and from the strange wives Marke here the foresaking of the sinne could not suâ—fice without confessing the sinne All Israel had sworne and covenanted to doe the thing to put away the strange wives vers 5. But Ezra the Priest tells them they must also make confession of their sinne confession of their former trespasse must be joyned with Reformation for the future All which the people promise to doe as Ezra had said vers 12. But what was this confession was it onely a private confession to God alone or was it onely a generall confession made by the whole congregration of Israel at a solemne Fast and humiliation Nay that there was a third sort of Confession differing from both these appeareth by vers 13. neither is this a worke of one day or two for we are many that have transgressed in this thing yea three Moneths are spent in the businesse vers 16 17. during which space all that had taken strange wives came at appointed times out of every City and were successively examined by Ezra the Priest and certaine chiefe of the Fathers and Levites such of both as were not themselves guilty before whom such as were found guilty did make Confession The Sons of the Priests made Confession as well as others yea with the first and gave their hands that they would put away their wives and being guilty they offerered a Ram of the Flock for their trespasse With which trespasse offering confession was ever joyned as hath been before shewed from the Law Seventhly Master Hildersham of worthy memory in his 34. Lecture upon Psal. 51. draweth aâ— Argument from Davids example for the publike Confession of a scandalous sinne before the Church He made saith he publike Confession of his sinne to the Congregation and Church of God for we see in the Title of this Psalme 1. That he committed this Psalme that containeth the acknowledgement of his sinne and profession of his repentance to the chief musitian to be published in the Sanctuary and Temple 2 That in this publication of his Repentance he hideth not from the Church his sinne nor cloketh it at all but expresseth in particular the speciall sinne c. Adde hereunto this publike Confession was made after ministeriall conviction by Nathan who did convince David of the greatnesse of that scandalous sinne in which he had then continued impenitent neer a yeer or thereabout The Doctrin which Master Hildersham draweth from Davids example is this That they whose sinnes God hath detected and brought to light whose sinnes are publike and notorious scandalous and offensive to the congregations where they live ought to be willing to confesse their sins publikely to make their Repentance as publike and notorious as their sinne is He addeth in his explanation when they shall be required to doe it by the Discipline of the Church Marke one of his applications which is the Subject of the 37. Lecture The second sort that are to be reproved by this Doctrine are such as having authority to enjoyne publike Repentance to scandalous sinners for the satisfying of the Congregation when they are detected and presented unto them refuse or neglect to doe it And here he complaineth that the publike acknowledgement of scandalous sinnes was grown out of use and that though it was ordered by authority yet it was not put in execution The Canons of our Church saith he can 26. straightly charge every Minister That he shall not in any wise admit to the Communion any of his flock which be openly known to live in sinne notorious without Repentance And the Booke of Common Prayer in the rubrike before the Communion commandeth that if any be an open and notorious evill liver so that the Congregation by him is offended the Minister shall call him and advertise him in any wise not to presume to the Lords Table till he hath openly declared himself to have truly repented that the Congregation may thereby be satisfied which were afore offended So that you may see the Lawes and Discipline of our Church require that open and scandalous sinners should dâ—…e open and publike Repentance yea give power to the Minister to repell and keepe back such from the Communion that refuse to doe it Where it may be observed by the way that the Power of Elder-ships for suspending scandalous persons not Excommunicated from the Sacrament now so much contented against by Master Prynne is but the same Power which was granted by authority to the Ministery even in the prelaticall times And he hath upon the matter endeavoured to bring the Consciences of a whole Elder-ship into a greater servitude under this present Reformation then the Conscience of a single Minister was formerly brought under by Law in this particular Eightly Master Hildersham Ibid. Lect. 34. argueth not onely â—… pari but â—… fortiori If a necessity of satisfying an offended Brother how much more a necessity of satisfying an offended Church which will equally hold both for the old and
civill Courts of Justice c. There was a chiefe Scribe who waited upon the King and wrote unto him a coppy of the Book of the Law according to that Deut. 17. 18. Such a Scribe was Sheva 2 Sam. 20. 25. Shaphan 2 Kings 22. 3. 8. Baruch Jer. 36. Such a Scribe had Joash 2 Kings 12. 10. There were divers other Scribes for the house of the Lord and for the people whose office it was to write and to read the Law 1 Chro. 2. 55 Psal. 45. 1. Ier. 8. 8. 13. Object But neither in the old Testament nor in the Talmudists can there be found any Ecclesiasticall Excommunication properly so called Answ. I deny both yea I have disproved both Moreover as touching the Excommunication used in the Jewish Church I shall adde here these following Testimonies of Mâ—…imonides In libro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tract Talmud Torah Cap. 6. sect 10. He that revileth a wiseman though after his death shall be excommunicated by the Sanhedrin by whom also after repentance he shall be absolved Ib. sect 11. He who is excommunicated in his own Town ought also to be esteemed in all other Cities and Towns as a person excommunicated Answerable hereunto were the ancient Canons which did appoint that a person excommunicated in his own Church should not be received to communion in another Church The 24. causes of excommunication above mentioned he there reckoneth forth from sect 13. to the end of that Chapter Again Cap. 7. sect 2. What is the manner of a simple excommunication or Niddui He that doth excommunicate saith Let that person N. be in or under an excommunication or separation If the person excommunicated be present they who doe excommunicate say unto him Let this person N. be separated or excommunicated And when Cherem or the greater excommunication is inflicted what is the manner They say Let N. be devoted and accursed let an execration adjuration and separation be upon him But how doe they loose the person excommunicated and how doe they free him from the separation or the curse they say Be thou loosed be thou pardoned If the guilty party be absent they say Let N. be loosed and let him be pardoned In the same Chapter sect 8. Neither is there any certain space of time predetermined before which the bond of the excommunication inflicted may not be loosed For immediately and at the same time when excommunication is inflicted it may be loosed if the guilty party doe immediately repeâ—…t and come to himselfe Which doth further set forth the great difference between the nature and scope of Excommunication and the nature and scope of corporall or civill punishments For how soon soever an excommunicat person giveth good signes of true repentance he is to be loosed from the bond of excommunication But he that is punished in his body or estate for any crime is not freed from the punishment because he is known to be penitent The repentance of a criminall person is no supersedeas to civill Justice Thereafter Maimonides proceedeth thus Yet if it seem good to the Sanhedrin that any man shall be left in the state of excommunication for how many yeeres shall be be left in excommunication The Sanhedrin will determine the number of yeers and space of time according to the haynousnesse of the trespasse So likewise if the Sanhedrin will it may devote and subject to a curse first the party himself who is guilty of the crime and then also every other person whosoever eateth or drinketh with him or sitteth neere unto him unlesse at foure cubits distance that so by this means the heavier correction may fall upon the sinner and there may be as it were a hedge put about the law which may restrain wicked men from transgressing it Whence observe 1. It was from the Jewish Church that the ancient Councels of the Christian Church took a pattern for determining and fixing a certaine number of yeeres to the separation of some haynous offenders from the Sacrament and sometimes from other Ordinances also Though I doe not approve this thing either in the Jewish or Christian Church for at what time soever a scandalous sinner doth give evident signes of repentance the Church ought to receive him againe into her bosome and fellowship 2. From the Jewish Church also was the patterne taken for that ancient Discipline in the Christian Church that he who keepeth company and communion with an excommunicated person should fall under the same censure of excommunication Which thing must be well explained and qualified before it can be approved 3. Compare also this passage of Maimonides with 1 Cor. 5. 11. with such a one no not to eate 2 Thes. 3. 14. have no company with him that he may be ashamed Which Texts doe fitly answer to that which the Hebrew writers say of a person excommunicated 4. The excommunication of an offender among the Jewes was intended not onely for the offenders humiliation and amendment but for an ensample to others that they might heare and feare and do no more any such thing it was therefore a publique and exemplary censure And so much of Sect. 8. In the 9. and 10. Sections Maimonides sheweth us that though a wise man was allowed to prosecute unto the sentence of excommunication one that did revile or calumniat him yet it was more praise-worthy and more agreeable to the example of the holy men of God to passe in silence and to endure patiently such injuries Then followeth Sect. 11. These things which have been said are to be understood of such reproaches and contumelies as are clandestine For if railers doe put a publike infamy upon a wise man it is not lawfull to him to use indulgence or to neglect his honour and if he shall pardon as to the punishment him who hath hurt his fame he himselfe is to be punished because that is a contempt of the law He shall therefore avenge the contumely not suffer himselfe to be satisfied before the guilty party hath craved merey Here is the true object or if you will the procuring and meritorious cause of Excommunication viz. not a private personall or civill injury which a man may passe by or pardon if he will but a scandalous sinne the scandall whereof must be removed and healed by some Testimony or Declaration of the sinners repentance otherwise he must fall under the censure and publique shame These Testimonies of Maimonides and the observations made thereupon beside all that hath been said in this preceding Book will make it manifest that the Spirituall censure of excommunication was translated and taken from the Jewish Church into the Christian Church Furthermore beside all the Scriptural proofs already brought I shall desire another Text Nehem. 13. 1 3. to be wel weighed After the reading of the law Deut. 23. 3. that the Ammâ—…nite and the Moabite should not come into the congregation of God for ever it came to passe saith the Text when they heard
commonly say of the Magistrate that he is Custos utriusque Tabulae He is to take speciall care that all his Subjects be made to observe the Law of God and live not onely in moral honesty but in Godlinesse and that so living they may also enjoy peace and quietnesse More particularly the end of Church censures is that men may be ashamed humbled reduced to repentance that their spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. The end of civil punishments inflicted by the Magistrate is That justice may be done according to Law and that peace and good order may be maintained in the Common-wealth as hath been said The end of delivering Hymeneus and Alexander to Satan was that they may learn not to blaspheme 1 Tim. 1. 20. Erastus yeelds to Beza pag. 239. that the Apostle doth not say Ut non possint blasphemare that henceforth they may not be able to sin as they did before which yet he acknowledgeth to be the end of civil punishments but that they may learn not to blaspheme Wherefore when he expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to no other sence but this That the Apostle had delivered those two to be killed by Satan Ut non possint that they may not be able to blaspheme so any more just as a Mastgirate delivers a theef from the gallows that he may not be able to steal any more and as he tels us some speak that he may learn to steal no more He is herein confuted not onely out of the Text but out of himself So then the end of Church-censures is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the offenders may learn or be instructed to do so no more which belongeth to the inward man or soul. The end of civil punishments is Ut non possint as Erastus tels us that the offenders may not be able or at least being alive and some way free may not dare to do the like the sword being appointed for a terrour to them who do evil to restrain them from publike and punishable offences not to work upon the spirit of their mindes nor to effect the destroying of the flesh by mortification that the spirit may be safe in the day of the Lord. The fifth difference between the Civil and Ecclesiastical powers is in respect of the effects The effects of the Civil power are Civil Laws Civil punishments Civil rewards The effects of the Ecclesiastical power are Determinations of Controversies of Faith Canons concerning Order and Decency in the Church Ordination or Deposition of Church-Officers Suspension from the Sacrament and Excommunication The powers being distinct in their nature and causes the effects must needs be distinct which flow from the actuating and putting in execution of the powers I do not here speak of the effects of the Ecclesiastical power of Order the dispensing of the Word and Sacraments but of the effects of the power of Jurisdiction or Government of which onely the Controversic is Sixthly The Civil power hath for the object of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the things of this life matters of Peace War Justice the Kings matters and the Countrey-matters those things that belong to the external man But the Ecclesiastical power hath for the object of it things pertaining to God the Lords matters as they are distinct from Civil matters and things belonging to the inward man distinct from the things belonging to the outward man This difference Protestant Writers do put between the Civil and Ecclesiastical powers Fr. Junius Ecclesiast lib. 3. cap. 4. saith thus We have put into our definition humane things to be the subject of Civil administration but the subject of Ecclesiastical administration we have taught to be things Divine and Sacred Things Divine and Sacred we call both those which God commandeth for the sanctification of our minde and conscience as things necessary and also those which the decency and order of the Church requireth to be ordained and observed for the profitable and convenient use of the things which are necessary For example Prayers the administration of the Word and Sacraments Ecclsiastical censure are things necessary and essentially belonging to the Communion of Saints but set dayes set hours set places fasts and the like belong to the decency and order of the Church c. But humane things we call such as touch the life the body goods and good name as they are expounded in the second Table of the Decalogue for these are the things in which the whole Civil administration standeth Tilen Synt. part 2. disp 32. tels us to the same purpose That Civil Government or Magistracy versatur circa res terrenas hominem externum Magistratus saith Danaui Pol. Christ. lib. 6. cap. 1. instituti sunt à Deo rerum humanarum quae hominum societati necessariae sunt respectu ad earum curam If it be objected How can these things agree with that which hath been before by us acknowledged that the Civil Magistrate ought to take special care of Religion of the conservation and purgation thereof of the abolishing idolatry and superstition and ought to be Custos utriusque Tabulae of the first as well as second Table I answer That Magistrates are appointed not onely for Civil Policy but for the conservation and purgation of Religion as is expressed in the Confession of Faith of the Church of Scotland before cited we firmly beleeve as a most undoubted truth But when Divines make the object of Magistracy to be onely such things as belong to this life and to humane society they do not mean the object of the Magistrates Care as if he were not to take care of Religion but the object of his Operation The Magistrate himself may not assume the administration of the keys nor the dispensing of Church-censures he can but punish the external man with external punishments Of which more afterwards The seventh difference stands in the Adjuncts For 1. the Ecclesiastical power in Presbyterial or Synodical Assemblies ought not to be exercised without prayer and calling upon the Name of the Lord Matth. 18. 19. There is no such obligation upon the Civil power as that there may be no Civil Court of Justice without prayer 2. In divers cases Civil Jurisdiction hath been and is in the person of one man But no Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction is committed to one man but to an Assembly in which two at least must agree in the thing as is gathered from the Text last cited 3. No private or secret offence ought to be brought before an Ecclesiastical Court except in the case of contumacy and impenitency after previous admonitions This is the ordinary rule not to dispute now extraordinary exceptions from that rule But the Civil power is not bound up by any such ordinary rule For I suppose our opposites will hardly say at least hardly make it good that no Civil injury or breach of Law and Justice being privately committed may be brought before a Civil Court except first there
for my Argument that he acknowledgeth this Scripture to warrant Synods of Ministers and Elders and the power of these Synods to be not onely consultive but conclusive decisive and obligatory for this I suppose he means by the power to determine controversies and to make Canons for the Churches peace and government else he had concluded nothing against the Independents who yeeld a consultive Synodicall power If any shall yet desire to be more partiâ—ularly satisfied concerning the strength of my present Argument from Act. 15. I will make it out from these particulars following First Here is a power and authority to assemble Synodically and it is an intrinsecall power within the Church it self not adventitioâ—s or extrinsecall from the Magistrate Whence the soundest Protestant writers prove that though the civil Magistrate hath a power of convocating Synods and he ought to do it when the Churches necessity or danger doth call for such a remedy yet this power of his is positive not privative cumulative not destructive And that if the Magistrate be an enemy and persecuter of the Church and of true Religion or cease to do his duty that is to wit in a manifest danger of the Church the Church notwithstanding ought not to be wanting to her self but ought to use the right and authority of convocation which first and forâ—…most remaineth with the Rulers of the Church as may be seen Act. 15. So say the Professors of Leyden in Synops. purior Theol. Disp. 49. Thes. 24. beside diverse others whom I might here cite but that is not now my businesse Secondly Beside the publike debate and deliberation the Synod did also choose and send certain delegates or commissioners to Antioch and wrote by them a Synodical Epistle to the Churches in Antioch Syria and Cilicia I beleeve such Synodical acts of sending Commissioners and letters to the Churches in other Nations or Provinces should now be lookt upon as acts of government if done without the leave of the Magistrate as then Iudas and Silas were sent Thirdly That Synod did exercise and make use of a threefold Ecclesiastical power for remedy of a three-fold Ecclesiastical disease 1. They purge out the leven of false doctrine and heresie by deciding and determining that great controversie whether Circumcision and the keeping of the Ceremoniall Law of Moses were neeessary to salvation They hold forth and declare to the Churches the negative And this they do by the dogmatik power 2. There was a great scandal taken by the beleeving Jewes then not fully instructed and perswaded concerning the abrogation of the Ceremoniall Law by the death of Christ who were so far stumbled and offended at the beleeving Gentiles for their eating of things sacrificed to Idâ—ls and of blood and things strangled that they could not freely nor contentedly converse company and eate together with the Gentiles For remedy whereof the Synod doth require in regard of the law of love edification peace and avoyding of scandall that the Gentiles should abstain from those things as also from fornication which for what cause it is added I do not now dispute And this they do by the Diataktik power 3. There was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a schisme dissention and rent made in the Church by the Judaizing Teachers vers 2. Who clothed themselves with a pretended authority and warrant from the Apostles and Elders at Hierusalem and thereupon got the more following and drew away the more disciples after them For remedy hereof the Synod stigmatizeth and brandeth those men by declaring them to be lyars troublers of the Church and subverters of souls vers 24. And this they do by the Critick power or authority of censures Fourthly The decree and Canon of the Synod which is made imposed emitted and promulgat is authoritative decisive and binding Act. 15. 28. For it seemed good to the holy Ghost and here the Arabick repeateth it seemed good to us to lay upon you no greater burthen then these necessary things That ye abstain c. If it be said that this was but a doctrinal advice It seemed good c. I answer Iosephus Antiq. Iud. lib. 4. cap. 8. speaking of the decree of the supreme Sanhedrin which he that disobeyed was to be put to death calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which seemeth good So likewise in this place the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not meant of an Opinion onely for an Opinion as Schoolmen define it is properly such a 〈◊〉 of or assent to a thing as is evident and firme but not certain So that Opinion cannot be ascribed to the holy Ghost It is therefore here a word of authority and decree as Mr. Leigh in his Critica sacra at the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 noteth out of Châ—…mnitius In which sence the Grecians frequently use it So Stephanus out of Demosthenes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is de reed by the Senate And Budaeus out of Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is certainly appointed to die Observe also the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imposing and burthen They do impose some burthen onely they are carefull to impose no burthen except in necessary things Acts 16. 4. And as they went through the Cities they delivered them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the decrees that were ordained of the Apostles and Elders which were at Hierusalem And here I cannot passe the observation of that gentleman who hath taken so good pains in the Original Tongues Mr. Leigh in his Critica sacra of the New Testament in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wheresoever 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is found in the New-Testament it is put for Decrees or Lawes as Luke 2. 1. Acts 17. 7. it is put for the Decrees of Caesar and Ephes. 2. 15. Colos. 2. 14. for the Ceremonial Lawes of Moses and so frequently by the LXX in the Old Testament for Decrees as Dan. 2. 13. and 3. 10. 29. and 4. 6. for Lawes Dan. 6. 8. Caeterum saith Erasmus upon Act. 16. 4. Dogmata Graeca vox est significans ipsa decreta five placita non doctrinam ut vulgus existimat And whereas some have objected that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are used onely in reference to a doctrinal power as Col. 2. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I answer Budaeus expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be decerno and Col. 2. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Syriack makes it judicamini Erasmus and Bullinger Decretis tenemini Stephanus Beza and Gualther ritibus oneramini the English Translators are ye subject to Ordinances This subjection was not onely to Doctrines but to Commandements vers 22. after the Commandements and Doctrines of men and these commandements though in deed and truth the commandements of men onely at that time were imposed as the Commandements of God and as Ceremoniall Lawes given by Moses The vulgar Latine hath decernitis and Tertullian readeth Sententiam fertis
that which is better 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is greatly punished For here also he that commeth and confesseth the sin is to be punished with six yeers segregation but he that persevereth in the evil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be east out or expelled from the Church adde what he had said before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and shall not thenceforth converse with the Orthodox Which intimateth as plainly as any thing can be that there was an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a segregation or sequestration used in the ancient Church which was a lesser censure than casting out of the Church and from the company of Church-members Zonaras seemeth to understand the Canon otherwise for he saith nothing of the offenders converting and confessing his sin before the six years segregation but that for the offence it self committed not confessed a man was segregated six years and afterward if he did not repent but continue in the offence that then he was to be cut off and cast out of the Church wherein as I take it he did explain the mind of the Councel better then Balsamon However in that point which I now prove they are most harmonious namely concerning a greater and lesser excommunication Wherefore also the Fathers of this Synod saith Zonaras did ordain those who do such a thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be segregated for six years c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but if they continue therein to be also cut off from the Church Fifthly To suppose that there were no Poenitentes in the Ancient Church but such as were Excommunicati were a greater error then that it should need any Confutation Yea there were some poenitents who did of their own accord confesse their offences which could not have been otherwise known but by such voluntary confession and those saith Zonaras Annot. in Conc. Carth. Can. 46. were most properly called Poenitents I hope no man will imagine that such were excommunicated But so it was that all the Poenitents even such as had neither been excommunicated nor yet forensically convict by proof of scandal but did voluntarily confesse and convert were for some season kept back from the Sacrament as is manifest by that instance given out of Basilius magnus of theft voluntarily confessed for which notwithstanding the offender was for a year suspended from the Sacrament Sixthly It is manifest that there were several degrees of censure upon Bishops and Presbyters They were sometime suspended from giving the Sacrament and as it were sequestred from the exercise of their Ministery which suspension or sequestration is sometimes called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be separate sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be sequestred from communion to wit in the exercise of the Ministery or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to minister There was a higher censure then this which was deposition or degradation called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the honour or degree of Presbytership to be taken away Basils phrase is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they are deposed from their degree These two censures a suspension or sequestration from the Ministery and a total deposition from the Ministery are distinguished by the eighteenth Canon of the Councel of Ancyra and the sixteenth Canon of the Councel of Nicâ—… compared with the fifteenth Canon of those called the Apostles which certainly were not the Apostles yet are ancient See also Zonaras in Can. 11. Apost Likewise both him and Balsamon in Conc. Nic. Can. 16. Again there was somthing beyond all this which was excommunication or to be wholy cast out of the Church a censure sometime not inflicted when the former were For a Minister might be suspended yea deposed from his Ministery yet permitted to communicate or receive the Sacrament among the people as is plainly determined Can. 15. Apost and Can. 32 Basilii ad Amphil. If there were such degrees of censure appointed for Bishops and Presbyters how shall we suppose that there was no lesse censure for Church-members then excommunication For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to a Minister and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to one of the people were paralel Whence it is that you will often find in the ancient Canons and namely of the sixth general Councel He that committeth such a fault if he be one of the laity let him be segregated if one of the Clergie let him be deposed As therefore a further censure after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might fall upon a minister so a further censure after that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might be inflicted upon one of the people I have now made it to appear that the Practice Discipline and Canons of the ancient Church are for us in this present controversie about suspension from the Sacrament In the next place I will produce particular Testimonies of Fathers I shall take them as they fall to my hand without any curious order I begin with Isidorus Pâ—…lusiota who flourished about the year 431. or as others say 440. In the first Book of his Epistles Epist. 143 to Thalelâ—…us he disswadeth from giving the Sacrament to three sort of persons 1. To Jews 2. To Hereticks of both which he saith that they had once received the doctrine of truth but did after return with the dog to the vomit 3. To persons of a prophane and swinish conversation Unto all or any of these he holds it unlawful to give the Sacrament and that because of a divine prohibition Give not holy things to dogs neither cast ye pearls before swine And he concludeth thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For saith he the giving of the mysteries to such persons is unto those who contemptuously give them a breach out of which they are not awaked Dionysius Areopagita whom I do not take to be that Areopagite converted by Paul Act. 17. But certainly he is an Ancient Writer as is manifest by the Scholia upon him written by Maximus who flourished about the year 657. He is also cited by the sixth general Councel and by some ancient writers de Ecclesiastica Hierarchia cap. 3. part 3. Sect. 6. 7. having spoken of the exclusion of the Catechumens Energumens and Penitents from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper though all these heard the word read and preached he addeth that unclean carnal prophane persons in whom Sathan reigneth by sin are worse and ought much lesse to be admitted to the Sacrament then those who were bodily possessed of the divel These therefore unclean and profane persons as the first and much rather then those Energumens let them be suspended or sequestrate by the judicial or discriminating voice of the Minister for it is not permitted unto them to partake of any other holy thing but the Ministery of the Word by which they may be converted For if this heavenly celebration of the divine Mysteries refuse or repel even penitents themselves although they were sometime partakers thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not admitting him who is not altogether most holy c. for that most