it is a genus or a compositum of Heresie and Schisme 203 204 The onely ebjection Artificially framed against my main conclusion answered 105 c. Augustines judgement about the point discovered 151 152 Authour of the Church viz. God may be so considered without the bestowing of saving grace p. 43. Amesius asserts both the Catholick and particular Church to be integral p. 6. his difference 'twixt ecclesia in genere and ecclesia Catholica 5 B Baptisme the right of some gracelesse parents children p. 212 213. as also of the openly profane p. 213 to 217. as also of the excommunicate and such as receive not the Supper 217. Baptisme enters into some kinde of right unto all other Ordinances proved 257 258 259 Beleeving is Virtual Actual p. 29 30 Bound some are passively whom they do not actively binde themselves 97. The Brownists held that saving grace was essential to the visible Church which our Church adjudged an error in them 156 157 The Brownist objection against our Churches answered p. 208 209 210 C What Censures are 284 Censure are two Admonition and Excommunication 285 Before Censures are past we may not account the scandalous to be without 289 290 We are bound to proceed against the scandalous in a way of Censure 291 292 Members are froward to censure 292 The great hindrance of reformation 293 The Called and the Church are of equal latitude The Elect are members of the Church onely as called 36 Some non-Elect yet called in Christs account 36 and 38 Calling is Active direct Passive reflex Partialis this Totalis 65 How the common call is effectual with an Apology for the terme 36 37 38 The common call a true call proved 38 The Causes of the Church have no necessary respect to saving grace 42 c. The summe of the Argument from the causes 97 The Church is an individual integrum p. 4. and totum aggregativum The Churches being consisteth not in consideration onely 20 The onely true Church the reformed sense about it 105 c. The excommunicate are of the Church and have both habitual and actual communion with it 194 Communion in Ordinances fitter to define the Church by then personal qualifications 87 to 92. shewn by seven considerations Community yet more necessary 93 94 95 96. proved by six Reasons Conference why desired with all our people 279. and why before the Sacrament rather then at any other time 280. why not before every administration 280 Consent is given by seeming dissenters that the command to receive is mediate 236 237 Consent how far necessary to ones being in Covenant 187 Consent negative keeps men in Covenant 188 What is constitutive of visible membership Mr. Cottons and Mr. Hudsons answer to this considered The Covenant of the Church considered 96 97 98. little reason to dispute much about it 98 Covenant is implicite or actual an actual Covenant is mental or vâ—cal called expresse 98 Knowledge dark and general consistent with being in Covenant 188 189 Church is taken strictly largely the Church largely taken is so comparative and absolute by the Reformed Divines 109 111 Confirmation not used as a new admission into the Church 138 Ours are true Churches and rightly constitute 204 c. In what Court is self-examination to be held Our Churches are made up of three sorts of people a middle and two extreams 296 D Denying the Supper to some the negative and positive grounds of it 259 to 271 Definitions of the visible Church given us by the reformed Divines take not in saving grace 100 c. One definition may be given to the Church as largely taken and another as strictly taken and yet there may be but one Church 116 117 118 Divorce is given by God to men either mediately or immediately and both two wayes 196 197 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 1 Cor. 11. 28. largely examined 241 to 249 Dogmatical faith meerly is not sufficient to entitle to membership 118 Dogmatical faith is the proper principle of profession of faith yet none ever really professed the Doctrine of faith but he hath something of an Applicative faith common or saving 62 We may not proceed against wicked members but by discipline 283 E Ecclesia aequivoca shut out of this controversie 21 22 The Efficient of the visible Church may be considered without respect to saving grace 42 c. The proper end of the Visible Church is cultus gloriae Dei and is attainably without saving grace 46 47 48 49 Evidence of Church-membership what giveth it to others 181 182 226 Evidence of saving grace not necessary upon the examining our selves to warrant our coming to the Supper proved 245 to 249 The Excommunicate are members more then potentia or conditionaliter 192. they have both habitual and actual coÌ„munion with the Church 194 They may be known to be Church-members 182 183 Self-Examination what it is not p. 240 241. What it is p. 241 In what court it is held p. 242 243 244 245. What is the necessary issue of it p. 246 247 248 Who are to be judged not to examine themselves 268 269 270 Saving grace not of the Essence yet of the excellency of the visible Church 32 33 F Faith is True and saving True and not saving p. 28 Faith true and not saving proved 81 to 86 Faith is Virtual Actual p. 29 Some do not actually beleeve others renounce the faith 29 30 Some do formally and some onely by consequence deny the faith 31 32 Faith is Relative Qualitative p. 83 Relative or foederal faith is seated in the childe and not in the parent 83 84 The visible Church hath a real constitutive form not depending upon saving grace 65 1. This forme is not external vocation 65 66. 2. Nor external profession pag 66 67 3. Nor faith 70 But community respecting communion in Gods worship 70 to 74 That which partakes of the accidental Forme of any thing must needs partake also of the essential forme of that thing 68 69 G God himself is pleased to give many titles to wicked men equivalent to Church-member 126 to 133 God the Authour of the Church may be considered to be so without the bestowing of saving grace 43 44 H Heresie cutteth off from the Church and when 198 199 200 Heresie how it differs from Apostasie 200 201 Hildershams Reasons pretended against the Baptizing of the children of wicked men examined and he found to hold that such children have a right to baptism 214 215 216 The Head of the visible Church viz. Christ may be considered to be such without respect to saving influence proved 45 c. and explained and Objections to it answered 51 52 53 54 Hypocrite what he is 32 We may not say that wicked men are hypocrites further then they are so 33 No Hypocrite as such can be a member of the Church either visible and invisible 33 Holinesse of life is a separable accidental note of a true visible Church 78 Foederal holinesse
parts of it as similar and dissimilar as before was hinted for the Church as Junius is but one in number and two in manner because of the disposition of the members thereof For the whole professing is the visible Church and a part of this Paraeus whole also savingly beleeving is called the Church invisible the whole is visible as men called a part of these are invisible as men elect and regenerate Whence that common but most useful distinction ecclesia vocatorum and electorum Therefore saith Pareus between the visible and invisible Church there is even the same difference as is between the whole and the part for inuisible lieth hid in the visible which appeareth from that of Paul whom he hath chosen them he hath also called Exp. Urs cat p. 283 284. Polanus confirms it with his authority and reason too the invisible Polanus Church saith he lieth hid in the visible ut pars in toto as a part in the whole If we consider both as the company of the called by external vocation which is common both to the invisible and visible Church Synt. c. 9. l. 7. Osiander hath the same words also in coetu visibili ecclesia latet Osciander invisibili Encherid contra p. 126. which indeed is no other then that which in other words is asserted by even all our reformed Divines in their most common and known distinction of the Church as strictè and latè strictly and largely considered who intend generally by the Church strictly taken the Church invisible or the elect or elect regenerate and by the Church largely taken the Church visible or of the called comprehending good and bad the elect and reprobate as they do still explain themselves giving very differing definitions of them as will more fully appear anone Yea one greater then all these our Saviour teacheth that the wheat the corne the good fish and the elect are but part of the Church or the Kingdome of God which hath tares chaff bad fish and such as are not elected in it Whence Paraeus hath well collected ecclesia electorum in coetu vocatorum est SECT VI. Exceptions against this distinction of the Church Having shewed the ground of the distinction of the Church into visible and invisible and how I conceive it should be understood I shall now crave leave to shew my exceptions against it 1. My first exception will shrowd it self under those words of Field of the Church p. 14. Doctor Field We say saith he there is a visible and an invisible Church not meaning to make two distinct Churches though the forme of words may serve to insinuate some such thing Certainly that forme of words is not very commendable that may serve to insinuate that which we mean not by them if we change the instance haply this may be more notorious if one should say there is a heap of precious stones and an heap of common stones would not the hearer of these words rather imagine that there are two heaps one of precious stones and another of common stones then that there is but one heap of stones in all of which some are common and some precious and in the present case who would understand Bullinger other if he were not prepossessed with a better meaning then his words should insinuate his words are non sine causa gravi dixerunt alii ecclesiam Dei aliam quidem esse visibilem Bul. Decad. p. 355. aliam vero insibilem who can well make aliam and aliam ecclesiam to be but one Church 2. I am afraid also that the ill uncertain sound of this distinction in the ears of the world hath been a means of troubling us with those many intricacies wherewith the doctrine about the Church is still cumber'd we finde this distinction not of so frequent use either in Scripture or in the Church before the reformation from Rome and then how quiet was the Church about this point all concluding that there is but one Church how natural is it from this distinction of a Church invisible and visible for the Papist to reject the invisible to maintain his visible and for the Brownist to maintain his invisible by rejecting the visible while if we look on the Church as one entire totum or the Church of the called wherein the elect as part are contained without any more distinction we might enjoy with lesse controversie 3. 'T is indeed a difference without distinction 't is no true distribution for whereas as Master Hudson hath well observed all distributions should have their parts distinct and different and the more opposite the members are the better the distribution is it is nothing at all so here for either the one part viz. the visible comprehends the other viz. the invisible and thus the one part becomes the whole as indeed it is or else this one part viz. the visible being distinguished from the invisible as of necessity it must be in this dâ—stribution hath no being at all and so the distribution hath lost a member and consequently it selfe for nothing can be distributed into one part SECT VII Three other lawful senses of this distribution of the Church yeelded to But least I be thought to reflect too much upon this distinction of the Church I cannot let passe three other ancient uses of it which I cheerfully allow 1. By the visible Church hath been sometimes meant the Church united in outward and actual communion together and by the invisible such as though gracious yet were not in actual fellowship with any particular Church Thus the Papists urging that none could be members of the Church but such as were in fellowship with the Church of Rome our Divines answer them that we must distinguish some say they are in actual communion with the Church these are members of the visible and some though not in fellowship outwardly with the Church yet if gracious they are members of the invisible Church among whom they usually ranked the Catechumeni and the Excommunicati if truly gracious accordingly Trelcatius saith Inst theol p. 231. Catechumini sâ—cundum externam ecclesiae formám ad quam quia non pertinent propriè de ecclesia non esse censentur licet ecclesiae in visibilis sunt 2. Again by the visible Church hath been usually meant as before the Church as professing by the invisible as sincerely or Vid. par in Ursin cat p. 475. pet du Moul. Buck. p. 264. Exp. of Eng. Art 39. p. 67. savingly beleeving or regenerate We may know who professe they therefore are visible We cannot know who are regenerate therefore they are invisible as Jewel God hath always a Church invisible i. e. known onely to himself God knew them but Elias knew them not to the judgement of men they were invisible Defen p. 361. Lastly the Church is frequently said to be visible when its profession is prosperous pompous and glorious in the eyes of the world invisible
their opinions with those that directly and in very termes renounce it so neither savours it of much charity or indeed justice that wicked men that directly professe the faith both vocally with their mouth and really by attending on the Ordinances of God be equally condemned with Apostates and Hereticks that rase the very foundation of all religion though in works they deny him Therefore such as stand baptized into the faith of Christ and yet remaine in visible Communion with the Church and do not renounce the faith of Christ either with their mouths or in the intent and purpose of their hearts cannot onely by their disobedience or wicked lives as I shall anon labour to prove unchurch themselves or declare themselves as some would rather say to be no true members of the visible Church There are in the Church such as 1. Seem and are not 2. Are and seem not 3. Are and seeme and Distinct 6 are none visi not seen 4. Are and seem and are seene also He that is and seemes not is a David in desertion he that seemes and is not is a Judas betraying with a kisse he that is and seemes and is not seen is a Saint in a cave he that is and seems and is seen also is I presume not onely the man savingly qualified professing the same before men but our ordinary professour and church-Church-member that usually attends upon visible communion with the Church though wanting saving grace The same persons in divers respects may seem to be what They are Distinct. 7 They are not Or the same persons may be said in one respect to be hypocrites and in another respect true beleevers so that though we are wont to condemn all for hypocrites that professe Religion without real holinesse yet I suppose I shall not erre if I say we ought to do it not without caution and limitation I confesse that if not all that thus professe Religion without saving grace yet most of them are hypocrites in that they pretend if not seem to be what they are not viz. savingly qualified and I humbly offer whether it be not in this sense that Divines generally charge such professours as have no saving grace with the sin of Hypocrisie even because they pretend to have that Mr. Perkins speaking of temporary beleevers on Luk. 8. 13. saith these though they are not sound yet they are void of that grosse kind of hypocrisie Their mindes are enlightned their hearts are endued with such faith as may bring forth these fruits for a time and therefore herein they dissemble not but rather shew that which they have His Ep. to the Reader before his Treatise tending unto a declaration of a mans estate grace and interest in Christ or as they would say in the true mysticall invisible Church which indeed they have not But let us seriously consider can either they or we with any colour of reason or justice adjudge men to be hypocrites farther then they are so or for professing themselves to be what indeed they are though also they should professe themselves to be what they are not may not men be so far illightened as to know and beleeve the Scriptures really and yet not be so far sanctified as to believe effectually to salvation and may he not professe this faith which he truely hath though he also professe and pretend to more and is he not a true beleever and a true professour so far as he hath though false and hypocritical in professing more and to be accounted a true Beleever as to the Church visible though a hypocrite as to the Church invisible A hypocrite is one that pretendeth or seemeth to be what he is not but when men that have no saving grace pretend or seeme to be visible Church-members relatively holy Gods Covenant-people common believers c. they pretend and seeme to be what in truth they are therefore thus farre they are no hypocrites but true beleevers so far as they truely beleeve and true men so far as they professe But what they thus truely believe and what they truely are The devil is an hypocrite while he professeth himself an Angel of light but when he acknowledgeth what he truely believeth that there is a God and that he is a fearful avenger of wicked spirits and that Christ is the Sonne of God c. in this the devil is no hypocrite so what is good in wicked men is still good and what is true in them is still true notwithstanding all the evil and falshood that they are guilty of Their hypocrisie in one respect cannot destroy their reality and truth in any other In a word a hypocrite as such cannot possibly be truely a member of any Church whether it be visible or invisible for that which is false as such can never be true so he that pretends to saving grace and interest in the Church invisible if his pretence to that saving grace be false his interest in this invisible Church cannot be true and likewise he that pretends to the common faith and yet doth really renounce it cannot possibly be a true member of the visible Church yet one that is an hypocrite as to the Church invisible may in another sense be a true beleever and have a real interest in the visible Church accordingly CHAP. IV. Arg. 1. From the Etymology or the Name of the Church HItherto of the Termes of the question and the sense thereof by what I have already intimated I am bound to adhere unto the affirmative part which turneth it selfe into this Thesis The visibly Church may be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace Thus I shall now proceed as the Lord shall assist me to prove from these five considerable places or heads of Argument viz. the Etymology of the Church visible Causes of the Church visible Definition of the Church visible Testimony on my side Absurdity on the contrary First then as method requires we shall set down the Etymology of the Church and argue from it The name or word signifying Church in the Greek original which is generally allowed to be argued from is known to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which primitively derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and more immediately from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contained in it both Calling and calling out a right improvement of each of these I presume wil help us with its Argument SECT I. My first Argument then ariseth from the calling that we find Arg. 1 included in the name and is indeed inseparable from the nature Primum illud quod actu eccle siam constituit est vocatio unde nomen definitionem suam accepit ecclesia enim est coetus hominum vocatorum Med. 161 162 Inter Orthodoxos qui ecclesiam definium coetum electorum vel per electos intelligunt secundum electionem vocatos vel non ecclesiam quae actu existit Medul 161 of the Church thus Arg. 1. The Church
is the dispensation of Christ as head 3. Because the Scripture it self hath noted them to be the proper work of the spirit of Christ which is peculiarly designed and sent to do the work of Christ as head gifts are so there are diversities of gifts but the same spirit that giveth them all graces are so too for the spirit is to convince the world of sinne c. and those that were enlightened and had tasted the good Word of God and the powers of the world to come by common grace they as the text addes were made partakers of the holy Ghost 4. Because these gifts and graces are most properly reducible to the work of Christs offices which he dispenseth as head gifts to his prophetical and graces to his Priestly and Kingly office Arg. 2. The members of the visible Church may be considered Arg. 2 to be truely members of Christ without respect to saving grace therefore Christ may be also considered to be truely the head of the visible Church without respect thereunto the consequence is obvious The Antecedent viz. that members of the visible Church may be considered to be truely members of Christ without respect to saving grace appears 1. Because the members of the visible Church may be considered to be truely objâ—cts of discipline truely called to the Ministry and truely baptized without respect to saving grace 1. The members of the visible Church may be considered to be truely objects of discipline without respect to saving grace 1 Cor. 5. unlesse fornication railing drunkennesse covetousnesse malice wickednesse or scandal as such for which discipline is properly appointed carry respect to saving grace or those that are about dispense the rod should first consider whether the fault may consist with grace or a saving condition and otherwise not to lash therewith Therefore it will follow that the members of the visible Church may be considered to be truely members of Christ without respect to saving grace For 1. All discipline is truely a part of the administration of Christ as Head of the Church it being truely appointed by himself to be dispensed by such as stand in his stead in the Church Quia vero tam efficaciter urget obedientiam er ga Christum idcirco non sâ—ne ratione singulari magna pars regni Christi preut visibiliter ecclesiam regit ab optimis theologis in ista disciplina colocatur Medul p. 202 to be dispensed by them in his Name alone to be made effectual by his power alone and lastly it being so urgent a meanes of obedience to his Gospel Wherefore as Amesius addeth is not without singular reason according to the method of our best Divines reputed a great and special part of the Kingdome of Christ which all will grant belongeth to him as Head of the Church 2. The objects on whom discipline is to be exercised or granted by all to be members of the Church and consequently of Christ for as we have said discipline is part of his dispensation as head and the influence of the head is not beyond the body Certainly Christ judgeth none with discipline but such as the Church ought to judge now the Church ought to judge none but those that are within for those that are without God 1 Cor. 5. 12 13 judgeth Within and without what but the Church and what is the Church but the body of Christ therefore Amesius exactly Personae circa quas exerceri debet sunt membra ecclesiarum visibilium insti tutarum 1 Cor. 5 11. non a lii v. 12. Med. p 201. John 6. 70. saith that persons about whom discipline ought to be exercised are members of visible instituted Churches and none other 2. Persons may be considered to be truely called to the work of the Ministry without respect to saving grace for Judas was truely called to the work of the Ministry as is undeniable insinuated by that question of our Saviour have not I chosen you twelve i. e. have not I my self put you twelve into my Ministry yet 't is known that Judas was not savingly called to be a member of Christ as the next words added by our Saviour note and one of you is a Devil which our Saviour doubtlesse knew when he first chose him and would never have chose him had saving grace been essential to a true and lawful call to the Ministry Therefore it hence also follows that persons may be considered to be truely members of Christ without respect to saving grace for can any one possibly think that Christ would choose an infidel remaining such to rule his Church or make him an officer over that is not one of his people or put him into the place of the steward of his house whom he yet hath not and whom he never intends to put into his house who doubts but that he that is a Ruler Officer or Steward over the Church people or house of Christ is also a member thereof and much more and that he that is a member of the Church people and house of Christ is also a member of Christ himselfe 3. Persons may be considered to be truely baptized without respect unto saving grace for persons are truely because lawfully baptized in their infant state unto the consideration of their Covenant-holinesse and not the supposition of their personal Si ullius gratiae sunt participes fit illud vi faederis gratiae atque adeo foedus primum foederis sigillum adipsos etiam pertinet saving grace for as Ames teacheth us if they are partakers of any grace it is done by force of the Covenant of grace and thus both the Covenant and the first seal of the Covenant belongs also to them not as having true grace but as borne to God and in Covenant with him by their parents and if it be so with us when infants I shall humbly ask anone why not so afterwards and in our adult estate if born Christians and if we do not renounce Christianity Then hence it also follows that persons may be considered to be truely members of Christ without respect to saving grace for into what are persons baptized but into the body of Christ 1 Cor. 12. 13. yea and though afterwards they prove ungodly yet are they dealt with both here and hereafter as within and as children of the Kingdome here they have punishment peculiar to the subjects and members of Christ viz. to be cast out as before if after admonition they remaine obstinate then if they repent and are re-accepted into communion with the Church they are still dealt with as within and are not required to be re-baptized and if they shall die in their wickednesse they shall be judged hereafter and proceeded against not as the children of this world but as the children of the kingdome but of this more largely hereafter as we shall have abundant occasion now accept of this short touch Arg. 3. Christ is considered under all those many
in Ordinances so Mr. Hudson the visible Church saith he is a company of people called or separated by God from Idols to the true Religion and yeelding professed subjection to that call and more plainly Wollebius the visible Church is a company of persons commonly called as well Elect as reprobate But no Authour that I have yet met withal did ever define the Church without specifying and expressing this society or community one way or other Apollonius begins his definition with societas the Leiden Professors with coetus So Wallebius Trelcatius Ames and Augustine with unitas of English men Bradshaw saith the Churches of Christ are holy assemblies Dayrel saith a particular visible Church is a company c. so Hudson the visible Church is a company c. And Arnobius upon the 19 Arti a Congregation of faithful people Therefore it is likely that the unity or society of the Church deserveth the first and the highest place in the definition thereof Lastly therefore I shall conclude my selfe in those expresse Fideles non constituunt ecclesiam particularem quamvis simul plures in codem loco conveniant aut vivant nisi speciali vinculo inter se conjugantur Med. p. 169. Vinculum hoc est foedus c. Ibid. words of Amesius that neither the faithful or many faithful or many faithful meeting together or living in one place do thereby constitute a particular Church without they be further joyned together by some special bond among themselvs and I shall not fear to adde with him that this bond is a Covenant and that this covenant ought to be such as he there defineth it viz. that whereby the faithful oblige themselves particularly to performe all those duties both towards God and mutually towards each other which respect the Condition and Edification of the Church Yet give me leave to explain my self in a few particulars touching this bond or Covenant and I shall hasten to the conclusion of this last particular 1. I grant this bond or covenant may be lawfully expressed at the first constitution of a particular Church because it rationally agreeth with the nature of such a society 2. I further grant that the expresse bond being a prudential thing may be so much the neerer to necessity by how much the more prudence dictates it to be of use and discovers more evident occasion thereof accidentally occurring at the constitution of such a Church 3. Yet I must interpose against the necessity thereof in its own nature because we finde not any such command in Scripture nor any such practice in the primitive Churches 4. Neither may the want much lesse the absence thereof by any means be hence interpreted to the questioning of the truth of such Churches as have the Word and Sacraments purely or but truly administred and constantly attended upon for who can deny but that these are infallible marks yea essential notes of a true Church besides it is apparent even thereby that there is an implicit bond or covenant wherein to such a people are not onely taken with God but mutuo inter se mutually with one another seeing as the prophet queries how can two walk together unlesse they be agreed which two of the most eminent Dr. Ames and Mr. Hooker as well as moderate Congregational men have under their hands acknowledged to be all that 's necessary to the truth of a visible Church in this respect 5. Therefore we must with them conclude that the form consisteth not in a Covenant as expressed for then where that was wanting the Church could not exist but as a Covenant or mutual bond so far as it is necessarily supposed in the nature of such a society or community 6. Although I have before granted that either an expresse or implicite covenanting to performe the duties of Church members is a necessary duty binding all that are admitted into such a relation Yet I must still deny it to be of such absolute necessity as that the non-real and actual intention in a particular person so to covenant and oblige himselfe should exclude the reality of his visible Church-membership provided his desire to be admitted be real and sincere The reality of his desire of admission is essential to his very admission but the reality of his actual purpose to performe all the duties to which he is obliged by his admission is onely essential to his safe admission the first is necessary for his being the last for his well-being in this state of the Church membership Indeed he is passively bound by the command of God as also by his relation to this society of the Church both actively Persons may be passively bound when they do not actively binde themselves and actually to oblige himself unto the said duties yet if by reason of the Churches carelesnesse he is not put upon it or by reason of his ignorance of this his duty or his unwillingnesse to engage at present so farre in it he shall not thus oblige himself he is not thereby presently disobliged from his duty by the nullity of this his Relation or visible Church membership 7. This actual obliging himself in truth to performe all the duties There is a necessary duty a necessary condition of a Church-member is therefore a necessary duty accompanying his admission but no necessary condition thereof or without which he cannot be admitted And this I would conceive to be the meaning of Ames his words before noted viz. the bond without which the faithful do not constitute a particular Church is a Covenant vel expressum vel implicitum which implicitum I humbly conceive must necessarily An implicit Covenant opposed to an expresse and an actual covenanting An actual conanting is either vocal or mental We covenant consequentially or vertually what neither expressely nor actually be opposed both to expressum and to actuale and his meaning is or should be that neither an expresse that is a vocal nor yet an actual whether vocal or mental Covenant is a condition so necessary as without which the faithful cannot constitute a Church but a conjunction so far foederata as his phrase is as is necessary to communion which doth implicitely i. e. consequentially though not expressely and vertually though not actually also bind the faithful i. e. all the members of the Church particulatim to the performance of all those duties which the nature of so holy a society calls them unto For I readily grant that though particular persons do not actually either in their words or thoughts oblige themselves so largely yet by their very desire of admission into the Church if admitted they do by consequence and vertue thereof oblige themselves unto all those duties that the state into which they desire to be and are accordingly admitted doth necessarily and naturally We binde our selves vertually to more when we yeeld to be admitted sometimes then we that are admitted think of or intend put them upon so
in conclusion this foedus as it is extended in Ames his description is necessary in intentione passionis viz. admission non patientis the person admitted 8. Yet at length we must conclude that there is very little use of and consequently as little reason to dispute about this bond whether expresse or implicite in constituted Churches seeing herein our members are generally admitted in their infancy and what shall need to be imposed at years of discretion cannot with any shew of reason intend their admission into the Church it being rightly either but in order to their admission to some higher Ordinance or at most their confirmation in that state and those priviledges whereinto they are indeed admitted before in baptism but of this more directly and therefore more largely hereafter However my maine conclusion passeth still for if the persons that are subjects of both this society and the bond thereof may be considered as before is proved without respect to saving grace then doubtlesse so may both the society and the bond thereof touching the first viz. the society there is no colour of doubting and touching the latter viz. the Covenant let Amens himself whose words haply are the ground of our doubt be our resolver he first assures us that such as onely professe are members of the visible Church and yet also here addes that the visible Church is not constituted without the bond of this Covenant so that if Ames consist with himself or may be yeelded unto in the case this Covenant may be entred even by such as onely professe i. e. such as have no saving grace or as he in another place no inward vertue Besides what should possibly hinder but that such persons as are not endued with saving grace may yet be obliged to those duties which are not performable without that grace which themselves want by an obligation brought upon themselves by themselves when they themselves did not intend it as we have found this to be and was the very case of Simon Magus CHAP. XV. Of the definition as it may be framed by the union of the former parts HItherto of the parts of the definition of the visible Church by themselves proceed we now to look upon these parts in union and to state an entire definition therefrom Which is most ready to be done by the closing or drawing together what hath beene so long considered apart The visible Church may thus be said to be Beleevers or persons outwardly called or professing the true Religion ordinarily attending the communion of Ordinances in coetu or in a fix'd society or if you would put them together thus a community of persons that believe with a common faith or that are called with common calling or that make a profession of the true Religion ordinarily meeting and joyning together in the Ordinances of Gods worship For though communion be neerer to the essence of the visible Church then personal qualifications and community then communion yet as hath beene still acknowledged they have all their sit place and use in the definition thereof Here therefore is the qualification of the matter viz. common faith calling or profession here is the forme constituting the coetus or community as it looketh unto communion and lastly here is the formal action or if you please rather the form dâ—stinguishing this society from all other communion in the Ordinances of God Most of the definitions that our reformed Divines have given so far as I can find do indeed expresse all these three parts thereof I shall set a few of them down here and leave the rest to the search and judgement of the learned The Leiden Professors define it to be a company of those which Visibilis ecclesia est coetus eorum qui per verbum externum Sacramentorum disciplinae ecclesiasticae usum in unum corpus colescunt disp 40. The. 32 by the external word and the use of the Sacraments and ecclesiastical discipline are united into one body wherein two of the three foresaid parts are very evident 't is a company and such a company as hath the communion of such a body in the Word and Sacraments I confesse that the other viz. the qualification of the subjects of this company is not by them here specified yet their profession is easily implied in their fellowship and communion in Gods Ordinances and the not mentioning of the calling or faith or profession thereof onely intimates as before was noted that personal qualifications are not so necessary to the visible Church as this community or communion Indeed they also insert discipline but seeing that discipline is not necessary to the being of the Church and is but a separable adjunct of it it cannot be taken as more necessary into the definition of the Church Ames defineth the Church institute or visible particular to be Est societas fidelium speciali vinculo inter se conjunctorum ad communionem Sanctorum constanter inter se exercendam Med. 168. a society of beleevers joyned together among themselves by a special bond for their constant exercising the communion of Saints together where all the three parts are very visible 1 Beleever 2. In society 3. For communion I have before confessed that he intends saving faith as appears by his next words yet I humbly conceive his meaning is that all this society ought to be endued with such a faith and not that they are so indeed or if not no members of the visible Church For in the same page he tells us that it is very probable that there is no particular Church but it hath some members that do savingly beleeve and by his asserting the greatest probability of some that savingly beleeve he evidently granteth that others in this Church yea and many others for they viz. many others are directly distinguished to some may be without saving faith and yet as he grants in the next Paragraph be members of the visible Church and in that known place against Bellarmine saith expressely that it is false if any say that we the reformed Divines require inward vertues and therefore not the root of them saving faith to render one a member of the visible Church Trelcatius saith the visible Church is a company of men called Ecclesia visibitis definitur coetus hominum vacatione externam seu praedicatione verbi ad cultum gloriae Dei Inst 215 Est societas coramqui veram fidem profitentur ad communionem societatem ecclesiasticam inter se exercendam out by external calling as by the preaching of the word and the communion of the Sacraments to the worship of the glory of God here also all the parts are manifest A company 2. Of men called with external calling 3. To communion in the worship of God But Apollonius seemeth most clear and distinct whose definition I had rather fix upon then any yet named 't is saith he a society of persons professing the true faith and exercising ecclesiastical communion
they say that wicked men are not of the Church that they are not of the Church so fully effectually and savingly as the righteous and elect are not but that they are so really Therefore there is plaine Scripture ground to distinguish of being of the Church viz. savingly as they that fell away 1 Joh. 2. 12. were not 2. In a visible outward and common sense as those were Rom. 9. 6. that were of Israel to whom belonged the Covenants and glory of the visible Church though they were not Israel to whom belonged the absolute promise of salvation But to silence all possible objections I shall now undertake to conclude from several principles undoubtedly owned by all the Churches in all ages that they have ever denied saving grace to be essential to visible Church-membership and consequently must needs have ever held that wicked persons may be of the visible Church and that really and not equivocally onely if it be opposed to really Arg. 1. To believe that relative holinesse is really sufficient Fidelibus sunt annumerandi tanquam ecclesiae membra fidelium corum liberi qui sunt in ecclesia 1 Cor. 7. 14. participes enim ejusdem foederis ejusdem professionis cum suis parentibus Medul Am. p. 168 169 to interest in visible Church-membership is to believe also that saving grace doth not onely do so unlesse relative holinesse and saving grace be all one a Paradox that no Protestant asserts but the Church hath ever beleeved that relative holinesse giveth real interest to visible Church-membership For first she never doubted but that children borne within the visible Church were really in Covenant and Church-members Nor secondly that their title thereto is founded not upon personal much lesse saving grace but upon parental or relative holinesse Arg. 2. The constant unscrupled practice of baptizing the children of all such as remaine within the pale of the Church can truely proceed from no other principle but this viz. that Church-membership may be really considered without respect to saving grace this is demonstrated by two considerations 1. That it was never the practice of any Church constantly and ordinarily i. e. without the Adoption of such children unto Christian Parents to baptize the children of Pagans or of such as are no Church members 2 That it cannot be imagined by any that are serious in the case that all that are within the pale of the Church make evidence satisfactory of saving Epist 12. Infantes pontificiorum similium possunt baptizari quia non sunt plane alicni a foederi professiâ—ne Am. de consic p. 248 grace But now it cannot be denied me that such hath been the constant unscrupled practice of the Churches of Christ in all ages viz. to baptize the children of all such as lived within the pale of the Church Indeed Calvine writes against the baptizing of the children of the Papists But 1. Papists live not within the pale of our reformed Church 2. And his reason given against it is not because the Papists have no grace or because they are hypocrites but because they want sound doctrine and are judged Hereticks Yet 3. The ecclesiastical Colledge of Geneva plainly Against Knox p. 88 tell us that wheresoever the profession of Christianity hath not utterly perished and been extinct Infants are beguiled of their right if the common seale be denied them I confesse that Amesius Hildersham and some others haply would have us put a difference in sealing the children of the wicked i. e. such as do apertè in the face of the world violate the Covenant But 1. They never questioned the right of Ab allis piis eorum educatio suscipiatur Qui foedus Dei Aperte violuat corum infantes cum aliquo discrimiâ—e debent he doth not say non debent Baptizari de consc Am. p. 247. Distinctio debet ad conectionem malorum ibid. such children to Baptisme 2. Nor denied the actual administration thereof unto such wholly onely in prudence urged the great use of Sponsores viz. godly persons to undertake for children in such a case 3. This reacheth not our case for the reason hereof was not because they had no saving grace but because their open wickednesse was a present blot and scandal to Religion for which they ought by this suspending the seale from their children to be made ashamed and brought to repentance 4. However this is but the judgement of particular men and contrary to the judgment and practice of the Churches in general as our present argument extends it self yea howsoever our Congregational brethren have of late taken up the contrary Master Rutherford hath noted that Best a famous Brownist denied baptisme to belong to the children of the excommunicate onely which yet he doubtlesse did not because such were supposed to have no grace but because they were by the sentence of excommunication cast out of the Churches clearly yeelding that the children of all Church-members are to be baptized Yea though our Congregational brethren are yet so charitable as to allow our Churches to be true Churches and yet so severe to deny our Infants the first seal we suppose this is not because they judge us all to be void of saving grace or out of the general Covenant of God but as Master Cotton Master Norton c. affirme because we are not within their ecclesiastical particular Covenant and that in their practice in their own Congregations they are more favourable to the Infants borne therein and their application of the seals is as large as their Church and Covenant Arg. 3. Those that in their constant course of preaching still supposed that men might violate their Covenant with God cannot but be thought to hold that men may be truely in Covenant with God and consequently in the Church without saving grace especially considering 1. That if men do break Covenant with God it is by great and notorious wickednesse 2. That to men who are now the Judges such as are guilty of notorious wickednesse and do as Ames expresseth it Aperte violari foedus Dei give no evidence of saving grace and lastly that as it was before observed men cannot break that bond they are not under or violate that Covenant in which they cannot be said to be But now none can have the least ground of doubting whether such hath not been the constant course of proaching yea and writing too by the whole cloud of the men of God in all ages that hath the least communion or converse therewith Arg. 4. Those that hold that notoriously scandalous persons are within until they be censured and cast out must needs be granted to hold also that persons void of saving grace may be real members of the visible Church that is de facto if not de jure the reason is because one that appeareth notoriously scandalous appears thereby to have no sincere or saving grace and according to the rule esse apparere sunt equipollentia in
quis Christianam fidem se amplecti profiteatur ecclesiae per Baptismum inseri â—oget B. z. other Religions and expressed desire to be united to the Christian Church by baptism is with a professed subjection to the wayes and Ordinances of Jesus Christ the onely necessary requisite to constitute a Heathen a member of the visible Church and to give him title to the badge thereof viz. Baptisme I grant this must be serious otherwise it cannot give a real right yet I meane such a seriousnesse as may consist without saving grace and might otherwise be expressed by truth or earnestnesse as opposed to dissembling deceit designe or hypocrisie as before is explained Now if this embracing Religion and desire of baptisme be thus serious I presume such a one hath a real right in the Church and baptisme and may be lawfully admitted thereunto by the Church without further scrutiny or examination after such or such a measure of knowledge or holinesse or the inward saving condition of the party and this I hold upon the following reasons added to what hath been formerly urged Reas 1. Heathens may be lawfully received by the Church now upon the same moral conditions that the proselytes were in the time of the Law and that both by parity and identity of reason for Heathens embracing the Christian Religion now are as really made proselytes into the Jewish Church I meane the same Church which was then Jewish but now is Christian as the ancient proselytes were then for though the Church be changed in its outward dispensation and Ordinances it is still the same in its subjects and Covenant as appeares undeniably against the Anabaptist from Romans 11. Ephes 3. 6 c. But now the Jewish ancient proselytes were received and accordingly circumcised by the Church upon such a single disowning all false religions and adhering to the true with a desire to adjoyne themselves to the people and worship of the true God Therefore upon the same terms supplying what is necessarily to be supplied touching the Messias now come may Christ an proselytes be lawfully admitted into the Christian flock and number and be baptized Reas 2. That which is sufficient to make a disciple is sufficient to make a visible Church-member and to give claime to baptisme as Master Cotton and others reason well from Matth. 28. 18. Now an expressed desire to be admitted into the Schoole with a proffer to submit to the Rules and Laws thereof and to be taught and ruled accordingly is sufficient the party being thus received to disciple or make one a Schollar or a member of the School without the addition of such qualities or measures of learning or aptnesse thereunto Therefore a single desire to be joyned to the School of Christ and a professed subjection as Mr. Hudson speaks to the government thereof without any further evidence is sufficient to entitle a person to this disciple-ship and to warrant his reception and sealing by the Church Reason 3. Some Scripture admit into the Church upon as low termes as these viz. upon a general desire of baptisme and to submit to the wayes of the Lord in communion with his Church as might be instanced in all the examples of Johns Baptisme with that of the multitude Acts 2. of whom it is said that they gladly received the Word and were baptized Therefore persons may be lawfully admitted upon as low and easie termes still For 1. what was done in such cases in the Word may be lawfully done still for nothing was done unlawfully then and what was done then was written there for our imitation and learning 2. Though some other Scripture should require more then this viz. upon some consideration yet reason will prompt us to look for the minimum quod sic what may lawfully be done in such places as require least seeing every place and instance in Scripture requireth sufficient Reas 4. A profession that Jesus Christ is the Sonne of God with a desire to be united to the Christians communion by Baptisme rendred the Eunuch worthy to be admitted into the Church and baptized therefore so much doth others also What Philip required more in his question matters not if his answer had not been satisfactory doubtlesse he had not been baptized Reas 5. He that embraceth the Catholick faith or doctrine partaketh of the essence of the entitive Church and he that submitteth himself to baptisme and ecclesiastick communion partaketh of the essence of the organical Church therefore he that embraceth the one and submitteth to the other hath all that is essential to a visible Church-member Reas 6. Those lastly that require more viz. seem to require performance of the condition of the Covenant in order to entring Covenant but this is some-what strange The condition of the Covenant is twofold 1. In order to covenanting which is a promise or engaging to performe the termes or conditions of the Covenant now to be entred upon performance of which the reward covenanted for depends 2. The other condition is in order therefore to the obtaining this reward promised upon such condition which is the actual performance of the conditon engaged unto upon entring Covenant Vid. Blakes Seals Hystorical faith may be in reprobates both within the Church and also in such as be without the Church as Turks believe there is a God that Christ was born of a Virgin the resurrection of the dead c. yea the devils have it 1 Joh. 2. 19 Rogers of faith p. 6. The first is necessary to entrance into Covenant the last to the partaking of the benefit thereof As it is with men a servant enters Covenant by undertaking and promising to do his Master his work but obtaineth his reward or wages alone by doing what he hath thus undertaken Yet with leave of that Reverend man this engaging to perform the condition of the Covenant is I conceive more then a bare historical or dogmatical faith for there is something of application in that faith that doth not only beleeve but embrace the truth and the true Religion and make application to the Church for admission and baptisme However I humbly conceive though more then a bare histostorical faith should be requisite yet lesse then a faith that justifieth I do not say lesse then the profession thereof may truely entitle to visible Church-membership and consequently to Baptisme as hath been shewn CHAP. XXIX What is requisite to evidence a persons interest in the visible Church by men Quest THe second question to be answered is What is requisite to evidence a person to be a member of the visible Church to others or how may we know a person to be a member of the visible Church or what doth render Church-membership visible Answ 1. I answer first that that which evidenceth a persons interest in the essence of the visible Church doth even thereby evidence his visible Church-membership for what can better evince a members union with the body then its partaking
with the essence thereof 2. Againe that which evidenceth a persons communion in the essential and formal actions of the Church doth also thereby evidence such a persons interest in the essence of or his essential union with the Church for nothing can have or carry a stronger tincture of the essence of any thing then the formal or essential actions thereof which immediately flow from it 3. Then further the essence of the visible Church hath beene found to consist in community respecting communion in Gods truth and Ordinances and the formal actions of this community have been found to be this communion 4. Now that person that appears to have communion with the Church in Doctrine and worship or in the truth and Ordinances of Jesus appears to partake of the essential actions and consequently of the essence of the visible Church 5. These premises thus laid I found my answer upon them to the question thus that therefore that person that doth not plainly renounce the truth and openly submitteth unto and ordinarily attendeth upon the Ordinances of divine worship whatsoever evil qualities he may otherwise bear doth thus appear to be really a member of the visible Church Indeed were saving grace of the essence of the visible Church a person could not appear to be a member thereof without the evidences of saving grace but seeing we have found that it is not we adde whatsoever evil qualities he may otherwise beare As a man living within such a dominion and was either borne there or else is known to be naturalized and made free according to the Laws thereof though he be a great offender and highly obnoxious to Law and punishment yet if he renounce not his subjection or declare not against the government is notwithstanding known to be a member of that body politick or a lawful subject of that dominion Or as in the natural body a member remaining in union with the body and in communion with it in its essential actions though it be a diseased or wounded or leprous member yet is known and granted to be a real member So a man that stands in relation to the Church and ordinarily attends upon the Ordinances thereof and doth not renounce the doctrine of the Gospel though he be a wicked and rotten member is yet hereby evidenced to be really a member of the mystical visible body the Church for this sufficiently evidenceth that common faith which though it avail not to justication yet is found effectual so far as to constitute or interesse in visible Church-membership Obj. It may be hence urged that then children cannot be known to be Church-members and consequently cannot be members of the visible Church Answ May not a childe be known to be a member of the Common-wealth by its being borne therein and doth not the Scripture intimate as much concerning a childe born in Zion it shall be said that this man was borne there q. d. that this man is known to be a member of Citizen of the City or Church of the living God because he was borne there or by Birth-priviledge or being born free 2. Children have visible communion with the Church in their parents profession as Ames teacheth sunt participes ejusdem profesfessions c. 3. They have some visible communion with the Church in their own persons also in that first Ordinance of Christ of which they are capable and thus being entred they remain in the Churches communion so far thereby until they shall be capable of enjoying more Object 2. However it may be said that the excommunicate are thus excluded Answ Not so for though the excommunicate should have no actual communion with the Church yet they have a fundamental and habitual communion with it as a palsie member is yet a real member and may be truely said to have an habitual communion with the body though at present its actual partaking of the animal influence be denied or suspended or as a man out-lawd may be said to have a remoter right fundamentally in the Law of the Land though he have no present actual benefit thereby which indeed the violence of discipline and not the nature of such a condition hath brought him unto But secondly there is notwithstanding some secret actual communion betwixt the body and a palsey member and the Common-wealth and a person out-law'd and likewise betwixt the excommunicate and the Church which may also be known for that the palsey member hath some influence from the body appears by its warmth that the person out-law'd hath some benefit by the Laws appears in that they secure his life it being murther to kill him and that the excommunicate have some fellowship with the Church appears in that they are within the care thereof and under the Ordinance of God appointed for salvation and not for destruction and is to be dealt withal as a brother 3. The excommunicate lastly I mean such onely as are not heretical have communion with the Church in preparatione animi and in their desires which is onely suspended for their good a while with hopes of repentance and satisfaction and thereupon re-admission as the palsie member in the disposition or preparation of nature is ready as it were to receive the suspended influence from the body again viz. upon the unlocking and opening of obstructions which a member wholly cut off or dead hath not CHAP. XXX What it is that doth wholly put a man out of the Church and first that it is not ignorance WE proceed Lastly having shewn what is requisite to constitute and evidence visible Church-membership to enquire into the meanes and ways of dissolving it and the question is What is that which wholly dismembers or cutteth off from the visible Church Hereunto I answer Negatively and Positively Ans 1. Neg. First I assert that the want of such a competent measure of knowledge as every one ought to have which is commonly termed ignorance doth not simply or of it selfe wholly cut off from the visible Church and the Reasons hereof are Reas 1. Because such a knowledge doth not go into the essence of the visible Church which we have found to consist in society or community Reas 2. Because evidence or appearance of knowledge is not a necessary or essential requisite to discover Church-membership for then none might take another for a member of the Church before he is satisfied of his knowledge which would be a strange thing therefore ignorance or the want of such knowledge doth not signifie one no Church-member the consequence is built upon the common rule eadem est ratio contrariorum Reas 3. Because the Scripture doth not assert it which alone hath authority from God to satisfie us in this point the Scripture doth often charge the members of the Church with ignorance but doth never either say that ignorant persons cannot be Church-members or that ignorance doth cast men out of the Church or indeed so much that ignorant persons ought meerly for their
thus excommunicate hath yet both habitual and actual communion in part with the Church either of which is far more then a bare conditionall or potential communion with it and therefore participateth of the essence and ceaseth not wholly to be a member thereof 1. An excommunicate person hath habitual communion with the Church which is real and more then potential though he Habitual should have actual communion this hath largely appeared before for his communion is onely suspended upon expectation of satisfaction and he hath it in desire and in the preparation of mind and the seal of the Covenant viz. baptisme is yet in force upon him 2. Yea such an excommunicate person hath actual commmunion with the Church in many though not all her Ordinances Actual 1. As before in the ordinance of Baptisme 2. In the prayers of the Church which are or ought to be made for him as a person in some relation as a brother to them which he may claime at least if he may not heare 3. In the counsel and exhortations of the Church which doubtlesse is an Ordinance Heb. 11. 25. and to be performed to the excommunicate count him not as an enemy but admonish him as a brother 4. In the Ordinance of excommunication also which is acknowledged to be appointed and ought to be executed as a medicine to heal and not alwayes as a sword wholly to cut off a diseased member the Excommunicate are thereby under the meanes of cure 〈◊〉 1. Cor. 5. the meanes of salvation which no one wholly out of the Church is Yea some conceive that the excommunicate have an actual right in all Ordinances but the Supper and the politick acts of the Niddui Church Niddui among the Jews which is thought to answer to our lesser degree of excommunication did not exclude a man from the Temple as the Talmudists say though according to Drusius he might not come into the Synagogue whence haply Vid. Gillesp Aarons rod. that forme of speech casting out of the Synagogue in Scripture Yet Joh. Coch. thinks that an excommunicate person was not altogether cast out of the Synagogue neither but was permitted to heare and in other things was separate which yet hath some colour from that proverb of the Jews that he that was under Cherem or the greater excommunication non docet non docetur and by this he was distinguished by those under Niddui intimating that such though they might not teach yet they might be taught otherwise there appears to be no difference betwixt them herein That which favours this opinion amongst us is that other Ordinances may be dispensed to Heathens and Publicans a Publican may come into the Temple to pray and an Heathen came into the Church at Corinth to heare and a person thus excommunicate is but an Heathen or a Publican but enough of this I presume not to determine any thing in so nice a Controversie I crave onely leave to conclude that if the excommunicate heare onely as a Heathen and pray onely as a Publican then not as a Church-member which serveth to cut this Observation wholly off from the present question and to break short off the thread of my answer hereto CHAP. XXXIII What doth wholly cut a man off from the visible Church first on Gods part HItherto we have answered negatively and laboured to shew that ignorance wickednesse and excommunication viz. the lesser doth not wholly root up visible Church-membership come we now to give our positive answer and to shew what doth The person that is the subject of this sad change may be considered The person cut off is passive or active in it to be passive in it onely and to be cut off or active also and to cut himself off from the Church If we look upon him as passive in it I mean in the punishment not in the sinne the agent can be none in a strict and principal When the man is passive God is the agent properly sense but God for as the Husband is said most properly to give the wife a bill of divorce though others viz. the administers of the Law be subservient also so God alone hath this prerogative to admit into and cast out of his own Church though the discipline of the Church be used by God therein therefore we are taught by Divines that when the key of the Church erreth God doth not binde in heaven and consequently men are not really bound at all 1. But God may be considered to give this bill of utter divorce two wayes first mediately by the hand of the Church in her God doth divorce 1. Mediately by the Church highest act of punishment if such a one there be called Anathema Maranatha which God doth either by ratifying in heaven what is done accordingly on earth when the Church dares arise to so great and dreadful a judgement as it is said she did against Julian and doth not misapply it or else by putting forth such a judicial sentence against a person known to himself to have sinned the unpardonable sinne though not to the Church as a dismal addition and not onely a ratification of the Churches lesser censure Secondly sometimes God doth put in his own hand and sickle and wholly cut off persons and Churches more immedialy i. e. without 2. Immediately two wayes the meanes or mediation of the Church and that two ways 1. By the stroke of natural death whereby a person if wicked is in 1. By death heavy judgement wholly cut from the Church in all respects but if godly in much mercy wholly cut off from the Church in our present respect viz. as militant to be joyned to Jerusalem above in the glory and triumphs thereof for ever 2. By removing his Ordinances 2. By removing the candlesticks the onely means of church-Church-communion from the place where such a person or people who have not hearts or fruits answerable do inhabite for otherwise though the Gospel be removed yet if a mans heart be to it indeed he hath habitual communion with all other Churches and power to joyne himselfe to any true Church in the world and to claime actual communion with it as none can doubt though his own former Congregation be dissolved Just thus it was with the ancient Church of the Jews God after many warnings and threatnings when she had stoned the servants and killed the heire and yet still refused her own mercies scorning to be wash'd in the blood her selfe had shed or healed by the wounds she had made God at length giveth commission to his servants in the Gospel and lo they turne to the Gentiles and carry away the light and glory of Israel the golden candlestick of the Gospel and the Where God utterly taking away the means of his Word and worship Acts 15. 46 hath apparently given the bill of divorce Isa 50 1 then are we not to acknowledge any Church at all at this day in Jerusalem
once the holy City but where these meanes are yet continued we are to acknowledge a Church of Christ Rev. 2. 12 13. more or lesse corrupt according to the gâ—eater or lesse abuse of Gods Word and worship Bish Usher sum of Divin p. 398. Church along with them Yet observe though the rest were blinded the Elect were saved many of the former Church of the Jews now dissolved joyned themselves unto the Gospel-Churches which indeed were the same for substance and differ'd onely by a new administration of Ordinances with their own Church before Now of any other way wherein God doth directly and formally reject or divorce a person or people besides these I think we read not in Scripture CHAP. XXXIV How a man may cut himself off from the visible Church viz. by Heresie and Schisme THe destruction of man is of himself not onely meritoriously but sometimes efficiently and so in order thereunto is his cutting himself from the Church of God the meanes of his salvation That it is so is not doubted our question is how it cometh to passe The visible Church is usually considered in an entitive or organical apacity accordingly it is said to be endued with two properties profession of the faith as entitive and communion in worship as organical respective hereunto a man may violate his right in the Church and dismember himself 1. By Heresie denying the faith he cutteth himself from the Church entitive 2. By Schisme renting himself from its comunion in worship he breaks himself off from the Church organical so that my general answer here is that a person may wholly cut himself from the visible Church by two means viz. Heresie and Schisme by the first he goes off the foundation which lies in doctrine by the last he forsakes the fellowship which lieth in worship of these a little more distinctly 1. Heresie cutteth off from the Church as it breaketh the great Haeresis opponitur fidei schisma charitati Ames bond of the Churches union viz. faith and as it necessarily carrieth with it a want of that historical faith which hath the doctrine of faith for its object and which none do doubt to be an essential requisite to a true church-Church-member Therefore the Jews Buxtor Lex Cald. Talm. Rab. p. 195 held that an heretical Israelite had no communion with the Church of Israel and why but because communion supposeth union and union with Israel or the true Church is lost with faith they also held as Master Selden noteth that an Israelite turning an Heretick i. e. denying any of the thirteen fundamental Articles to be as an Heathen man and did therefore permit a Jew to lend De jure Nat. gent. l. 6. c. 10 him upon usury as to an Heathen and why but because he had renounced the Law which chiefly if not onely differr'd a Jew from an Heathen Not that every errour is so dangerous for every errour is not heresie nor yet every heresie onely such as is so general and desperate as that it takes one wholly off from the maine doctrine of Christ his Prophets and Apostles the doctrinal foundation Eph. 2. ult of the Church It hath beene a very ancient controversie in the Church whether Heresie doth wholly cut off from the Church or not upon which counsels have contradicted and contra-decreed The Africane Bishops in the Council of Carthage held that heresie As Mr. Hooker observeth out of Fortunat. secundin Hieron did put out of the Church which opinion was afterwards condemned in the Council of Nice even by the chiefest of the authors thereof themselves Mr. Hooker who enclined to the negative seems to plead for the fathers so farre as they appear on the contrary side If the Ecclesias pol. p. 87. fathers saith he do any where as oftentimes they do make the true visible Church of Christ and heretical companies opposite they are to be construed as separating hereticks not altogether from the company of Beleevers but from the fellowship of sound Beleevers However I presume the controversie may be easily ended viz. by parting stakes and allowing some truth on both sides 't is true that Hereticks are of the Church and it may be true that Hereticks are not of the Church there is a latitude in heresie Thus the Ancient fathers held for their opinion was that that heresie which did not deny the Trinity did not wholly cut off from the church Paget some heresie which absolutely denieth some particular fundamental truth and taketh up some one or few stones thereof is consistent with Church-interest and other heresie which raseth up the very foundation of Religion denying most or the most chief if not all of the Articles of our Christian faith is inconsistent therewith Object But it should seem then that Heresie doth not un-Church for if denying of some particular fundamental truth do not then heresie properly doth not for that is properly heresie and that which raseth up the foundation of Religion seems more then heresie and may be Apostacy Answ A falling from the faith is indeed Scripture-Apostacy though I humbly conceive that that expression as it stands in that place of Scripture intends as well a falling from the companies of the faithful by schisme as a falling from the doctrine of faith by heresie and indeed both these viz. perfect heresie and perfect schisme make proper Apostacy as Reverend Hudson observeth for a man to remove out of the Church Catholick either entitive by disclaiming the doctrine and faith of Christ which is heresie or organical by refusing to joyne to any Christian society which is schisme is a great sin and Apostacy 2. But I conclude though a man deny not all the maine Articles The difference betwixt heresie and infidelity and apostacy the two latter are the denying or renouncing the whole faith of Christ but the former of any one single part of it Han. paraen p. 64. of Christianity without which he is not properly an Apostate in the sense of Divines yet by denying many or most of the chief fundamentals whereby he may fitly be said to teare up the foundation though he do not take up every stone thereof a man may cut himself off from the Church the pillar of truth 3. Besides doth not Apostacy imply the height of Schisme as well as Heresie can a person be properly said to be an Apostate if we speak as others do that yet remaineth in the communion of Ordinances why then may not a person that renounceth all the Articles of the Christian faith if he yet refuse not communion Ita ut hereticus quis possit esse non schismaticus Ames in Ordinances be rather said to be an Heretick then an Apostate But I dispute not for words be it granted me that such a renouncing of the Christian faith without any personal separation from the Church is sufficient to cut a man off there-from it will not trouble me to
have term'd either Heresie or Apostasie 2. Schisme may be thought also to put a man wholly out of the Church as it breaketh the other great bond of union viz. Schisme love though I must check here for schisme simply considered and of it self alone doth not wholly destroy our relation to the Church Dr. Hammond observeth that whatsoever may be thought to unchurch is reducible to these foure 1. Apostasie 2. Hâ—resie 3. Schisme 4. Consumption and devastation yet afterwards Paren p. 84. addes for the third of that schisme the fathers which aggravated the sinne of it to the highest do not yet allow it the force of unchurching but call them brethren i. e. fellow Christians which were most obstinately guilty of it I suppose he means such as were single as well as violent schismatâ—cks and chiefly the Donatists and not that this should contradict what before he had said that Schisme may be thought to be one meanes of unchurching among the rest that is as it may be qualified Therefore Schisme as sufficient to un-church or dismember must be 1. Total viz. a breaking off from all communion with the Speratio fiat certis quibusdam actionibus quamvis schismatica non tamen statim separat ab ecclesia Am Cas de schis p. 307. Church for to divide with the Church in some things or parts of worship and to retaine the rest hath been alwayes reckoned a separation onely in the Church and not from it much lesse so farre as to lose all interest in it if this separation be just it is not Schisme If unjust 't is but partial Schisme and the subject is a member but in part cut off and yet hanging to the body 2. It must be universal that is a breaking off from and refusing communion with all the purticular Churches of Christ in the world for one may schismaticaly that is causelesly depart Si separatio sit ab una ecclesia aut pluribus particularibus possunt tamen aliaâ—um ecclesiarum membra manere ubi supra Schisma proprie dictum est peccatum gravessimum ubi supra from one particular Church of Christ and joyne himself to another which though it be a very great sinne and schisme both in the party and the Church that knowingly receiveth him yet not so great as to render that party no member or that Church no Church 3 It must be also heretical such as is caused by or accompanied with the renouncing of some fundamental doctrine for as Willet observeth if Schysmaticks retaine that is in a body purity of doctrine and the right use of Ordinances as some schismatical Congregations in Augustines time did and now do they make up a true visible Church a flock of sheep is truely such though consisting of particulars strayed from their several folds Schismaticus potest esse qui non est haereticus ut siquis credens omnes Articulos fidei nolit tamen cum ecclesia vera communicare in actionibus piis Ubi supra to which they ought notwithstanding to return as to their proper and lawful places Yet I conceive it possible that a person may by a total and universal schisme though not Heretical that is if he neither joine himself to an ancient or to the Schismatical Churches cease to be a member of the Catholick organical Church hereby Though positive schisme be usually a great aggravation of negative schisme yet it is rather a diminution of it when the negative schisme is as before universal and total the reason is Si separatio pertinaciter fiat vel ab omnibus ecclesiis veris vel ab ulla propter causam communem tum tales schismat quamvis fieri possit ut fidem retinentes sint membra ecclesiae Catholicae non possunt pro visibilibus ecclesiae membris haberi Ubi supra because it is better to be a member of a Schismatical Church where the worship of God is in any measure exercised then of no Church at all and consequently to joyne in no kinde of publick worship at all though doubtlesse it is best of all to remain with or to returne again unto the communion and worship of the true and ancient Congregations of the Lord So that we may adde as a fourth property of such schisme as destroyeth Church-membership it must be negative as well as total universal and heretical Object It may be thought that this enumeration of the means wherby a person or a people unchurch themselves is too short seeing idolatry and apostasie do as well unchurch as Schisme or Heresie Answ I answer concerning Idolatry 1. Idolatry cannot be Idolatry Papismus est pernitiosa haeresis quia pracipuam partem pietatis evertet variis modis in falso cultâ— idolatria de consc p. 171. considered distinctly from Schisme and Heresie indeed it is made up onely of them 1. A denying the true God or a denying the true worship of the true God and a giving of Deity or the worship of the Deity to a creature in our minde or opinion which is mental Idolatry is nothing else but high heresie therefore Ames giveth this reason to prove Papacy to be heresie because it overturneth the principal part of piety in false worship and Idolatry Again secondly the other great part of Idolatry is Schisme both negative in withdrawing from the worship of the true God or a with-drawing worship from the true God and positive by setting up a false worship to the true God or giving the worship of the true God practically or actu exercito to a false God Idolatria est tribuere ei rei divinitatem ac honorem Dei quae non est Deus ac adimire cultum Dei creaturae tribuit Zegid de Idol p. 382 and therefore practical idolatry is properly and directly opposed to the true worship as mental idolatry is to true faith 2. Idolatry as such on all kinde of idolatry is not inconsistent with the true Church or true Church-membership and indeed it is so then onely when its heresie or schisme so renders it or when it is rather a fruit of apostasie or a total defection from God and all true Religion The people of the Jews were frequently guilty of this great sin of idolatry yet who will venture to affirme that they so often ceased to be a true Church or a people unto God and for The Jews idolatrous yet a Church what reason did not their idolatry wholly cut them off from God but because they did not totally immerse themselves therein they still retained the Statutes and the Law of the true God and so their heresie was not total as also in a measure his worship and service and so their schism was not total and consequently their departure from God was but partial and not to be branded in proper Ecclesiast polit p. 85 speaking with the foule charge or title of Apostasie wherefore as Mr. Hooker thinks not onely amongst them God alwayes
had his Church because he had thousands which never bowed their knees to Baal but whose knees were bowed unto Baal even they were also of the visible Church Apostasie a genus or an integrum of heresie and schisme And if it be yet urged that apostacy should be reckoned among the meanes of unchurching I reply that Apostacy may be thought to be a genus of heresie and schism or a compositum made up of both and the perfection of heresie and schisme as it is in the first respect totum universale or in the latter respect totum essentiale vel integrale whose species or whose parts are heresie and schism 1. Now if we consider apostasie as a genus of heresie and schism Apostasie as a genus c. is such in grammar and Scripture then we may conceive heresie or a falling from the faith to be one kinde of Apostasie and Schisme or a forsaking the Assemblies to be another kinde of Apostasie by the one men fall from the truth and by the other from the Church and by either or both from God Apostasie thus understood as I humbly conceive both according to grammar or the Etymology of the word which is in general onely a falling from which may equally respect the truth and the Church and also according to Scripture or the use thereof in the Scripture is such in the first and properest sense of the word Now if we take Apostasie in this signification it cannot be reasonably added as a third meanes of unchurching unto Heresie As a compound the usual sense and schisme seeing that a genus is universale and not individuum and existing onely in its species and not as distinct thereunto or in it self 2. If we take Apostasie in the sense of the Church wherein it is usually taken for a compound of perfect or total Heresie and Schisme or a perfect and absolute renouncing the faith and forsaking the communion of the faithful then I answer that it seemeth needlesse to adde this as a third means of unchurching in this sense either seeing it hath no other nature or force thereunto but what it received from its parts to wit heresie and schisme which have been before insisted upon so that all the difference is that heresie and schisme considered in themselves do unchurch apart and considered in Apostasie they do unchurch together or they are considered to do that together in Apostasie which they were considered to do before apart in themselves and this need not be added as a third meanes which hath no energy to do this effect but that which it receiveth from the other two yea even as it consisteth wholly thereof I conclude this discourse with a synopsis of what hath been said herein given us in those pertinent words of Learned Willet Synop. of the second contr of the Church he first tells us who may not be of the visible Church viz. Infidels i. e. such as are not baptized 2. Hereticks 3. Schismaticks to which he addes excommunicate persons he secondly teacheth who are or may be of the visible Church viz. 1. Such as are not predestinate 2. Manifest sinners de facto 3. Close Infidels i. e. hypocrites CHAP. XXXV Our Churches in England are true Churches inferr'd from the former discourse I Had once resolved to have written no more but finis to the former discourse and to have entrusted it as it is to the impartial improvement of my Readers Genius for who seeth not what great things a very little use of reason may inferre therefrom both touching our Churches Sacraments and Censure However though peaceable prudence be ready to advize as things and persons now are to be very sparing in taking the advantages offered us thence yet love to the truth and the zeale of the house of the Lord hath prevailed with to add something upon each of these heads as most direct and easie conclusions from the former premises and first concerning our Churches thus If we seriously consider what hath been said what can possibly hinder us from concluding therefrom that our publick Congregations in England are true Churches Were not all our members borne in the Church baptized in the Church and have they not hitherto remained in communion of the Church hath Apostasie Heresie Schisme hath a removal of the Candlestick or excommunication it self if it have such a power unchurched them Are not all our Congregations called out of the world of Infidels Turks Jews yea and Papists too and do not they stand as holy communities separate therefrom to the true worship and ordinarily exercised in the Ordinances of God Doth the Scripture require any more to the essence of the Church then ours have or doth it note any thing sufficient to unchurch that ours are not free from are not all the causes distinguishing marks of the true visible Church eminently in ours or doth not the whole definition thereof agree to them do not all the Churches salute and own us as true Churches and would not many dangerous absurdities both in judgement and practice immediately follow the denial thereof Are our Churches corrupt in their conversation true but the essence of the Church consisteth not in saving grace nor its visibility in an holy life besides what Scripture-Church is there except one viz. that at Philippi but is even by the Scripture it self both blamed for corruption and also acknowledged to be a Church or people of God But I intend not to enlarge here having elsewhere largely anticipated this discourse onely having often observed one great objection taken from the first constitution of our Churches to be the last and onely hold of the ancient Brownists as also of the subtiler sort of our later Anabaptists to whom we might adde the Papist I shall spend the remains of this chapter in the view and answer thereof 't is this Obj. Our Churches were not rightly constituted at first therefore they are no true Churches Answer This Objection as it lieth thus in general may be easily evaded upon all our adversaries own principles 1. To the Papists we reply that our Church was at first rightly constituted upon Popish principles for do they not say that we were at first converted unto Christianity by the preaching of Augustine the Monk and that he was commissionated thereunto by the Pope himself 2. To the Brownist we say that we were at first converted by the Ordinance of preaching whether of Joseph or not to which we may adde in answer to the Anabaptist that our ancestors were then baptized upon their personal professing the faith at years of discretion which thing cannot be rationally doubted seeing all are agreed that Heathens are not to be baptized but upon such profession of the faith and againe that our Ancestours were Heathens before their conversion to Christianity Object I know that all these adversaries are ready to reply that something hath since intervened that hath destroyed our Churches Answ Yet then the objection taken
determine or remove 2. Yea he seems indeed to speak ouly in the case of Bastardy which case is clearly distinguished by Casnists from cases of other notorious scandals who yet do generally grant that in such a case the illegitimate childe should be baptized upon certain conditions and consequently question not their right but only ptopose a prudential creditable and fit way means and manner for the application of Baptisme to them in such unclean cases 3. Yea once more we may truly observe that this worthy man Mr. Hildersham in the place infisted on did mixtly at least intend the debarring such wicked Parents from the Supper of the Lord which course if well proceeded in would I think wholly remove all the foresaid inconveniences For were the Parents justly censured for their personal wickednesse by being debarred from the Supper of the Lord what contempt of Worship prophaning of Ordinances or offence to any could possibly arise from a just dispensing to such their children their right in in Baptisme who ought not to suffer so great a losse for their Parents fault Again if I should adde that the children of persons excommunicate Children of excommunicate persons ought to be baptized 't is well known that many learned men would bear me out Certainly if the Parents in this state of censure are united to the Church and have the seal of Baptism in its force upon them I see not but their children have yet a right unto Baptism not to be violared For what is it that entitles the childe to the seal but its being borne in Covenant and what is the meanes of this but the Parents foederal holinesse and Baptismal state But praeteritis hic etiam illis quae alibi sunt disputata I shall say only this that either the excommunicate Parent is in Covenant or not If he be in Covenant then his childe hath right to Baptisme if he be not then upon his repentance he ought to be re-baptized for if the Covenant-interest of an excommunicate person be wholly voided then is the seal of the Covenant broken and must upon renewing of Covenant by repentance be anew affix'd by a rebaptization without any colourable contradiction that I yet can hear of Lastly it will easily follow that then the children of such as The children of such as ought not to be admitted to the Supper ought not to communicate in the Supper may have right to baptisme because wicked persons and persons de jure excommunicated and persons actually excommunicate ought not to be admitted to the Supper and yet the children of all such being the children of parents in Covenant ought not be de denied the seal of the Covenant viz. Baptisme CHAP. XXXVII Concerning private accession or coming to the Sacrament SECT I. The Introduction MY principle now leads me into a large field made by some a common by others I think a too to narrow and strict inclosure viz. Communion in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper I am conscious that seeing so many and various ways herein I may easily misse the right however I shall go as near as I can in the middle path that may be the rightest seeing as vice lieth in the extreams of vertue so errour in the extreams of truth and as we use to say of persons fallen out there is usually a fault on both sides it may be also the nearest way to my wished end of peace and unity for so is the middle by rules of Geometry and I doubt not of the the safety of it remembring that of the Poet in Medio tutissimus That which my principle helps me to infer here is 1. Concerning the terms of accession or ones own private coming to receive the Sacrament 2. Concerning the termes of admission or the Churches publick receiving persons to this communion for as Reverend Vrsin saith these are two questions Who ought to come to the Sacrament and who ought to be admitted though I cannot discern so great a difference betwixt them as some do First touching the private accession or liberty to come to receive or to offer ones selfe to this communion I reason thus If union with the Church dependeth upon saving grace then a right to communion in general with it and consequently to the Supper doth not for communion is founded in union as it is in natural and politick bodies Whence may flow these two Positions irresistibly 1. That such as are of the foundation of the Church or church-Church-members have a fundamental right and title to all the priviledges that belong to the Church as such 2. That all church-Church-members may lawfully proceed by vertue of this fundamental right to actual communion with the Church in the Sacrament of the Supper unlesse some special prohibition in the word doth limit it Hence arise two great and famous points of Controversie 1. Whether there be any such command in Scripture forbidding some Church-members to come to this Sacrament 2. If there be whether this condition without which Church-members are forbidden to come to the Sacrament it be saving grace or not SECT II. Whether there be any prohibition of persons within the Church from the Sacrament UPon the first of these I affirme that there is such a command in Scripture forbidding some Church-members to receive the Sacrament 2. I affirme that this command is to be drawn from 1 Corinth 11. 28. Let a man examine himselfe 1. That there is such a command forbidding or charging There is a prohibition of som persons something upon Church-members as conditional to their coming to the Sacrament and consequently rendring the right which persons have to the Sacrament by vertue of bare or single Church-membership but a mediate right and the command obliging Church-members as onely such but a mediate or a conditional command I affirm upon these reasons Reas 1. For if the command obliging all the circumcised to eat the passeover was not absolute but upon a supposition or condition of their cleannesse what reason can be given why this command obliging the baptized to communion in the Supper should be so absolute as to admit of no condition at all Is not the Supper the Christian Passeover as Baptisme is the Christian Circumcision at least is not the Supper as holy as the Passeover is not the Gospel-dispensation as strict as the legal is not the Supper at as great a distance from Baptisme as the passeover from circumcision however if these will not be yeelded unto I am sure that this will force its way that no reason can possibly be given why the command for the Supper should be more absolute then that of the Passeover 1. 'T is nothing here whether the legally unclean onely were forbidden the Passeover For 1. The legally uncleane were circumcised 2. The legally unclean were prohibited the Passeover 3. Therefore some circumcised persons were prohibited the Passeover 2. Neither is it our question whether those that were forbidden the Passeover were equally forbidden all other
Ordinances for if so then 1. The Passeover was forbidden also 2. Then other Ordinances were it seems but conditionally obliged unto in the time of the Law upon Church-members and what should hinder the Supper to be so now 2. Offering the gift at the Altar is commanded by Christ conditionally or mediately first go and be reconciled then come and Mat. 5. 23 24 offer and till then lay down thy gift why then should the command to receive the great gift at the Christian Gospel-Altar be more absolute is there any ordinancy greater circumstance greater solemnity is there any part of the Gospel-worship more guarded with threatnings more exacting preparation and seriousnesse towards God and charity to our Brethren in the comers thereunto then this of the Supper 3. If all Church-members are bound to heare the Church then some Church-members are bound to abstaine from the Sacrament for some Church-members are forbidden by the Church and in obedience to God to abstaine from the Sacrament 1. The catechumeni are Church-members before their baptisme otherwise they should never be baptized because none but Church-members are to be baptized none but foederati ought to be signati as before 2. The chatecumeni were forbidden the Sacrament in the missa chatecumenorum who had at most but a remote or mediate right thereunto until they were baptized 2. Children borne and baptized Church-members are truely Church-members yet such children are prohibited by the counsels of the Church to receive this Sacrament until they are arrived to years of discretion which all our adversaries even the highest for the priviledge of membership readily consent unto 3. Excommunicate persons as before I have laboured to prove are yet Church-members yet excommunicate persons are charged by the Church not to receive this Sacrament I know that such as I now oppose do usually acknowledge that such Church-members ought not to receive but then let them bethink themselves how is the command obliging all Church-members to receive the Sacrament an absolute command How then doth single Church-membership give immediate absolute and actual interest in every Ordinance 4. To persons of more moderate principles I might instance in members legally convict of scandal or grossely ignorant and therefore suspended are not these Church-members againe are not these commanded by the Church to absteine from this Sacrament then ought they not to abstaine then doth the command of God oblige them to come while the Church forbids them then is not their suspension a bar to their actual right in the Sacrament and lastly then is not the command to receive conditional upon Church-members upon a supposition of Age Knowledge freedome from sandal suspension excommunication Lastly let us heare the Church doth not both the practice and expresse judgement of the most eminent fathers of the Church in most ages thereof testifie as much namely that actual communion in the Supper is not for all church-Church-members and consequently the command obliging them is but conditional upon a supposition of their fitnesse 1. That practice of the Church concludes it wherein she The practice of the Church Let no unclean person no adulterer no usurer c. offer himself to the receiving of this Sacrament if any be such a one I require him by the body and blood of Jesus Christ and by the Judge of the quick and dead that he come not to the Lords Table that he betray not the son of God Bp. Jewel of the Sacram p. 279 Chrys in Heb. 10. 9. in Ethic. hath generally dehorted and doctrinally suspended such from the Supper whose own private hearts and consciences knew their own unfitness or unworthinesse of it Such a practice as this could possibly proceed from no other principle but this that Christ did not require this part of his worship from such unworthy hands and that in such a condition persons ought not to receive the Sacrament for if Christ did absolutely loose such persons to this duty of receiving and that to the Churches knowledge how could the Church without sinne against knowledge binde them from it what is this but to contradict Christ in his Word and to rob him of his honour worship and Sovereignty if our common Master do indeed absolutely command us all to come who dare forbid any upon the most glorious pretence in the world Now that this hath been the usual course of the Church if not juridically to with-hold from the Sacrament such as were scandalous which anone also may be examined yet doctrinally thus to diswade and terrifie secret sinners from approaching the Sacrament easily appears Chrysostome witnesseth for the Greek Church long agone The Priest saith he admonisheth all that are coming to the holy Sacrament driving away the unworthy but inviting the prepared and that with a loud voice and hands lifted up standing aloft where he may be seen and heard of all This hath been the constant practice of our own Church according to both the Rubrick in the common prayer and the late Directory The Common prayer enjoyneth the Minister to disswade all such Comon prayer as are blasphemers of God envious or guilty of any notorious crime in their heart to abstaine from this Ordinance where we may note 1. That in the judgement of our Church then some Church-members that were not juridically censured even such as were known to be unworthy by themselves alone in their heart ought to abstaine from the Sacrament 2. Therefore in the judgement of our Church then the command on the people to receive is binding onely conditionally viz. upon a supposition of fitnesse And doth the Directory require otherwise vid. page 34. there we read that the Minister is in the Name of Christ to warn Directory all such as are ignorant scandalous profane or that live in any sin or offence against their knowledge or conscience that they presume not to come to that holy Table where also we may note that the persons to be thus disswaded are not onely the openly scandalous but such wicked persons as are known to be such by their own knowledge and conscience alone 2. These are to be warned away in the Name of Christ which who dare presume to do that doth not beleeve that the will of Christ is that such persons ought not to receive 3. Therefore our Directors judged that the Will or command of Christ our Master is not that such Church-members as are thus unworthy ought to receive but rather the contrary Yea this is generally granted to us even by those that deny the thing as wel as those that deny us the power of juridical suspension Yea this is granted and forceably urged by some that as earnestly plead that the command do this in remembrance of me is inconditional and absolute which I crave leave to say is a contradiction for if the Command do this c. be absolute either upon the Administrator or upon the people how then is the Aministrator to warne any of
yet ought to be denied the use of that thing wherein he hath right a man that is not compos mentis is not sui juris reason saith he may not command himself much lesse any thing else whereby he would hurt himself or others we do not put a knife into a madmans hand though it be his own who will not say that a man in a feavour hath not right to his own beer yet reason forbids him the use of it or to his blood in his veines yet reason commands that to save his life some of it be violently taken from him and against hâ—â— Will. 2. 'T is establish'd also by the Law of Nations in civil rights 2. Of Nations where we know possession and actual personal manegery of estates is denied when the title is not questioned and this especially in two cases of insufficiency and delinquency 1. When persons are by apparent insufficiency either through In case of insufficiency minority of years or wit to manage that to which they have a right as children and fools and madmen we know the Law provideth that others shall possesse what these have a legal right unto 2. When persons by delinquency have abused their estates against the government that is over them then also the Law seazeth upon such estates and taketh the possession out of the owners hands and sometimes when it doth not change the property or remove the delinquent out of his right Therefore as there is a case of treason wherein the Law prosecutes the Traiter both out of possession and title for ever by confiscation or proscription so there is a case of sequestration which turnes men out of their present possessions but not wholly out of their title which possession is upon condition of such satisfaction as the Law in the case demands to be re-entred and however though the person offending should not performe this said condition yet the penalty may not extend to the utter dis-inheriting the offenders posterity I shall leave the application of these several particulars to the case of communion in priviledges of the Church as most obvious to my Readers Meditations This is also apparently agreeable with the law and judgment 3. Of the Church of the Church in every generation as appears by her constant and universal proceeding accordingly for she hath ever suspended some persons from the Sacrament of the Supper whom yet she did not judge to be without all title and right thereunto as might be unquestionably instanced not only in children c. in most ages but in the penitents in all The penitents were suspended from the Supper until the Church was fully satisfied But the penitents had a right in the communion of the Church as the hottest sticklers against suspension grant us Some say indeed that there were none juridically suspended from the Supper alone that were not first excommunicate and cast out of Communion with the Church in all Ordinances but these also say that the last degree of their pennance admits them unto fellowship with the Church in all Ordinances but the Supper neither will they deny this Proposition That a person that hath lawful actual fellowship with the Church in any one Ordinance hath some kinde of right to all the rest which right these men themselves cannot urge to be next and immediate seeing they allow the Church in denying such penitents actual admission to the Supper until further satisfaction But I shall have a fairer opportunity to speak of this kind of suspension upon the head of censure And indeed I need the lesse to trouble it here seeing there is one kind of suspension viz. not Juridical which is so far allowed by all parties as will fully serve my present turne namely that whereby persons naturally and rationalsy uncapable of emproving the Supper as some men speak are withheld from it which those who are likeliest to my opponents here do not only grant but make the ground of the present distinction of Jus ad rem and Jus in re as it stands applied to the case of the Sacrament as is most evident in their writings upon this subject This distinction is grounded lastly upon the Law of 4. Of Scripture God 1. In the old Levitical Law where we find that the Leper Lev. 13. 46. whom the Priest had pronounced unclean was to dwell alone without the Camp and out of his own house until he was re-cleansed yet none can doubt but this Leper had title to his own house still and therefore upon his cleansing he was without the procuring a new title to take possession of his house again yea thus it was then also in the case of Church-priviledges if we reade Numb 9. 6 7. We finde that certain men were defiled c. that they could not keep the Passeover on that day these men say to Moses and Aaron wherefore are we kept back to whom the Lord answers v. 10 11. that if any that were unclean or in a journey afar off yet these should keep the Passeover not now but on the fourteenth day of the second moneth Whence Mr. Blake solidly concludeth that their right is thus confessed by the Lord himself and their present barre also acknowledged not only a physical barre upon those that were in their journey and could not come but a legal barre on others that were unclean and must not be admitted 2. This hath been already made to appear to be allowed by the New Law of Christ in the Gospel Christ saith to his Church in general Do this in remembrance of me herein is the right the Jus ad rem founded for all Church-members yet the Apostle addes this Comment Let a man examine himself and so let him eat and herein as anon more largely is the denial of actual possession to some church-Church-members founded Such persons as do not examine themselves ought not to communicate in the Supper Some persons that do not examine themselves as children c. are members of the Church and in some kinde of communion with the Church and consequently have some kinde of riâ—ht to all kind of communion therewith Therefore some persons may have some kinde of right to the Supper that have not Jus in re that may not be admitted to present communion therein These things stand upon general principles and cannot well be questioned by any particular persons that understand themselves Digression 3. The Grounds of a baptized persons right to the Supper But let us draw a little nearer to our businesse and apply the former general distinction a little more closely to our present particular point of right to the Supper which will appear according to the grounds already laid to be twofold by presenting the grounds or reasons of these two notable positions Prop. 1. First that every person lawfully baptized hath a right to the Lords Supper Prop. 2. Secondly that such persons as are lawfully baptized have not by vertue thereof an immediate or present
sinne it self persisted in My reason for this is 1. Because most if not all Divines deny discipline to have to do with sinnes of infirmimity Quale sit pecca tum quod postulat usum hujus disciplinae R. Non infirmitates illae quae sunt omnium ferè Christianorum communes Istarum enim singularis curatio emendatio neque expectari potest neque ab iis exegi qui iisdem aut similibus subjiciuntur Am. de consc p. 251 252. and yet I think none of them will deny but that we are bound to watch over one another and thereby to labour to help onward the great work of mortification even of the least sinne by kindly admonition and provocation 2. Because if every sin of infirmity should be the object of admonition as a part of Church-discipline we should do almost nothing but persecute each other with renewed daily endlesse and remedilesse troubles for all are guilty of such sinnes and we must judge of obstinacy in sinne especially by continuance in it and such sinnes are defined to be quotidianae incursionis and there is no possibility of being throughly purged from them in this world and therefore if such sinnes be the object of censure we must unavoidably be continually following one another in the steps of admonition to excommunication as obstinate sinners Yet no doubt there is such a censure as admonition peculiar Admonition respective to the Church and a part of its discipline and indeed the first part of it and which we now intend which is though not so large as the former yet objectively as large as discipline and no Medul p. 203 larger adhiberi debet in omni peccato cui disciplinae medela convenit as Ames This admonition I terme respective unto excommunication not because it is in order to it or if as Ames denieth well the proper end of admonition were ut aditas inde fiat ad excommunicationem but rather ut excommunicandi necessitas si fieri pâ—ssit antevertatur or otherwise indeed as our Saviour Mat. 18. directeth that processe may be made to excommunication This being a proper part of discipline is to level at greater sins then sinnes of infirmity namely such as have a mark upon them This censuâ—e aimeth at greater sins in Scripture sinnes wasting the conscience defiling the life having a manifest aptnesse in them to scandalize Religion or to induce the brethren to sinne or sorrow and therefore such as is proper to deal with wicked and scandalous brethren withal of whom we are now debating But to conclude wicked Church-members are not to be proceeded Without admonition no proceeding against the scandalous against without this first part of Church-censure or denied any part of Church communion for his scandal or wickednesse for this would be to execute before sentence yea or conviction or hearing I doubt not to assert that no church-Church-member is to be put out of any part of Church communion for scandal without some degree of that censure called excommunication as may appear by and by and again that no part or degree of excommunication may proceed against any church-Church-member without previous admonition Correctio scandali ab admonitione semper incipere debet Am. cons p. 252. Indicatio culpa primum est medium emendationis râ—sipiscentiae genuina causa ibid. He may be a brother and yet scandalous if he be an offensive scandalous brother he must be admonished first that if possible he may be sâ—ved from greater shame and be still retained in Church-communion this is the patience forbearance tendernesse and care required by the Gospel towards scandalous brethren for the repentance and recovery of our brother is the proper end of all discipline and shewing of the fault is the first meanes and the genuine cause of repentance and recovery from it I grant that this admonition ought to answer the publick or private nature of the scandal by being also private or publick yet still admonition is necessary private admonition and its processes being grounded and regulated Mat. 18. 15 16. and publick admonition 1 Tim. 5. 20. Yea is there any case when admonition is not seasonable and not in prudence to be performed I shall assume that in the same case excommunication is to be forborne if the party have not admonish'd before for still the conclusion is that no person is to be proceeded against for scandal but this is to begin with admonition The other part of ecclesiastical discipline is called excommunication Excommunication whereby upon a brothers obstinate persisting in his wickednesse after due admonition the wicked person is put away from among us and cast out of communion with the Church Now for ought I can finde in this case of scandal there is no other remedy left us in Scripture after the performance of due admonition but this of excommunication that which some term suspension and many think most properly viz. the holding the suspected or accused person in suspense until he is tried cannot be reasonably termed a censure or penalty no more then the securing of a suspected felon to the day of hearing who may be innocent Besides others are ready to say that such persons under such suspension ought not to be debarred of any priviledge till sentenced guilty by excommunication The Scripture is plaine 1 Cor. 5. and in diverse other places that the way of proceeding against scandalous and wicked persons in the Church is to put them away from among us by an ecclesiastical judgement v. 12 13. and we read in Scripture of no other and this we call excommunication Obj. But thus you deny suspension of scandalous persons from the Sacrament Answ Yea as distinct from excommunication but not as a part or degree of it and so indeed this kinde of suspension or abstension hath been alwayes called viz. pars vel gradus excommunicationis and excommunicatio minor 't is agreeable saith Ames Medul p. â—03 when the thing will suffer delay both to Scripture and reason ut primo inchoetur that at first excommunication may be begun by suspension or abstention from the Supper and such like Church priviledges which is wont to be called excommunicatio minor the lesser excommunication though note he adds in isto tamen grada non est sub sistendum c. Suspension was termed a part a beginning a degree of excommunication and the lesser excommunication without doubt because otherwise it hath no footing in Scripture or Antiquity 'T is known to be a famous question not yet clearly determined whether in the ancient Churches any persons were ever kept from the Supper alone for scandal and admitted to all or any other Ordinances save onely the penitents who were first excommunicated I confesse methinks I have reason to incline to the negative Yet give me leave to adde that I see not but that the same reason upon which the ancients received the excommunicate in again by degrees will equally
A DISCOURSE OF THE Visible Church In a large Debate of this famous Question viz. Whether the visible Church may be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace Affirm Whereunto is added a brief discussion of these three Questions viz. 1. What doth constitute visible Church-membership 2. What doth distinguish it or render it visible 3. What doth destroy it or render it Null Together with a large application of the whole by way of Inference to our Churches Sacraments and Censures Also an Appendix touching Confirmation occasioned by the Reverend Mr. Hanmore his pious and learned Exercitation of Confirmation By FRANCIS FULWOOD Minister of the Gospel at West-Alvington in DEVON I said I will also answer my part I also will shew mine opinion Job 32. 17. For many be called but few chosen Mat. 20. 16. and 22. 14. Rejicimus Catharos Navatianos Pelagianos Anabaptistas qui peccatoribus nullum ne in visibli quidem ecclesia locum relinquunt Alst comp Theol. part 5. loc 8. Christians truely regenerate are the members of the invisible Church It is the duty of the members of the visible Church to be truely regenerate Such are members of the visible that are destitute of saving grace Mr. Cotton of N. E. holinesse of Church members pag. 1. LONDON Printed by Tho. Ratcliffe for Abel Roper at the Sun in Fleetstreet over against St. Dunstans Church 1658. To the HIGHLY RENOWNED EDWARD CRESSET Esquire Master of that most famous Hospital called the CHARTER-HOVSE and one of the Honourable Trustees for maintenance of MINISTERS FRANCIS FULWOOD Formerly a Plant in that Excellent NURSERY Being earnestly pressed thereunto by many Obligations of duty and gratitude Doth with all Humility and due respectfulnesse DEVOTE and DEDICATE this Polemical DISCOURSE of the CHURCH c. TO THE READER OUR Reverend brother Mr. Francis Fulwood having taken great pains upon this question viz. whether the visible Church may be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace which we conceive to be a subject both weighty and seasonable We the Ministers of that part of the second division of the County of Devon who are appointed to meet at Kings-bridge do earnestly desire him to make these his worthy labours publick we being fully perswaded that they will prove very useful and acceptable to the Churches of God in this Nation now so much troubled with this great Controversie Kingsbridge in Devon Jan. 5. 1657. Signed by Robert Cary Moderator John Buckley Scribe In the Name and by the Appointment of the Rest TO THE REVEREND MY FATHERS and BRETHREN The Associated Ministers in the County of DEVON Reverend and Worthy Sirs YOu well know that the Reformed Churches have ever since they deserved that name been militant on both hands with the Papist on the one and with the Brownist Anabaptist c. on the other Against whom their first and maine scope was indeed to defend themselves to be the Churches of Christ yet in pursuit of Argument 't is very evident they were still driven to contend for the very being and nature of the Church Rejicimus catharos novatianos Pelagianos Anabaptistas qui peccatoribus nullum ne invisibili quidem ecclesia locum Relinqunt Alst Comp. Theae par 5. loc 1â— in general chiefly as invisible against the Papist and as visible against the Brownist c. The Brownist I humbly conceive assaulted the Reformed Churches with these two Positions 1. That a Church wherein there is a mixture of wicked persons at least tolerated cannot be a true Church 2. That none but the Elect or the truely godly are members of the visible Church 'T is confest this leaven was laid in the Church long agon Andiani pâ—opter hominum vitia coetum Orthodoxae ecclesiae deseruit quod donatistarum erroris postoa suit seminarium Dan. in Aug. de Her p. 976 even in the time of Cyprian as Augustine observeth and afterward kneaded in the lump by Donatus and its sournesse diffused very farre by the heat of his followers yet it was timely and effectually purged out by the learned and elaborate industry and wonderful success of Augustine But this ulcer broke sadly out again upon the Reformation and notwithstanding as to hic and nunc to time and place The Church hath been hitherto competently healed of it through the zealous instant and effectual endeavours of many of her champions yet grievous experience hath still found that at other times or in other places the botch hath risen and broke afresh with a more noisome stench and a more spreading and infecting nature then ever it had done before how evident and notorious is this in our calamitous Churches in England at this day how doth this disease range and its corruption spread over us having gotten its throne in the very heart of the people Wherefore I having also been formerly called forth both to a vocal and Scriptural defence of our Churches against A Sermon and dispute had at Wiviliscome in Somerset and Printed 1654 the first of these errours and there being some special occasion arising from some late scruples among my neighbouring brethren inviting me to deal with this latter of them this also being looked upon not by my self alone but by divers godly and Learned Divines to be the very core and root of most of our Controversies both about our Churches Sacraments and Censures I desire that this may be accepted to you my Reverend Brethren as all the publick Apology I thought fit to set before this my great and bold yet humble undertaking However I shall crave your patience a little longer while I shall labour to prevent mistake and unjust prejudices against the Treatise by setting down my minde as clearly as I can in a few following particulars 1. And first I am fully perswaded that such as have for their scandal of the brethren been justly excommunicated by the Church ought not to be received into communion again without the evidence of such repentance as is in the judgement of rational charity saving for the end of the censure is that the flesh of the offender may be destroyed and the spirit saved and in reason the means should remain applied till the cure be in likelihood done 2. Againe I fully consent with that Reverend man Master James Wood that such as have notorious marks of impenitency or unregeneracy upon them ought not while such notwithstanding the profession to be admitted or received into the communion of the Church at first though I dare not determine what is the true and next reason of their repulsion Mr. Wood saith the reason is not because they appear unregenerate but because a scandalous life is contrary to the very outward profession of the faith But may I have leave to demand how contrary certainly not so contrary to it but that it is consistent with it otherwise a scandalous Professour of the faith would be a contradiction and
the very ground of the question is gone Indeed here is practice contrary to profession but not profession contrary to profession and practice contrary to profession may consist with profession for they professe to know God though in works they deny him If it be replied that a scandalous life is contrary to the faith professed and so the profession appears counterfeit I crave leave to ask once more whether faith here be taken objectivè or subjectivè if objectivè for the doctrine professed or the Will of God revealed to be beleeved then it may still be affirmed that the profession of the Scripture or an outward owning of the Will and Word of God is not inconsistent with a conversation contrary thereunto then why may not such whose practice is contrary either to their profession or to the Scripture which they yet professe be received by the Church if no other reason but this be assignable If it be said that a scandalous life is contrary to the faith in sensu formali vel subjectivo and that a wicked conversation declareth that the Professor doth not believe as he professeth and is to be rejected therefore as a counterfeit Once more I demand whether this faith professed be considered as saving or as common if as saving then Mr. Wood his cause is yeelded who is now opposing Reverend Master Baxter with this assertion that wicked men are not to be rejected formally because their wickednesse is a signe of unregeneracy but materially because it is contrary to the profession of the faith if as common or as other historical or dogmatical then though I grant that all those whose wickednesse is such as cannot consist with a real common or historical faith ought not to be admitted yet I deny the hypothesis that all wickednesse is such as is inconsistent with such a real common faith that common faith is in its kinde a true faith and that this true common faith is consistent with a wicked heart and life are two Propositions as little doubted by most Divines as much confirmed by sad experience and largely discoursed in the Treatise following Sunt in eo coetu viz. ecclesiae visibilis multi electi alii non Sancti sed tamen de verâ doctrinâ consentientes Phil. Melanct. part Sept. p. 33. Others may have leave to think that such scandalous persons ought not to be admitted into the Church because of the scandal that would come to Religion thereby and because that in this sense scandal is contrary to the profession of the faith the Church thus drawing a blot and disparagement upon her selfe as if she was ready to open her bosome to any vile unclean unreformed persons and truely I humbly conceive there is very much in this for if the Church ought to have a care that those already within cause not the wayes of God to be evil spoken of why ought she not to have the like care touching those she is about to let in or why should those be admitted into the community that now appear to be such as are presently to be cast out of communion but I presume this is not all For 3. From the premises it seemes at least probable to me that the Church is to have some kinde of respect unto the saving condition of the person she is about to admit into communion though I donbt not to assert with our brethren N. E. and Reverend Master Baxter that a sober and humble profession of faith and repentance with a desire of Baptisme is as much evidence of this saving condition as the Church is bound to expect without any farther positive proofs of conversion 4. Yet I humbly conceive that more then a bare outward profession is requisite to give real interest in the visible Church and the previledges thereof before God though no more is requisite to give visible interest before men and that there is sufficient ground for the trite distinction of right here Coram Deo ecclâ—sia for the Churches judgement of mens right must passe with her administrations upon visible or appearing signes by their outward profession but Gods upon real for the visible Church is really a Church with God as well as the invisible though the Church is bound to believe a profession that is made upon designe as the Jews at New Castle was yet God knows his wickednesse and count him a dogg eating the childrens bread out of the hand of Church deceived by his falsnesse but not erring because profession is her onely rule in the case If it be demanded what is more required besides profession to give real interest in the visible Church I Multi enim sunt non renaâ—i vel hypocritae consentientes tamen de doctrina ritibus extcrnis sen est coetus consentientium de doctrina habens multa membra mortua sen non regeneratos Maâ— 7. 21. Mat. 13. 24. par in Urs cat 343. have at large answered in the Treatise that in Adult persons about to be admitted a real actual and not fained consent but in persons borne in the Church and baptised in their Infancy and now at the adult estate a non-dissent a not dissenting from or a not rejecting of the truth and wayes of the Lord at least for all that are of the visible Church must be one of these ways either negatively or positively consentientes to true doctrine as Melancton before as wel as outward professors of it 4. Yet I must still hold my maine Proposition till I see more reason to let it go that unregenerate persons once received into the Church are notwithstanding their unregeneracy or their want of evidences of saving grace really or truely members of the visible Church till they cut themselves off by Heresie Schisme or the perfection of both Apostasie or at least are cast out by Church-censure what reasons what authorities from the Scriptures and the Church I shew for it and what absurdities I alledge against the contrary opinion must be left to your censure in the reading of the Treatise Onely that it may passe here a little the more freely I cannot but adde the remembrance of one or two late most eminent and full Testimonies Mr. Hooker of New England saith Survey of Church discipline p. 36. that externally those are within the Covenant and consequently the Church who expressing their repentance with their profession of the truth engage themselves to walk in the wayes of God and the truth of his worship though they have not for the present that sound work of faith in their hearts and may be never shall have it wrought by Gods Spirit in them Master Norton also a Minister of N. E. to this very question whether truth Against Apol. p. 3. of grace be required to visible Church-membership answereth one may be admitted into the church-Church-communion of the external or visible Church that is not endowed with the real inward holinesse of regeneration and justifying faith in Christ or that
or particular Church Yea might we thus understand Ames to intend genus and species in a grammatical sense and not a logical in this place I think any one might say after him that ecclesia particularis est species ecclesiae in genere that is the word or notion Church is generally predicable of all Churches this way also the Church may be said to be universal as well as respectu loci and temporis as ursine or personarum and partium as Trelcatius addes but not naturae the Church is a totum and universalis but not a totum universale 't is a totum integrale and universal in the respects specified but not universal quâ totum But any further scrutiny into this matter may be pardonably waved seeing our maine question considers not the Church either as universal or particular or as universal-visible or particular-visible but onely as it is the visible Church as at first was noted Now all so farre as they own the visible Church to be really a Church make no question of its integrality that ever I yet heard of and therefore those that deny the universal visible Church to be an integrum do equally deny it to be really a Church who do also acknowledge the particular visible which they allow to be a Church really to be also totum integrale 2. The Church is also in its nature Aggregative that is 't is The Church is Aggregative of the number of those things which are constitute and by aggregation or collection this is applicable to the Church I conceive as it is that species of integrum that hath its parts united per modum colligationis but this bond by which such parts are held together may not be thought to be real as sticks are bound together in a fagot but metaphorical or political as Companies or bodies or societies of men are bound together by some tie or bond so the Church hath her joynts and bands whereby it is held and knit together as the Apostle speaketh Ephes 4. 16. onely with this difference that civil societies are under civil and the Church is under spiritual bonds What these spiritual bonds of the Church are is largely enquired hereafter Aggregative bodies are so familiar that indeed we finde them in every classis of the creatures and accordingly they are either inanimate as piles of wood heaps of stone c. or animate and these are either irrational as a flock of sheep a shole of fish c. or rational and these againe are either civil as a family a corporation a Common-wealth c or ecclesiastical as the Church Aggregative bodies are either occasional as many times flights Aggregatives are inanimate and animate these irrational and rational these civil and ecclesiastical these occasional and fix'd Their essential state of birds are and that rout we read of Acts 19. was or fixt and settled as the Church of God is Aggregative bodies are distributed secundum statum essentialem vel integralem according to their essential state they are distributed into their matter and form as Trelcatius intimates * Tales quae non sunt eo nunquid absolute sed continent in se duo quonum alterum est simile maltitudini materiae dispersae altorum vero unitati ordine collectioni Instit therl p. 214. Professio visibilis Communio visibilis Am. Medul p. 165. s 28. Integral state they are such saith he aâ—â—ontaine in them two one of which is like to multitude and dispersed matter which is as it were the matter the other to unity order and collection which is the forme Now such are the essential parts of the Church the matter whereof is persons professing Religion or called and the forme the collection or Congregation order unity society or community of persons as at large hereafter By the way give me leave to hang two queries upon this observation 1. Whether an aggregative body and consequently the visible Church which is such have not its essential forme as well as every other thing that hath an essence 2. Whether an aggregative bodn made up of visible parts and consequently the visible Church which is such have not an essential form which is visible if the matter or parts be visible why is it not the union or aggregation of this visible matter or parts visible also if the persons and the profession of the persons be visible what hinders the society or fellowship of them to be visible also or what should render it invisible but of this also more largely anone According to their Integral state aggregative bodies are distributed into their parts qua integral and according to the nature of them which are sometimes similar sometimes dissimilar 1 Cor. 12. 28 29 30. Now the parts of the visible Church I conceive are both similar in that all are called dissimilar in that some are Elected and some not similar in that all are professours dissimilar in that some are also officers and some not But we are now I humbly conceive very neer unto the ground of the common distribution of the Church into visible and invisible which was proposed to be next considered SECT V. The ground and meaning of the distinction of the Church into visible and invisible This aggregative body the Church is usually distinguished into visible and invisible I shall briefly shew how I understand it and wherein I except against it and thus my notion of the Church visible will furthèr appear 1. I conceive it cannot be a distinction of the essential totality of the Church as if the visible were the matter and the invisible were the form of the Church then the invisible Church being also visible visible in profession as invisible in faith should be both forme and part of the matter of the same Church which is absurd Wherefore I dislike that distinction that hypocrites are materialy but not formally of the visible Church for indeed if hypocrites be not formally of the visible Church they are not of it at all if forma dat esse nor may be said to be so if forma dat nomen 2. Neither can it be distinctio generis in species as Ames observes as if there were one Church visible and another invisible specififically differing for properly there is but one Church as all consent and that one Church is therefore not a genus for then its species would make more then one 3. Neither again can it be distinctio integri in membra as Ames also teacheth as if one part of the Church visible and another part invisible seeing the whole is in its profession visible but this I humbly conceive is nearest to it 4. Therefore lastly I conceive it to be distinctio integri non Una numero duplicem mododicunt pro conditione membrorum ipsius in partes sed à parte and to result not from the totality of the integrum as such but from a diverse consideration of the nature or disposition of the
found in particular beleevers scattered I cannot imagine how this conclusion can be intercepted particular believers have the forme of the Church and consequently are truely a Church though not in coetu or in societie do they want the mattter of the Church no for they are considered apart in his own words the called of God and the called of God are the true matter of the Church none will deny Neither 2. Will it be helped to say that faith in beleevers considered collectively is the form of the Church For 1. The form of a thing is real which hath being extra mentis operationem it receiveth no part of its nature from consideration and therefore if faith be in it self or properly the essential forme of the Church so it still will be whether we consider it distributively or collectively and wheresoever we finde it viz. in materia congrua in fit matter as the called doubtlesse are Besides 2. Then something is apparently added to faith to informe the Church viz. the collection of the persons so beleeving and then I humbly offer whether whatsoever faith be meant here it belong not exactly to the matter and most unproperly to the forme of the Church for that which doth not perfect the essence or give essential perfection to a thing is not the essential forme of that thing but faith doth not give essential perfection to the Church for where faith is there is not this essential perfection of the Church without something else viz. collection or association of the subjects of this faith together added 3. Therefore he saith 1. Fides est forma ecclesiae and then 2. Coetus est forma ecclesiae wherein I am yet to seek his meaning for either these differ and are two things and then there are two formal causes of the Church or else faith and company are all one in his sense and indeed almost in his words fides spectata collectivè est coetus vocatorum id est forma ecclesiae which I cannot comprehend 4. If coetus vocatorum be indeed a definition of the Church as Amesius saith then either vocati are the forme or coetus or both Med. p. 163. 12. if vocati distinct from coetus be then coetus is not if coetus distinct from vocati then the vocati are not and if both together be the forme then where is the matter 5. Again if this be a perfect definition and consequently the whole cannot be the forme one of the parts must and now which is likeliest coetus or fideles not fideles of the faithful because that these prae-exist before the Church is informed and something as was before observed is necessarily to be added to perfect the essence of the Church 2. One of these two must be the matter of the Church but coetus cannot because the matter is presupposed to the forme but coetus or the consosiation of beleevers doth praesuppose beleevers 3. Therefore the cleanest account with me is that beleevers are the matter the coetus and the collection or community of them is the true essential forme of the Church That wherein they have communion is the publick exercise of such duties as we ead Act 2. 47. Hook eccles pol. 89. Here then at length I pitch that the forme of the Church lieth in society or community stâ—ictly and properly that collection taken actively or unitâ—on is the immediate efficient collection taken passively or union is the effect or proper state of the Church that communion is its formal action but corporation society or community is strictly the forme thereof Which learned Ames himself doth seeme more than to intimate if we let passe the foresaid obscurities saying that faithful Med p. 163. 13. men are the Church of God prout conjunctim vel collectivè considerantur in coetu and yet more plainly in the page before p. 162. 9. Coetus dicitur quia in multitudine consociata vel communitate multorum proprie consistit non in aliquo uno vocato So that in short account the remote matter of the Church Ad homines restringitur iste coetus p. 162. 10 is men the lesse remote matter of the Church is men called and the next matter of the Church is a many or a multitude of men called and now that which is to be added to compleat the Church is the society or community as Ames exactly of these many or this multitude of men called and this is properly the forme thereof Which further appeares For 1. The Church is allowed by all to be totum aggregativum or a holy heap now where lieth the forme of an heap but in the society of the parts thereof they being put together 2. 'T is therefore called a body in Scripture corpus coagmentatum and compactum ex variis membris as Ames noteth from Ephes 4. 16. as also a House a Family a City a Kingdome a Flock and where lieth the forme of all these but in society or community 3. This notion suits so well with the principles of many that they are called Congregational men and their way called Emphatically the Congregational way doubtlesse then their Church is a Congregation yea the opinion of many of them is that their Church-Covenant is the forme of their instituted Church which Covenant is onely the bond of the company or society Lastly that which being put in any matter the thing is necessarily Quo posito in materia aliqua necessario constituitur compositum sublato tollitur id est illius forma constituted and being taken away the thing is dissolved is the forme of that thing but society or community being added to many men called which is the matter of the Church the Church is necessarily constituted and society or community being taken away the Church is dissolved therefore society or community is the forme of the Church 5. Szegedine teacheth that true doctrine and the true use of the Sacraments are the formal cause of the Church But these I conceive are rather either the means of communion which is as was said before the formal action more properly then the very forme it selfe of the Church or else the distinguishing forme whereby the Church is known rather then the constitutive form whereby the Church hath its being But to draw up this discourse of the constitutive forme of the Church 1. Whatsoever it appear to be I hope to prove that it may be truely considered without respect to saving grace if it be calling or faith or profession it hath before appeared that these may be considered to be truely when not savingly such and if it be society or community as hath partly appeared already and will more fully appear when we handle the definition of the Church I presume none will question but this also may be considered to be truely such without any respect to saving grace 2. But if Ames should mean as he truely seemeth to do that coetus vocatorum or societas fidelium
members of the Church but infidels but neither temporary beleevers nor foederal as before can ever from the Scripture be proved either to be infidels or savingly beleevers 2. Foederal faith is not justifying or in Wallaeus his word doth not justifie the childe yet this entitles the childe to visible Church membership and by this to wit foederal faith all that are borne in the Church are entitled and stand possessed of the said membership and this is the very state and case of most of the people of God in England and that which answereth our own case might give satisfaction without further enquiry 3. Yet if not a dogmatical faith a faith lesse then justifying or a temporary faith or a common faith which so farre draweth the person beleeving and to own and apply himself by desire of and submission unto Baptisme to the true Religion though it work not so deep as was before explained is sufficient to admit an adult heathen as more largely anon into communion with the Church as easily appears in Simon who had no more in the Eunuch who professed no more and in the stony ground which hereby stood in a due possession of this communion till in the time of temptation it fell away CHAP. XIII Touching Communion in the Ordinances of God and the place it hath in the definition of the Church WE now proceeed to the second great specialty observable in the definitions of the visible Church taken from its chief office and employment viz. communion in the Ordinances and worship of God Here though I do not altogether exclude the qualifications spoken to yet I shall humbly offer whether communion in the worship and Ordinances of God be not fitter to define the visible Church by then the former qualifications thereof Cons 1. Such as lay most weight upon the former qualifications of faith calling and profession in their definitions of the visible Church do yet ever adde more then a touch of this holy exercise and communion of it to the perfecting of their said definitions as will appeare expresly anon Amesius himself adds unto his societas fidelium ad communionem sanctorum constanter inter se Med. p. 168. exercendum Cons 2. These qualifications seeme fitter to define the Church as invisible by seeing they also are invisible indeed Ames defineth the Church to be coetus vocatorum but he evidently intends Vid. Med. cap. 31. 7. p. 162 the mystical or invisible Church it is a most usual thing for Divines to define the mystical by which they intend the Church of the saved after this manner viz by some occult invisible quality of faith love calling or the like whereas the defining of the Church from its outward acts and exercises in the worship of God is without some shew of exactnesse to define the Church as visible from something visible Cons 3. If the visible Church should take its definition rather from the said qualifications then from its communion in Ordinances then would the Church be rather known from the evidence of these qualifications then from its communion in Ordinances for that which flows most immediately from the essence of a thing into our apprehension and knowledge cannot but be reckoned the most essential and therfore the best mark of that thing But the Church on the contrary hath been ever better knowne and distinguished by the Ordinances wherein it communicates then from any personal qualities whatsoever 1. Therefore the truth of the Ordinances and the truth of the faith which is professed hath been ever respected and looked upon as an essential mark and indeed the onely essential mark of the true visible Church while personal qualities have beene ever reckoned among the seperable adjuncts thereof 2. Indeed purity of life and evidences of saving grace I humbly conceive are rather the purity of single members but the purity of Ordinances the purity of the Church as such so that the purer the Ordinances the purer the Church c. contra As even all our Divines do argue upon the Marks of the Church against the Papist and as is most punctually and fully asserted by the Irish confession Artic. 58. But particular and visible Churches of those that make a profession of the faith and live under the outward meanes of salvation be many in number wherein the more or lesse sincerely according to Christs institution the Word of God is taught not practiced and the Sacraments are administred not received and the authority of the keys is used not obeyed the more or lesse pure are such Churches to be accounted Cons 4. The Church is rather and better distinguished from O holy Socrates O holy Plato O devilish Christian O wicked Protestant Woods Serm. p. 49 its opposite viz. the world by its fellowship in Ordinances then by the evidence of inward qualities or saving grace any other way therefore its definition should rather be taken from thence 1. Many Christians are not so civil as some Heathens and many Heathens are not so profane as some Christians yet no Heathens do attend the Ordinances of God as Christians do in their solemn assemblies 2. As Heathens taken in a large sense for all infidels do openly oppose the true religion so Christians do more openly own and maintain the same in these their solemne meetings and properly publick assembles particular persons stand in most direct opposition to infidels not by their own private calling faith or profession but by their relation to these bodies and Assembles of Gods people and the communion thereof in the worship of God in publick 3. Therefore therein also the Church is most exposed to the malice of those that seek her life and thirst to destroy her very being in the world not so much in her righteousnesse towards men or in her private enjoying or separate professing the faith of Christ as in her publick and valiant owning and serving her Lord in the wayes and Ordinances of divine worship as it were to the worlds and the God of the worlds defiance for fear of whom they flinched Heb. 10. and forsock the assembling of themselves together with the Church Cons 5. This further appears if we well consider the onely way that God himself hath generally if not ever taken directly and judicially to un-church a people namely by removing his Ordinances and not his graces their faith calling or profession from them Look over all the books and works of God and see whether this can be questioned the very people that murthered Christ yet to them belongs the promise Acts 2. and they are the seed of the Covenant chap. 3. and so continue notwithstanding this height of all impiety untill the Ministry and Ordinances are turned from them to the Gentiles Acts ult 't is granted that such desperate wickednesse doth not onely deserve that God should spew a people out but also it doth violently provoke him to it yea it is threatned with it Rev. 3. 16. Yet observe they are to be
spewed out of his mouth his word is to be removed from them for how did those Asian Churches cease to be so but by the Lords performance of that other threatning in order unto this viz. removing his Candlestick out of their place Revel 2. 5. Cons 6. Yea a people have no other way to unchurch themselves but by their voluntary breaking of their communion in the Ordinances of God by heresie poysoning them and thus making them die and cease to be Gods Ordinances or schisme directly rejecting them or by the perfection of both in a total Apostasie But though wickednesse did ever unchurch a people demeritoriè it never yet did unchurch a people formaliter vel effectivè as will appear more anone Yea though Heresie be indeed a renouncing the faith and schisme a renouncing the profession of the faith yet at present I conceive that heresie doth properly and strictly unchurch as it denieth the faith not as it is the faith of Christ but as it is the foundation of this communion in the Word and Sacraments Being built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles and accordingly schisme doth stictly unchurch as it breaks off this communion and not as it ceaseth the profession of the faith Therefore breaking off from this communion is most exactly and properly termed schisme or a renting of the Church and ungodlinesse of heart or life and indeed a ceasing to professe the faith as such is not so properly or stictly schysme Cons 7. These qualifications faith holinesse calling and profession may all be found where there is no instituted or formed Church and consequently to our congregational brethrens principles who as Master Cotton in the name of his brethren phraseth it say that the universal visible Church is a Chimaera where there is no formed visible Church wherein Ames is so expresse Fideles non constituant ecclesiam particularem nisi speciali Med. p. 167. vinculo inter se conjungantur which onely renders them capable of this communion the Jewish Church being dissolved the Elect that were saved were not of themselves a formed instituted Church but must therefore be added to the Gentile-Churches i. e. Congregations Therefore these personal qualifications are not so fitted to the definition of the visible Church as communion in the Ordinances of God for wheresoever this is fixed and settled there is undoubtedly a true visible Church this communion supposeth the called beleevers professors on the one side and the officers or dispensers of the Ordinances on the other side and plainly expresseth or signifieth to us the essence or truth of the visible Church by the formal actions of it Now that I may yet be more free from exception and more truely understood I shall here recollect and subjoyne what hath beene already in a scattered way hinted about these two great considerable in a few brief concessions and propositions Prop. 1. I grant that these personal qualifications are necessarily supposed in this communion in Ordinances in the senses before given of them the persons thus communicating are such as are called thereunto such as professe the faith therein and such as are presumed to beleeve what they thus professe or at least not to deny or renounce it Prop. 2. These qualifications are therefore necessary conditions of Church members or of such particular persons as assemble themselves with the Church in this worship of God or as Ames most Med. p. 163 accurately forma vocatorum the forme of the called not of the Church Prop. 3. Therefore these qualifications are rather to be reduced to the matter of the Church then to the forme Prop. 4. I grant therefore that they fitly serve to expresse the qualification of the matter of the Church in the definition thereof as I conceive Amesius and others mean whose definitions of the visible Church are usually begun thus a company of beleevers c. or of the called c. or of such as profess the faith or the true Religion Prop. 5. Yet I humbly conceive the maine distingushing part of the definition of the visible Church lieth in the communion of Ordinances for the reasons above specified this being as was said the formal action of it immediately springing from its forme and essence viz. society or community which is the next great particular in the definition of the Church and now at hand to be considered Onely by the way let this be concluded with the easie notice that my designe is yet going on seeing none can doubt but if persons void of saving grace may be truely considered to have faith calling and profession as before they may much easier also be considered to partake of the outward communion of the Church in the worship and Ordinances of God and therefore so far none can hinder the definition of the Church to be applicable therunto without respect to saving grace CHAP. XIV Touching that State of the Church whereby it is capable of communion in Ordinances viz. Community THe last great particular that claimeth a place in the definition of the Church is that proper condition or state thereof that only renders it capable of the exercise of this employment comes now to be handled This I presume will be generally consented unto to be a company community or society as it strictly intends communion in the worship of God wherein I humbly conceive is contained 1. Many particular persons or men in the kinde not sex or age 1. Many coetus requirit decem 2. Many men for other creatures below man are not capable of making a society it being a political and therefore a rational state and Angels are almost as much above it society being a state of discourse and so most properly belonging to discoursive creatures viz. men according to that of the Grammarian coetus requirit decem homines this is supposed in a society Cod. 2. The union of these men by some kinde of bond or other whereby they are embodied and made an habitual assembly a fixed society this is expressed 3. Actual communion in the Ordinances of God this is intended Coetus or societas here is therefore to be taken in a moral or political sense from corporations or companies of trade So 1. 'T is orderly not tumultuons 2. 'T is fixed not occasional 3. 'T is habitual not onely actual 4. It hath officers belonging to an orderly and fix'd society of this nature 5. Therefore lastly 't is a society of Christians governed by the Minister or Ministers of the Gospel as we still finde it to be in Scripture I shall crave leave to explicate my self herein a little further by a few propositions Prop. 1. This community is of necessity required in the true or false definition of the visible Church Prop. 2. This community doth directly immediately and formally Foederata ifla conjunctio tantum constituit ecclesiam quotenus spectat ad communionem sanctorum exercendam Am. Med 169. intend communion Communion is the most natural act and the very essential efflux of community therefore coetus a coire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is truely rendred an Assembly or Congregation Prop. 3. Communion then hath the next necessity and place to community in the definition of the Church as
being the essential property thereof and its formal evidence Prop. 4. The means of this communion or its specification is the Ordinances or worship of God instituted and enjoyned by Christ in the Gospel Prop. 5. Would we view all the three special particulars that lay claime to this definition at once I humbly conceive 1. That the qualifications spoken of viz. faith calling c. taken with Ames in a saving sense they best serve to define the Church invisible 2. Communion in Ordinances best serve to define the universal visible 3. And this community or proper society best serves to define the particular instituted visible Church which is the Church which we finde most frequently defined by Authors not but that they may all have their place in the definition of the particular Church but I think thus they may all have the chiefest and most necessary place in the definition of the Church Prop. 6. We then may hence note three degrees of necessity in these three great parts of the definition of the Church 1. The Church cannot be without the qualifications specified yet they may be where the Church viz. a particular Neque tamen sufficit subitanea aliqua conjunctio sanctae communionis exercitium ad ecclesiam constituendam nisi etiam constantia illa accedat quoad intentionem saltem c. Am. Med p. 170 instituted Church is not viz. in the called or beleevers scattered 2. Actual communion constantly attended on cannot be where the Church is not yet the Church may be where there is no actual communion the Church is really when it doth not meet or assemble together this is more necessary then the formes 3. Communion or society referring to this communion can neither be where the Church is not neither can the Church be where this is not therefore this is necessary even with the highest degree of necessity for a right defining a particular visible Church which further appeareth thus 1. Because as before we conceive the very forme of the Definitio propriè dicta vel essenâ—ialis est physica quae datur per Meteriam formam vel metaphysica que datur per genus differentiam Church to consist in coetu in society or community it being an aggregative body but I still intend such a community as relates to communion in the worship of God now desinitions being onely to explicate the essence of a thing and the forme being neerest to the essence and as Aristotle saith the very quid and essence it self definitions are best when taken from the forme 2. Definitions are fittest to be taken from hence because the qualifications mentioned are supposed in the persons of this society and this community doth essentially con-note the communion in Ordinances in the habit or first act of it when the second act or actual communion is unavoidably suspended by intrinsick or extrinsick necessity thereof 3. These qualifications may be where there is no Church and a Church may be where there is no actual communion at present The action being ended the Assembly is dissolved and is no longer in being whereas the Church which was assembled doth no lesse continue afterward then before Hook eccles pol. 89 and therefore neither of these are so fit to define the Church withal as community that was now observed to be convertible with the Church 4. The Names of the Church do generally intimate this community for its most usual and proper name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scharpius acquaints us that it is from convocando and that among the Athenians it signified a company called together voce praeconis to hear the sentence of the Senate which Assembly the Latines called concio and this saith he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transferred to a holy use we see here one actual Congregation of the people and this called ecclesia from their being convocated and this usual actual convocation must needs suppose a community by which they were held in a constant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a convocando apud Athenienses significabat coetume reliqua Turba voce praeconis ad audiendum Senatus sententiam convocdtum qui coetus latinis concio dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad res sac as traducitur Nempe ad significandum sanctum coetum voce praeconien verbi vocatorum ad oracirla divina audienda Joh. Scharp Carsus Theol. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gâ—aecis celebre usitatura significans proprie coetus hominum a suis sedibus in alium convocatorum ad aliquid audiendum Poly. Anth. p. 969. Vid Bul. dec p 135. preparation for these summons but he proceeds to tell us what it is in a holy sense viz. an holy Assembly of persons called together by the voice of the Preachers of the Word to hear the Divine Oracles Langus also teacheth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Greeks signifying properly a company of men called together from their own seats into some other place ad audiendum to hear something whence the occasion being frequent and solemn the company became a society or an habitual company constantly attending in one place upon Gods worship which is properly a Church of God therefore in Latine 't is called Congregatio haply from the Hebrew Katial Congregavit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It s metaphorical names import no lesse 't is called a Body a House a Family a City a Flock a Kingdom all which connote union and such as directly intends communion and fellowship 5 The Church is therefore called a Way I persecuted saith Paul this way unto the death Acts 22. v. 4. which is a figure pointing at the persons that usually walked together in Visibilis ecclesia est coetus eorum qui per verbum externum Sacramentorum ac disciplinae ecclesiastice usum in unum externum corpus coalescunt disp 40 Thes 32 Est unitas ecclesiae quae late patet in Sacram. omnium societate communione His Vind. p. 9 Visibilis ecclesia est coetus communiter vocatorum tum electorum tum reproborum p. 194. Arnob. p. 156. upon the 19. Art allowed by the former Church of England one way of worship and evidently intimateth that the persons that thus walked together were a fix'd community or society 6. Some that define the Church leave out the foresaid personal qualifications so do the Leiden Professours the visible Church say they is a company of persons that by the external word the use of the Sacraments and discipline are united into one outward body And Augustine 't is the unity of the Church which lieth broad in the society and community of all the Sacraments Some againe that define the Church do not expresse it communion
and fellowship among themselves here is society of professors for communion communion ecclesiastical distinguishing this society from all others and profession dâ—stinguishing this society and communion to be of the visible and not of the invisible Church There are some of our own countrey-men that have given very clear definitions of the visible Church in this kinde Reverend Bradshaw saith the Churches of Christ are holy assemblies joyning ordinarily and orderly together in the worship of God here is an Assembly the qualification thereof holy the communion thereof joyning together in the Worship of God though I confesse I suppose that he here called these assemblies holy not with respect to the subjects or the persons that made it up but to the works and employment about which they were conversant the holy service and worship of God Yet I confesse that there is an obscure Authour whose name is Dayrel that wrote many yeares agon in the defence of Dayrel of the Church p. 24 like to Hookers our Churches against the Brownists whose definition is more exact to my notion of the visible particular Church then any of A Church as now we are to understand it â—s a society that â—s a number of persons belonging unto Christian fellowship the place and limits whereof are not certain eccl pol. p. 88 Lictionary p. 85 the former a particular visible Church saith he is that company that in a City Town or place cohabiting professe the Christian or true Religion and do ordinarily meet and joyne together in the exercises of religion A company united by co-habitation and profession and having communion together ordinarily in religious exercises the Ordinances of God Much like to which Wilson hath defined the universal visible Church 't is saith he a company of men selected gathered and called out of the world by the doctrine of the Gospel to know and worship the true God in Christ according to his Word Or if these be too long you may take it thus the visible Church Ecclesia specialiter sumitur pro coetu sacra scu conventu hominum ad cultum Dei convenientium Ravanel de eccl for which he quotes many Texts is a society of persons called out of the world to the worship of the true God In this last I am willing to acquiesce it being short and yet I humbly conceive plaine clear and full evidently conteining the whole sense of all the former and wanting for ought I can see in no necessary propertie of a perfect definition Herein we finde the matter persons called so termed by Christ himself as peculiar to the visible distinguished to the invisible or the Church of the Elect. 2. They are persons called out so it exactly answers to the most natural and allowed Etymology of the Church 3. Here are the termes of this motion a quo out of the world ad quem to the worship of God wherein we have its seperation The end of the Church in the Scripture in the time of the Gospel is to worship God as before from John 4 and its dedication its seperation from the world its dedication to God and his worship Wherein also its distinguishing forme and end and office is con-noted communion in the meanes or Ordinances of this worship of God 4. 'T is also said to be a society a fix'd community that respects this communion wherein as hath been often said the tò formale the very constituting form of the Church consisteth This definition is also convertible with the thing defined it doth not lie broader or narrower but just adequate and even with it for every society thus called out of the world to the worship of God is a Church of God and è contra Object Neither doth it avail to object that in this definition there is no mention at all of the constant or ordinary meeting thereof for this worship of God as some other definitions have it Answ For we are defining a visible Church in general which ought to be such as agrees with every kinde of visible Church if I may so speak both universal and particular now this constant actual meeting together is rather peculiar to the particular Church then common therewith to the Church universal which hath this actual meeting together but either in its representative a general counsel or in its parts particular Churches whereas a society called out of the world to the worship of God is general and common both to the universal and particular Church 2. Yea a particular visible Church it self is such when it hath not this actual meeting together much more when it hath it not constantly from which it haply may accidentally be long suspended and yet not lose its being and therefore not come short of its definition the essence of the Church lieth not in act but in habit not in communion but in community as this community * Foeder ata ista conjunctio catenus tantum constituit ecclesiam quatenus spectat ad communioneÌ„ exercendam to be exercised Am. Med. 169 Sanctae communis exercitium ad ecclesiam constituendam sufficit si constantia illa acâ—edit quoad intentionem tantum quae statum ad sert corporis membrorum in spirituali quadam politia as with small variation of words is gathered From Am. Med. 170 parag 21 looks towards and alwayes intends this communion to which it is therefore said to be called out of the world in the definition As a man doth not lose any part of his essence or cease at all to be a man when he ceaseth the exercise of his reason in his sleep or the like because the essence of his manhood lieth not in the exercise but in the faculty of reason whereby he is fitted and duely furnished to exercise the same when occasion is offered and impediments are removed So the Church ceaseth not to be a Church when she ceaseth her actual communion in the worship of God because the essence of the Church being in society to that end doth not suppose it though indeed it strongly intend it and dispose unto it as it conteineth a habit therof or at least an obligation thereunto upon due seasons Yet though the communion be not actual but onely habitual we may not say the community is onely habitual and not actual it would be strange to say that a man is only an habitual man because his reasoning is now habitual and not actual or a society of such a trade is onely habitually so when it doth not actually meet and assemble together The communion therefore is but habitual but the Church hath its essence and existence when it doth not meet together Therefore to have put ordinary or orderly meeting together into the definition of the Church would have made the definition larger then the definitum sometimes so that sometimes the Church must have been no Church when indeed it is so or the definition thereof must have been no proper definition thereof but variable
sometimes fit and sometimes not fit when the Church is an actual meeting and not fit when she hath adjourned to another time Therefore this definition a society called out of the world to the worship of the true God being fit to expresse the nature both of the universal and the particular visible Church and that at all times and states thereof it may I think be yeelded to be a proper definition thereof Now to draw up this discourse I shall onely further intimate that the definition of the visible Church may be truely considered to be such and truely applicable to the visible Church without any respect to saving grace as appears to the very first glance of our observation from the definition fix'd upon viz. that it is a society of men called â—ut of the world to the worship of God who will be so ventrous as to question either the fitness of this definition or its applicablenesse to the visible Church without respect to saving grace For 1. All the parts that are either essential or necessary or fit for this definition of the Church have appeared before to be thus truely applicable thereunto without respect to saving grace therefore the whole is so likewise 2. All particular definitions now mentioned except one are to be truely considered without respect to saving grace without any colour of question much lesse controversie and that one viz of Ames is nothing against us seeing Ames his judgement is for us and himself alloweth such persons a place in the Church as he will not allow if we understand him any place in the definition of the Church as before is noted 3. Therefore these very Authours take occasion to acquaint us that the Church which they thus define containeth Hypocrites as well as the Elect and that with the joint consent of the reformed Divines which I doubt not abundantly to make to appear when we speak upon the head of humane Testimony CHAP. XVI Objections answered and the true sense of the reformed Divines considered who say the invisible Church is onely the true Church BEfore we passe on to that way of arguing termed inartificial namely from authority we think fit to consider a few objections which may be called artificial and leave the other Objections which arise from Scripture and the judgement of the Church to be handled I think more methodically after my arguments thence The first and indeed the onely considerable objection against me is this Object 'T is confest that there is but one true Church 't is also confest that the invisible Church is one true Church but now the Church invisible cannot be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace therefore neither the Church visible Answ I answer that in general this argument is justly exceptible against because before it reacheth the conclusion of my opponent it evidently concludeth that which I presume himself renounceth viz. that the visible Church is in no respect at all either with or without saving grace to be truely a Church of Christ that this is the first conclusion of the argument is most obvious from the two first propositions 1. 'T is said there is but one true 2. The invisible is one true Church What now doth force it self from hence but therefore the visible is no visible Church somewhat a strange conclusion unknown I think to all the ages of the Church before us and such as imposed upon the providence of God to have entrusted this whole worship and Ordinances in the hands of a false Church 2. Hereby also we have a quick dispatch of the present controversie for what need we reach any further after the thing before us viz. whether the visible Church may be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without this respect to saving grace if it be first concluded that there is no visible Church at all 3. But more directly I answer by denying at least one of these things either 1. That the one true Church is the Church invisible Or 2. That though the one true Church be invisible yea and this invisible Church cannot be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace yet it followeth not that the visible Church may not be considered to be truely a Church of Christ without respect to saving grace 1. I might deny with fairnesse enough that the one true Church is properly the Church invisible until my arguments above for the contrary are answered till when the present objection can challenge no answer 2. But here I shall rather deny the consequence and that though I grant the invisible Church to be the onely true Church and that this cannot be truely considered as such without respect to saving grace yet the visible Church is a true Church and may be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace the reason is because these attributes of visible and invisible though they are given to the same subject the Church yet in diverse respects which appears by this argument if they are to be taken in the same respect and visibility be as none will deny an inseperable adjunct of the Church then there is no invisible Church for to say as Ames saith the Church never ceaseth to be visible and there is an invisible Church if visible and invisible here be to be taken in the same respect is a plaine contradiction now the consideration of the divers respect wherein the same Church is said to be visible and invisible detects the fallacy of the former Argument thus the Church with respect to its saving faith and to those persons that have this saving faith is said to be invisible this faith being not seen and these persons not to be certainly known And againe the same Church with respect to its profession and the persons therein that own the same in the eyes of the world is truely said to be visible So that though there be but one Church there is a Church invisible and a Church visible And again though this Church as invisible cannot be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace seeing it is therefore said to be invisible because of its saving grace and the subjects thereof cannot be seen or certainly known by men yet this Church in its visible consideration or as it is the visible Church may be considered to be truely such without respect to saving grace seeing that which renders it thus visible hath no necessary dependance upon saving grace as Reverend Hudson saith well the Church is considered to be visible and invisible à duplici modo communionis externae internae visible with respect to its external way of communion which doth not suppose saving grace and invisible with regard to its internal way of communion which doth suppose saving grace This is doubtlesse the plaine sense of the reformed Protestant Churches as is clearly stated by that eminent patron thereof Med. p. 165 Dr. Ames his words are known The Militant Church
this profession till they die which he largely proves as indeed most of the reformed Divines do from all the parables of Ut jam nihil addubitarc possumus Judam non fuisse membrum internae Sanctae dei ecclesiae licet esset membrum exterioris ecclesiae Quam superius appellavi ecclesiam militantem strictius consideratam aliam vero visibilem illam bonos malos comprehendentem latius consideratam Dec. page 355 the Kingdome of Heaven in the Gospel at length concludes that hypocrites are members of the Church visible largely taken containing the good and the bad but not of the Church invisible not true and living members of this interiour Church or the Church so strictly taken Yet this doth not infer two distinct Churches for if we take the Church strictly then hypocrites are no part of the Church and if we take it in the large sense then the strict Church is but a part thereof to instance in the material Church if taken in a strict sense it signifieth the body of the Church exclusive of the chancel if largely for both together and then the Church strictly taken is but part of the Church largely taken This is clear while we distinguish the Church qua Church but when we consider it as visible and invisible it faileth us We say well that the Church taken strictly is part of the Church taken largely and the Church largely taken containeth the Church strictly taken but it would be hard to say the Church invisible taken strictly is part of the Church visible taken largely to say a thing as invisible is part of a thing as visible is contradictio in adjectio 'T is evident then that invisible and visible are opposed here in the accident not in the subject i. e. 't is not meant that as some persons are invisible so others in the same respect are visible as if saving grace was not seen in some and yet seen in others but thus some persons having saving grace not seen are said to be invisible and others having profession visible are said to be visible Moreover this subject of these accidents is rather the faith Bull. Dec. 355 Invisibilis interna dicitur non quod homines sunt invisibiles sed quod hominibus non appareat qui vere ficte credaut then the person they are applied to the person but intend the faith or the truth thereof as 't is saving 't is invisible as 't is professed so 't is visible and not because the men are either visible or invisible Lastly the Church largely taken may be considered Either Asolutely Or Comparatively In it self or in comparison with the Church strictly taken and accordingly the reformed Divines may be thought to meane that the Church largely taken if it be considered absolutely and in it self is a true or at least truely a Church of Christ but when the Church largely taken as it includes the bad the good together is compared with the Church strictly taken for the company of the Elect or savingly called then as they say the latter is the onely true Church and the former in comparison thereunto is not a true Church that is not so truely in the favour of God and union with Christ Object 3. I confesse that Ravanellus and Calvine with others haply affirme that the Church thus largely taken is the Church improperly and the Church strictly for the Church of the Elect onely is the Church properly taken But Answ 1. I humbly conceive that their difference with the Papist did not exact their assertion from them for the Papist denieth the invisible Church altogether and not that it is the Church properly or improperly taken then this remaineth as a lawful controversie among us Protestants whether the visible or invisible Church be most properly the Church of Christ 2. Neither do I think this assertion of theirs doth necessarily flowe from this strict and large acceptation of the Church the larger acceptation of a thing doth not alwayes imply the most proper acceptation thereof nor è contrà God of Abraham not of the dead the man as Abraham taken from the soul onely is not the largest nor yet the preperest acceptation of man The Church taken exclusive to the chancel is not the largest nor I think the properest acceptation thereof a denomination from the better part is not the largest nor I think the properest denomination of a company this is figurative therefore the other viz. the larger acceptation should be the proper as opposed to figurative 3. How ever this toucheth not my conclusion which is that the Church in this large acceptation may be considered to be truely a Church and not properly much lesse more properly so then the Church invisible or strictly taken 4. Yet I humbly crave that my former arguments for the contrary part in my state of the question may have the justice of consideration if not the charity and honour of a confutation Object 4. I confesse once more that Ames hath placed reprobates and hypocrites out of the essential and within the accidental form of the Church But Ans 1. I humbly conceive that this is his peculiar language we find divers of the reformed Divines distributing the form of the Church into internal and external as they also do the state society Vid. Cameron praelect de eccl cap. de natura conditione ecclesiae in prin cipio circa medium caput and communion of the Church 2. I have ventured before to manifest the inconsistency hereof with his own concession that hypocrites and reprobates while they remain in the communion of the Church are membra ecclesiae yea that this very expression that they onely partake of the accidental form hath a contradiction in it self For if there be no essential forme besides this then cannot be an accidental forme seeing this viz. the accidental forme is opposed unto the essential and must needs suppose an essential Accidens hic est accidens non praedicabile sed praedicamen tale quod opponitur substantiae distributio enim est in formam substantialem accidentalem or substantial forme to give being to the subject of this accident all whose being is in the subject of it if there be no substantial forme there is no substance and if there be no substance there can be no accident for the definition of substance requires that it do substare accedentil us and therefore as Schibler saith the reason of an accident requires that it do in haerere in subjecto Or if the Church have another forme viz. essential or substantial besides this accidental as indeed he allows then I cannot yet see but that interest in the accedental forme is necessarily founded in interest in the forme which is called essential and that by granting that hyrocrites and reprobates do partake of the accidental he necessarily implies that they also partake of the substantial forme and therefore to say that such or any persons
do onely partake of the accidental forme of the Church is for ought I can see a plaine contradiction to it self For if the reason of an accident be to be in the subject then it no farther is then it is in the subject then also nothing can stand under it as it is the accident of such a subject viz. the Church unlesse it be part of the Church unlesse it also partake of the substantial forme of the Church or that which renders the Church or the subject of this profession or what ever it is which is said to be the accident thereof a Church a dead carkasse though it still retaine the same colour and figure that it had when it was alive yet it cannot be said to stand under the colour and figure of a man and why because the substantial form of a man is not in it 't is not a man therefore not capable of the accidents of a man so a hypocrite may partake of profession which is like the profession of the Church but cannot partake of the profession of the Church nor any part of the accidental forme of the Church unlesse it be part of the subject the Church which it cannot truely be without partaking also of the substantial forme of the Church where there is an essential totum as well as an integral all the essential parts must feel the influence of the essential forme or else they do not partake of an accidental forme of the totum for indeed a member that admits no influence from the forme is no longer an integral part of the body and consequently doth no longer partake of any thing as it is of the body Yet I shall adde one Argument ad hominem to prove that hypocrites partake of the essential forme of the Church a mark is said to be essential because 1. It flows directly and necessarily from the essence And 2. It is a sure indication of the essence of a thing therefore wheresoever we finde an essential mark there the essence of the thing is and there we may know it to be now what is the essential mark of the Church hath not Ames answered the profession of the true faith therefore hypocrites c. who doubtlesse do partake of this profession which himself acknowledgeth to be the essential note of the Church are and may be known to be of the essence of the Church Ames tells us that hypocrites have a share in the the outward profession of the Church which he saith is the accidental forme and which he also saith is the essential note of the true Church therefore they partaking in the accidental state or forme of the Church they also partake in the essential note of the Church and therefore of the essence of the Church and therefore of the essential form of the Church 3. I confesse it is my present opinion that that which Ames assignes to be the essential or internal forme viz. faith is no forme at all either of the Church visible or invisible but onely a necessary qualification of the matter of the Church of the saved or the Church invisible which seemes not much incongruous to Ames himself sometimes for he affirmeth that fides taken distributively is but forma vocatorum the forme of the called and not of the Church and that collective sense that he would put on faith to make it the forme of the Church is it self as distinguished from faith the forme of the Church which is not far from his own meaning yea and words too in another place ecclesia maximè consistit in coetu 4. Yea further I yet judge that the visible Church hath no internal forme at all and that which Ames calleth the accidental forme and others the external is very neere unto all the essential forme constituting of the visible Church the visible Church is a collective or aggregative body and that visible Now whether is the essential form of a visible aggregative body inward or outward indeed the particular parts of such a body separately considered have their internal formes but is not the form of the whole another thing is not union or rather unity or society of the parts the forme of the whole and is not this external for instance every particular sheep hath its forme internal but as these are a flock they have another outward forme which yet is not accidental but essential to it as it is a flock viz. their being in unity or community or society together Indeed 't is necessary that there be sheep if there be a flock of sheep and 't is necessary that these sheep have their essential which is an internal forme yet both these are but conditions of a congruous matter which is essential to every compositum I grant therefore that sheep with their internal forme are essential to the flock viz. as the matter is essential but they are no part of the forme I grant also that in rational aggregative bodies viz. societies of men there lieth some difference from a heap of inanimate creatures as stones c. from a flock of sensitive creatures as sheep c. because the reason of man doth qualifie rational societies with an habitude or aptitude to various ends and employments which are accordingly distinguishing and specifically differencing rational societies and which is not communicable to other collective bodies which are irrational therefore there is something to be understood at least if not expressed which is to signifie the reason or the end of every rational society to distinguish it from societies of men of another kinde Ex. gr among men there are domestick politick scholastick ecclesiastick societies which constitutes a family a Common-wealth a Colledge and a Church Now without some peculiar reason or end of these several societies how shall we distinguish the one from the other they are all collective bodies they are societies of men yea they may be all societies of Christians yea they may be all societies of Christians that are in a state of salvation and yet discovered by a general description onely and nothing intimated to distinguish to us one kinde of society from another Therefore something is to be added besides a bare society of Christians to distinguish the Church from a Christian family a Christian Common-wealth or a Christian Colledge which hath beene often hinted to be the peculiar reason and intention of this ecclesiastick society from all others viz. the joynt and publick communion thereof in the worship and Ordinances of God Neither may it be then replied that the forme of the Church consisteth not in coetu or in society because there is something to be added to distinguish the same for that which is added is but the quality or reason of this society or its being such a society yet a society still even as none may say that the forme of a man is not his soul because a soul in general is not that which distinguisheth a man from a beast a
beast being an animated creature as well as a man without the specification or essential quality of reason added However indeed 't is such a soul that is the forme of man not a soul in general nor yet reason in abstract consideration from soul but the soul as such or the reasonable soul so in the case before us the forme of the Church lieth in a society so qualified or intended or as such yet still a community though as Ames saith a community that looks at communion in the worship of God Yet lastly that I may not seem to acquiesce in my own sense and also that I may if possible attaine the genuine notion of the reformed Divines in the point I shall not stick to say that Essential here is not the attribute of totum or opposed to integral but of forma and opposed to accidental Essential forme is also used here in a large sense for the substantial form of any real thing and accordingly applicable to compositum agregativum as wel as essentiale strictly taken In all visible assemblies many bad are mingled with the good and therefore of necessity we must allow another Church wherto they properly belong which can be none but an invisible Church White his way to the true Church I yet perceive no great absurdity to be incurred if one should assert that a double acceptation of an aggregative body may make a supposition of a double forme and they both essential Give me leave to explicate my meaning by the former distinction of the Church as largely and strictly taken each of which acceptation I conceive will bear its distinct definition and consequently may be supposed to have its distinct essential form so far as this diverse acceptation will hold A heap of stones wherein there are many precious stones may be taken strictly for a heap of precious stones and largely for a heap containing both the precious and the common Now if this heape be defined exactly according to both these acceptations who would not see a formal difference betwixt them the one must be exclusive of all the common and the other must generally agree unto and receive in both the common and precious Thus if we define the Church as consisting onely of the Elect and againe if we define it as such a society as agreeth to both the Elect and reprobate must not the definitions differ as much as the Elect and reprobate i. e. specifically for in the latter the Elect and reprobate are found to agree in one common bond or fellowship which by the former is utterly dissolv'd Yet this doth not make two distinct Churches farther then in our consideration the reason thereof is plaine because the Church is a society made up of heterogeneous parts or parts specifically differing in their proper natures and this various acceptation thereof doth strictly consider and define onely one part or largely takes the whole together yet all the while there is no real separation of these Churches but the one still remaineth the whole and the other is but a part if largely considered we may consider the precious apart and the common apart and we may define it as a heap of precious stones and as such a heap as containeth in it stones both common and precious and yet there is but one real heap and the heap taken strictly is but part of of the heap taken largely This matter may be plainer understood thus an aggregative body is such as not one thing absolutely but such as containeth Trelcatius de eccles in it self two things one of which is like to multititude and matter dispersed the other is like to unity order and collection So that we see ground 1. To consider such a body in one respect In an aggregative 1. Matter dispersed like to multitude or matter divided now this matter thus divided may be either of the same kinde or nature which is called Homogeneous or of different which is called Heterogeneous If this matter be Homogeneous i. e. of the same nature then if you define a part you define the whole or at least you define the whole in part i. e. you define the whole matter of this body though you do not define it with respect to its forme in collection but if this matter thus divided be of different nature so farre as the nature of the matter differs so farre will the definition of one part differ from the definition of the whole because the definition of the whole must be so general as to agree to both parts but the definition of the one differing in nature from the other must distinguish it from all things else of a differing nature and so consequently from the other part of this compositum and consequently from the whole which as was said must have a definition so general as to take in all the parts in some common reason Efficacitas vocationis duplex una salutaris electorum propria altera non salutaris ad vocatos communiter spectans Trel p. 114. and do not these specifically differ or bond agreeing to all Ex. gr the Church strictly taken is defined to be coetus electorum this now is specifically exclusive of the reprobate and as differing from that definition of the Church is which to take in the reprobate which by Wallebaeus is said to be coetus communiter vocatorum The Elect are commonly called and more as more they are defined by themselves and specifically differ from such as are onely commonly called as they are commonly called they agree with those that are onely commonly called and fall into the same definition with them which definition must differ specifically from the former suppose we should frame such a definition as takes in both man and beast would not that specifically differ from the definition of man as distingushed from bruits wherby he is said 〈…〉 not onely animal as they are but animal rationale as they are not Yet we have still evident ground in the second place to consider There is also a unity of this matter in an aggregative body this matter in the unity of this collective body the parts though never so different in nature are not divided in state but united so farre as to agree together in the same body homo and brutum though specifically differing in themselves yet they are the same generally and united together in animal the Elect and reprobate they are specifically differing in themselves yet both agree in their genus of visible Church-membership by common calling the like might be said of tares and corne chaffe and wheat c. these being also specifically differing in themselves yet they visibly meet in the same heap and agree to stand together in the same field Let us lastly observe that this notion of the Church is sufficient to maintaine the reformed sense from that of the Romish For the controversie betwixt us and them was not whether there be a visible Church but
whether there be a Church invisible i. e. such in the Church as are in a higher sense the children of God the members of Christ and in a state of salvation then others who may also be called a Church in a distinct consideration to the rest of visible professors which the Church of Rome denieth and the reformed assert and maintain against them Neither indeed is the controversie so much about the nature of the visible as about the being of the invisible Church every one knows that there is a vast difference about the head about the succession and about the visibility of pomp and multitude and about the infallibility of the visible Church betwixt us and them yet about the nature and definition of the visible Church the difference is but small the whole burthen thereof resting upon the nature being and definition of the Church invisible I shall presume to give my reader one famous instance of this from the great late controversie of the present point in France betwixt Mons Mestrezate and Cardinal Perron as is to read at large in an excellent Treatise written in French by that Learned Monsieur whereof please yet to take this short account He begins his book with a necessity of distinguishing â—he Church before he cometh to the definition of it his distinction is founded in divers respects viz. 1. â—he internal 2. The external state of the Church he gives us the notion of the Church in Scripture viz. 1. For a visible society of Christians 2. The invisible condition of Christians The first he builds on these places Col. 4. 16. 1 Cor. 14. 12 19 23. Acts 14. 22. Gal. 1. 13. Act. 8. 3. 2 Cor. 8. 1. Gal. 1. 1. 2 Cor. 1. 1. 2 Thes 1. 1. Apoc. 1. 4. and 2. 23. The second he builds upon Eph. 5. 25 23. Eph. 1. 22 23. Eph. 5. 29 30. Heb. 12. 23. According to this distinct acceptation of the word Church in Scripture he proceeds to distinguish of the Church more properly which he saith is the nuptial body of Christ and the Church lesse properly is the outward communions visible societies of Christians then he addresseth to his definitions of the Church thus diversly considered The first saith he is the body or multitude of those whom God according Lib. 1. cap. 4 to the eternal counsel of his election hath drawn out of their natural corruption and perdition by the Minstery of his word and the power of his Spirit incorporating them into Jesus Christ by true faith and sanctification unto life eternal now upon this rests the dispute for the last viz. the visible Church he agrees in most part with the Cardinal in this definition The Church is a society of those whom God hath called unto salvation Lib. 2. cap. 1 by the profession of the true faith and a sincere administration of the Sacraments by lawful Ministers Whence we conclude that the difference betwixt us and the Papists is not much about the nature of the visible Church both are agreed that it is a Church and that it is such a Church for the most part as the Monsieur hath here defined but chiefly about the Church invisible But before I close here methinks I am tempted to cry 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that I have now hit the very sense of the reformed Divines touching the nature of the Church invisible and visible they clearly hold that there is but one Church and yet they do so distinctly consider this one Church in its strict and large acceptation For the militant and Catholick Churches are not all one in state by reason whereof they may be in one which are not in the other Whites way to the true Church or as visible and invisible that any one that gives the lightest observation thereunto must needs confesse that their definitions thereof do more then accidentally differ and therefore essentially which two things are reconciled onely by granting that when they define the Church strictly taken they define but one part of the Church when largely taken and when they define the Church largely taken they conclude the Church strictly taken under some general attribution which equally or at least joyntly admits both of the Elect and reprobate which are Heterogeneous matter yet united in one society the visible Church as before is explicated Yet would I with all modesty submit this and what else I have or shall conceive and write to the judgement of my abler brethren knowing that the spirit of the Prophets is subject to the Prophets CHAP. XVII The first Argument from Scripture God calls a wicked people his people and his Church THe arguments usually termed artificiall with their objections have been hitherto insisted on we shall therefore descend in the next place to take the evidence of testimony both divine and humane of God and the Church The records of divine authority and testimony are the holy Scriptures Whence our first argument is offered thus God is pleased in the Old Testament to own such a people for his people and Christ in the new for his Church which at the very same time he himself universally brands as wicked rebellious evil-doers back-sliders c. and taketh no notice at all of any good thing in them therefore surely a people may be considered to be truely a people of God and a Church of Christ without respect unto and upon other terms besides saving grace Here now what I have writ I read over againe and againe yet must I seriously professe that I cannot foresee any colourable answer that is to be given to this Argument He that hath but a slight knowledge in the holy Scripture must needs confesse the antecedent and he that hath but a very slight reason me thinks cannot but yeeld the consequence 1. For the antecedent viz. that God and Christ do thus acknowledge a wicked people at the very same time when such their wickednesse is charged upon them for their own people and Church is so legible in the whole course of the Scripture that truely to heap instances and proof upon it would be to weaken it I shall onely therefore fix my reader upon one undeniable instance in each Testament according to the parts of my proposition That in V. T. is Isa 1. 2 3 4 5 6. where the Lord himselfe doth very eminently and above all kinde of contradiction both charge and acknowledge a people as before is asserted 1. Then observe how he is pleased to charge them And 2. To own and acknowledge them The charge is observable In 1. The matter of it 2. The extent of it the charge in the matter of it is that they are ignorant and inconsiderate ver 3. rebellious against the Lord that nourished 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 them and brought them up v. 2. or magnified and exalted them as the Interlineary translates it or brought up and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Arabick exalted as the vulgar Lattine
jure seeing men who judge onely according to appearance are Judges thereof But now it hath been the universal opinion or judgement rather of all the Church in all ages that notoriously wicked and scandalous persons are really within untill they are censured and cast out as Willet saith close infidels are in the visible Church de jure and openly wicked and flagitious persons are so de facto until excommunicated both of which do indeed evidently argue that saving grace is not an essential requisite to visible Church-membership neither can it be imagined that unlesse they are granted to be within that they are capable of being cast out or unlesse they be granted to be really within that they can really be cast out therefore persons as Ames aptly Medal p. 201 and plainly teacheth about whom discipline ought to be exercised are members of the Church and none other It will but little availe to urge here that some Divines affirme wicked men and hypocrites to be onely in and not of the Church for the same Divines acknowledge the most notoriously wicked so far in the Church as to be liable to eâ—clesiastical censure and to be cast out and do they not thereby confesse that they are also of the Church I mean visible for otherwise what hath the Church to do to Censure Judg punish one that is not of her own society and corporation therefore I am further confirmed in what before was noted that such Divines meane by such expression that wicked men are not so fully because not savingly of the visible Church or else they are not of the Church that is of the Church invisible for of the visible Church they must needs be granted to be and that really by all such as allow them really subject to the censure thereof seeing the Church judgeth none but her own members and one cannot be said to be a member by being in the body unlesse he also be of the body wherefore Ames is expresse in the words already cited that such as are liable to Church-censure are membra membra ecclesiarum members and therefore not onely in but of the Churches Arg. 5. The practice of the Church-hath ever been to readmit the penitents that is such as after baptisme have been excommunicate for scandal and have given satisfaction to the Church againe into church-Church-communion without rebaptization We read indeed of one kinde of Anabaptisme in the ancient Fortunat. in Conc Carthag secundinus in eodem Conc. Church much pressed by Cyprian and other fathers in the counsel of Carthage viz. of such as were baptized by hereticks but as this is nothing to our case it being in no respect to the persons that were to be rebaptized or their qualifications at all but wholly in respect to the qualifications of the administrator viz. his heresie so 't is well known that this opinion In Conc. Nic. vid. Hier. dial versus Luciferaria was afterwards both condemned by a better advised counsel and also revoked by the chiefest authours thereof themselves Now this practice of re-admitting penitents without re-baptizing them doth evidently argue this principle wheresoever it is found that persons may be considered in relation to the visible Church without respect to saving grace For 1. These penitents were acknowledged to have had some secret union with the Church even by the Church her self in their most scandalous condition when the Church could have no evidence at all of their saving grace otherwise upon their repentance they had entred covenant and consequently must have had the initiating seal applied viz. baptisme for what reason can there possibly be given why else they could not be re-baptized but onely this because they were held never wholly extirpated out of the Church or Covenant by scandal or censure neither can it be imagined that their now repenting is a certaine evidence of saving grace to have been in their hearts in the midst of their wickednesse and therefore conclude we must that they held that something else besides saving grace did root and interest in visible Church-membership for if being in Covenant and consequently being in the Church did appear unto the Churches where saving grace did not appeare who seeth not this consequence that the Churches judged that interest in the Church and Covenant is not founded in saving grace Arg. 6. The Church hath ever held that vera fides and sana doctrina is an essential note of the true visible with Ames thereupon our reformed Divines assert that a doctrinal and not a personal succession is a necessary mark thereof and according to reverend Hildersham profession and preaching of true doctrine Held in Joh. 4. p. 161 Vid. Cal. Instit l. 4. c. 1. p. 363. Zanch. de eccl p. 82 c. in all fundamental points is the onely proper and certain note of the true Church for ubi fides ibi ecclesia that as Ames explaineth fides quam or as Hierome in symb Rufin fides Christi illa est ecclesia Sancta quae fidem Christi integram servat thus the Prophets and Apostles the penmen of this doctrine of faith are said to be the foundation on which the true Church is Eph. 2. ult built Hence it must needs follow that the Church ever held that the essence of the visible Church doth not necessarily require saving grace For 1. The essential property or note of any thing doth immediately connote or argue the essence or forme of that thing 2. The profession of the true doctrine of Christ doth not necessarily much lesse immediately connote or argue saving grace many with Judas preaching and with Simon Ananias Saphira Hymeneus and Phyletus owning and professing the true faith or sound doctrine of Jesus Christ whose hearts are alienated from the life of God and strangers to the grace of that Covenant whose Doctrine they thus professe and acknowledge Arg. 7. Lastly to put the matter yet further out of doubt those very Divines that are suspected in the point do generally assert that the visible Church consisteth of good and bad that hypocrites are de jure of the visible Church that they are to be accounted members of the Church till they wholly renounce the Gospel that they are in the external part of the Covenant that they are in the Church according to the external state thereof that they have a visible right to the Ordinances all which are most obvious as well to the slightest as seriousest reader and searcher of the reformed writings and the least of which will fully satisfie my designe CHAP. XXV The last Argument from the opposite to my position and the dongerous consequences thereof WE have hitherto argued from the name the causes and the definition of the visible Church as also from divine and humane authority one place of argument more we hope may serve to conclude the question Which let me say without offence is the dangerous consequences that necessarily attend the contradictory
CHAP. XXVI What is requisite to constitute a member of the visible Church A twofold answer hereunto considered BUt least my notion of the visible Church wherein as my question leads me I have hitherto rather hovered in generals and negatives should be left suspitious or obscure I shall now pitch upon a more fix'd particular and positive discourse in answer to the three plaine cases or queries following which haply may prove a fit medium betwixt the debate already had and some plaine practical and necessary inferences that are yet to be drawn from the whole The Queries are 1. What is requisite to constitute a member of the visible Quid constituit Quid distinguit Quid destruit Church 2. What is requisite to evidence this visible Church-membership to others 3. What is that that doth dismember or cut one wholly off from the visible Church Quest 1. Then what is requisite to constitute a member of the visible Church Answ Mr. Cotton answers in the name of the Churches in New England thus 't is not the seed of faith nor faith it selfe that knitteth a man to this or that particular visible Church but an holy profession of the faith and professed subjection to the Gospel of Christ in their communion his way of those Churches p. 84 85. Supposing what is herein to be supposed viz. that the way of entring the universal visible Church is not here concerned Secondly that the way of Infants becoming Church-members is not here intended I could even signe this answer Onely I must needs except against its fitnesse to be applied to the cases of most Churches seeing it onely intends that which is more extraordinary viz. the entring of Heathens into our Chuâ—ches and leaves untouch'd that which is the ordinary and daily means of increase or continuance of them by our children born therein to God and to this priviledge of visible Church-membership Master Hudson also towards the latter end of his discourse of the Church proposeth and answereth this same Question viz. what is requisite to make one a member of the visible Church his answer hereunto conteineth three things Competent knowledge holinesse of life and subjection to the Gospel By which his answer it appeares that he likewise intended onely that which is requisite to make an adult Heathen a member of the Christian Church not at all noting the common way of entring into the Church and Covenant amongst us viz. by birth-priviledge However let me humbly offer this question whether all such as are not so qualified may be truely said to be no Church-members even amongst the Adult if so then there are no ignorant or unholy persons in the visible Church which cannot well be imagined to be Mr. Hudsons meaning by any that consult his p. 9. where we finde him asserting that the difinition of the Church is true of the godly as well as of the hypocrite and therefore true of the hypocrite but if he did not mean to exclude all such as want a competency of knowledge and holy life then these things specified are not conditions necessarily requisite to visible Church-membership which I presume to be the truth as well as Mr. Hudsons intention Indeed all must grant that Church-members of years ought to be competently knowing and of an holy life c. and this is necessary upon all Church-members as such with a necessity of the precept but it is therefore necessary with such a necessity viz. of the means as without it none can be truely in the Church I cannot but deny many things are necessary to the well-being that are not so to the truth or being of the visible Church-membership and so are these mentioned as I conceive doth already and by and by may further appear CHAP. XXVII A distinct consideration of admission of Infants and adult persons the condition of Infants Church-membership HAving thus prepared my way for an answer let me renue my question and what is it then that constitutes a member of the visible Church But seeing all but Anabaptists must needs acknowledge that the way and termes of the admission of Infants and such as are adult doth plainly differ a necessity is thereby granted us first to distinguish accordingly before I define or fix my answer if I would speak distinctly of things that differ 1. Then the first if the question be concerning Infants I may The way of infants admission briefly answer and boldly say that the condition or ground of infants admission into the Church is easily resolved by all but Anabaptists and yet as lightly considered by most for who else doth offer to question but that those that come into the Church in their infancy do advance thereunto by their Birth priviledge that they were borne to God in Covenant with him and his people and signed and sealed such by Baptisme But that this is as slightly considered and as lightly weighed by most that assert it is too too evident for how few do hence consider that then most of our people in England stand Church-members by verture of their birth-priviledge and are accordingly to be dealt withal as such how few do clearly see themselves hence enforced not to deal with them as Heathens or as persons out of the Church and not to require qualifications in order to their admission they being admitted already unlesse they have thus extinguished this their interest by such a violent course as will afterwards be spoken of How sweetly would the clear consideration of this original Church-membership common to our people lead us to see a great measure of the mystery and ground of most of our confusions and sad distractions to pitch and settle here even in the want of a more serious considering what this principle so generally granted viz. that we are borne Church-members and sealed such even from our infancy might prevent and conclude Yea what can we imagne to have a more direct and kindlier tendency to the ending of our differences thus desperately heightned then a serious sincere and impartial yeelding to the natural ducture and true consequences of this irresistible truth both about the Church and Sacraments But that is our misery which Justinian termeth but an inconvenience we puzle our selves about a way of settlement while Inconveniens est omissis principiis origine repetita illo tis manibus materiam tractare indeed they are off from our ground or rather expect the still waters and silver streams of peace and purity in the waters of strife or divided streams or rather flames of our own contention every one prosecuting the ground of division with pretence of union and beginning at the foot that 's cloven when it were better prudence to begin at the well-head to find and detect the cause of our breaches and the true meanes of our reconcilement which I verily believe chiefly to consist in a right understanding and diligent prosecuting this principle of infant Church-membership in the true and genuine
or actual right to be admitted by the Church to the Lords Supper but may and in some cases ought to he debarred thetefrom First that every person lawfully baptized hath a right to the Lords Supper appears from precept promise and ptecedent in Scripture and Reason grounded upon or drawn from Scripture 1. Those whom Christ commands to celebrate his Supper have certainly some kind of right so to do fot what better right or Reas 1 from the command Debitum agendi debitum habendi warrant can we have to do any thing or receive any thing then our Masters command Thus duties and priviledges are inseparable what God commands is both These things I command for your own good and if we must do what God commands as our duty then we may do what God commands as our tight and priviledge But now God commands every disciple and lawfully baptized person to receive the Supper and to do all that Christ hath commanded his Church Do this in remembrance of me Teach them to observe and do whatsoever I command you This will not conclude that every Church-member must receive the Supper without any further consideration This hath been and may be further cleared for this command is but mediate and consequently gives but a mediate obligation to such as cannot and a mediate right to such as can and do not examine themselves yet it is a right though but remote or mediate and it is an obligation though it be conditional seeing the condition is commanded also and though the condition of this obligation be such as we before have heard 2. God hath conveyed and granted all Covenant-priviledges from the promise Reas 2 and consequently this of the Supper to all that are taken into and sealed in Covenant else why are we taken into Covenant if not to enjoy the priviledges of the Covenant yea what is the object of our right by Covenant but the priviledges of the Covenant Therefore the Covenant still runs thus I will be thy God and I will give thee c. yea can we have a right in God the greater and not in the Ordinances of God which is the lesse qui habet habentem omnia habet omnia how shall he not with him give us all things and with a right in him give us a right in all things I grant the Covenant is but a conditional Covenant and therefore a right unto the priviledges thereof is but a conditional right But now though differences rise high about the way and terms of being in covenant yet al agree that Church-membership discipleship and lawful baptism are of equal latitude with being in covenant Therefore wherever God begins with I will be thy God it necessarily follows and thou shalt be my people and wherever God ownes a people to be his is to be his Covenant-people 3. Those whom the Scripture admits to actual possession from example Reas 3 without requiring any new evidence or title have a plain and evident right to the Supper without any new evidence or title This cannot be denied because we have no other rule to judge of persons right to the Supper but the Scripture and because that would not admit to possession such as have no right unto it But now we finde Acts 2. 41 42. the Scripture admitteth persons baptized putting no barre by ignorance or scandal against themselves immediately without requiring any new evidence or title of them to actual communion with the Church in doctrine fellowship breaking of bread and prayers viz. in all Gospel-worship 4. A baptized Church-member stands not at the same distance from Scripture-ground Reas 4 from the Supper with persons that are neither Church-members nor baptized for he is visibly at least drawn out of that state of distance and being afarre off wherein the world of Infidels lies and is in Scripture acknowledged to be made nigh in opposition to Infidels Gentiles and those without Eph. 2. 11 12 Therefore a baptized Church-member must needs be granted to have some kinde of right to all Ordinances and consequently to the Supper for though there be a latitude in right yet there is no medium betwixt est and non est right and no right And if the baptized be nearer in right to all Ordinances then an Infidel he hath some kinde or degree of right thereunto not to be questioned if he be not ar the same distance with such as have no right he must needs have some kinde of right He that is not so far off from the Supper is nearer to it and he that is nearer to the Supper is nearer only in a way of right for there is no proceeding towards a legal possession but by a line of right Digression 4. The Grounds of the Churches power to deny the Supper to some Church-members materially considered Though every person lawfully baptized hath some kinde of right to the Lords Supper yet the Church hath power to withhold the present use thereof from some persons lawfully baptized The truth of this Proposition is generally allowed even in the granting 1. That children are lawfully baptized 2. That children are not to receive or not to be admitted to the Lords Supper I shall rather therefore spend this digression in digging for or fixing the grounds of this truth according to Scripture Which Grounds may be aptly considered Materially Formally The material Grounds are the objects about which this power of denying the Sacrament is exercised the Matter for which persons though baptized are to be denied the Supper or the grounds of denying the same to such persons The formal grounds are the grounds of the power it selfe by which the Church denieth the Sacrameâ—t to such the grounds on which this authority of the Church is built So that the present discourse is visibly engaged upon these two questions Quest 1. What are the just and lawful causes for which the Church may deny the Sacrament to baptized persons Quest. 2. On what is this power of the Church to deny the Sacrament upon such causes fixed or whence is it taken or derived Quest 1. First then what are the just and lawful causes of denying the Sacrament to baptized persons I answer that these causes are either privative viz. the want of some necessary qualifications conditional to this Communion or positive viz. some apparent ill quality or blemish for which a person though baptized ought to be debarred from this Communion the first is more eminently noted in 1 Cor. 11. and the latter in 1 Cor. 5. the first may be termed unworthinesse 1 Cor. 11. 29. the latter wickednesse or scandal 1 Cor. 5. ult persons under the first of these may be thought to be unfit and to be kept off upon principles of care and merciful caution persons under the latter may be thought to be und eserving and to be cast out upon principles of Justice The first are therefore rather not to be admitted ratione cautelae whose suspension called
same ground viz. without a censure may it not Answ I must have leave to speak my minde and to say it doth not follow indeed there seemes to be the same reason for both had not God in Scripture otherwise disposed I affirme that persons found ignorant may be deniedt his communion without a Church censure upon the foresaid grounds and I grant that so also might the scandalous but that God hath provided a heavier punishment for them Mat. 18. 17. 1 Cor. 5. by the censure of the Church If it be Gods will that scandalous persons must be excommunicated and thus denied this Sacrament what are our reasons to the contrary Therefore the consideration of such as will not examine themselves as appeareth by their obstinacy in scandal is to be referred to the next head viz. of censure and the case of ignorance alone is to be tried here Quest 4. But who are those that appear by ignorance not able to examine themselves Answ Certainly not onely children fools and madmen nor these properly indeed these are reduced under the rank of the ignorant but even thereby 't is evident that ignorance is more properly attributed to persons of years and in the use of reason then unto these However children c. are debarred quia ignorant the ignorant as such and not as children or as in any other consideration are immediately incapable of performing the condition of self-examination and therefore as such are not to be admitted and 't is all as proper to say that growns affectedly ignorant persons cannot examine themselves as children fools if we know they cannot by reason of ignorance The duty to be performed is such as necessarily requireth knowledge and where there is want of knowledge whether naturally or morally there we are sure the condition of right is wanting and consequently admission is to be denied when all is done This Text is conditional or not if not then none for want of self-examination are to be suspended no not so much as children c. but if then all that appear not to be able to examine themselves are to be suspended equally with them and I despair of seeing any reason to the contrary for if persons quia non-self-examining are forbidden then all persons non-self-examining are forbidden and consequently all ignorant persons whatsoever Quest 5. But what degree of ignorance is sufficient to ground suspension upon Answ This must be left in the hands of prudence and charity but it may be measured by its influence upon this duty of self-examination if a person hath not so much knowledge as in any good measure to see his sinnes and to discerne the Lords body aright in the Sacrament of which he is to examine himselfe this is a sufficient â—ause of denying the Sacrament to such a person in my opinion Digression 5. The grounds of denying the Sacrament to some Church-members formally considered We have last considered the Object about which this is conversant or to be exercised we proceed to the ground or principle of it formally considered the authority whence it is derived 1. Negatively 2. Positively The power of the Church to keep back the ignorant from the The ground of denying the Sacrament negatively considered 1. Not Reason Lords Table is not founded in reason as if because that through ignorance men have no rational capacity of improving this Sacrament therefore reason discovering this should warrant the Church in denying the Sacrament to them this is but a being wiser for God then he is for himself 't is but bad reasoning against Gods Will if God will have such in Covenant as cannot express consent and such sealed in Covenant as in reason cannot improve it what is that to us God may do what he will with his own this would reason children out of the Church and Covenant out of Baptisme and Circumcision as well as the Supper who are all as capable of acting at a few years old in eating and drinking bread and wine as of suffering at a few dayes old in Circumcision or Baptisme or in their Church and Covenant-relation as soon as they are borne and as able to improve that as these 2. Neither is this power grounded in prudence or a prudential Nor prudence care and caution for the good of our peoples soules who not discerning the Lords body may eat and drink judgement to themselves prudence is a good assistant but a bad principle of Church power Interest in priviledges especiully this of the Supper falls under the head of spiritual property and right which prudence serveth well to discerne but not to make or alter prudence ought indeed to labour to the utmost that persons come not to the Supper unworthily but doubtlesse she goeth beyond her laste if she once ventures to deny those whom God doth not or whom he doth deny if she hath no call thereunto matters of property are matters of necessity and justice as before but prudence hath to do onely with things in themselves indifferent 3. Neither is mutual consent in ecclesia consederata by a Nor mutual confederation or consent Church-Covenant a sufficient ground of thâ—s power as if because a company of people do agree together not to give the Sacrament to the ignorant c. therefore they may deny it to such 't is known that upon this ground a learned man of late hath L. M. fixed all Church-power but I verily beleeve that the confederated Churches dare not trust themselves upon this foundation or venture their power or government to stand or fall upon this bottome Doubtlesse mutual consent is of great power in all societies and may dispose even of all indifferent things for order and decency in Christian societies or Churches but are denying Sacracraments casting out Churches c. things indifferent The persons under Church power are allowed this dommunion in the Word of God or not if they be allowed it by the word how can mutual consent warrant the Church to disallow it if not then it is determined before by the word that such persons should not be admitted that wicked persons should be put away from among us and then the power in the Church to do this is plainly derived thence I mean from those Scriptures and not from mutual consent though this be very useful quoad exercitium for the putting of this power in execution according to those Scriptures To me this seems nothing but a pretty device to make the confederated Churches fall to the ground between two extreams They have hitherto pleaded much for Scripture for every circumstance of Church-government but thus they should stride too large from hence upon the sole ground of prudence and mutual consent for the very substance of it as if the former Basis would bear neither any longer 4. Neither is this power grounded on Mat. 7. 6. or such like Scriptures for we here treat of that power to suspend such persons as are not censured but dogs and swine
if they be within are debarred the Sacrament as they are Juridically such or under censure 5. Lastly neither is it concluded in the power of judging 1 Cor. 5. this is the warrant of denying Communion to such as are wicked and to be judged and cast out qua wicked and consequently belongs to the next head viz. of censure whereas our present debate is touching the communion of such as are ignorant and as they are such 'T is true an ignorant person may be scandalously so and 't is possible that for this scandalous ignorance he may lawfully be censured by the Church yet then 't is plain that such a one is censured qua scandalous or scandalously ignorant and not properly or strictly qua ignorant or for want of ability to examine himself But if this power of denying the Sacrament to the ignorant The power of denying the Sacrament positively fixed be not founded in Reason Prudence mutual consent or on Matth. 7. 6. or 1 Cor. 5. where then may we fix it or whence may we warrant it I answer this power is founded in our stewardly and ministerial In our Ministerial authority given us for edification office wherewith authority is evidently given us for edification and not for destruction 1 Cor. 108. i. e. to dispense our sacred trust in Gods Ordinances for the best advantage of our peoples soules Here we know the great command is Let all things be done to edifying 1 Cor. 14. 26. to this great end we must level all our ministerial actions watching for the souls of our people as those that must give an account Heb. 13. 17. and following after such things as make unto edification Rom. 14. 19. wherefore no further excuse in all kinde of charges against us and our actions seemeth needful but only this of the Apostle We have done all things dearly beloved to your edifying 2 Cor. 13. 19. Whence the Argument riseth thus Upon these and the like Scriptures our Ministerial authority to do all things for the The Argument edification of our people as edification is opposed to destruction is clearly grounded But denying the Sacrament to the grossely ignorant is for the edification of the people as edification is opposed to destruction The first of these Propositions can be limited only 1. To The Confirmation of it all such things as are allowed by the Scriptures and not contrary to the Will of God therein revealed And thus indeed it must needs be limited otherwise it implies an apparent contradiction for God hath forbidden nothing that is for edification 2. To all such things as belong only to the manner and circumstances of applying or dispensing the Ordinances and not to the substance or matter of them for thus also it must escape a contradiction seeing no Orâ—inance brought into the Church in the substance and matter of it by humane Authority can possibly tend to edification but to destruction as superstition doth 3. To all such things as openly plainly and directly tend to edification as opposed to destruction Now if our Minor be found true with all these limitations none I presume will deny the conclusion But the Minor is true with these limitations For 1. The keeping back ignorant persons from the Supper is God hath not forbidden us to keep back the ignorant but allowed one of those things which God hath not forbidden but rather allowed in Scripture as almost all do acknowledge yea are they not forbidden while thus grossely ignorant to receive it Indeed if such as are ignorant had an immediate right in this Communion granted them by God in Scripture I conceive all the caution in the world could not warrant one ignorant persons suspension from it The Rule Give unto all their dues is of indispensable obligation but seeing ignorant persons have no such immediate right in the Supper what injury or wrong is there done them by denying it to them God forbids and we his servants only withhold what he forbids viz. the Sacrament to ignorant persons or such as cannot examine themselves Thus we have occasion to note that all our conclusions about right in accession or admission to and disswasion or All still meet upon 1 Cor. 11 28 suspension from the Sacrament with reference to knowledge or ignorance are still found to rest upon this Basis of 1 Cor. 11. 28. for as hath been urged if this text doth not deny this Communion to such as do not examine themselves I see not how any Church-member though but a childe or fool c. can lawfully be deterred or debarred from it but if it do imply a prohibition of such as cannot examine themselves because they do not I think it fairly follows thar Ministers have power in their very office to deny it to those that they are sure do not because they cannot viz. the ignorant 2. The denying the Sacrament to ignorant persons is one of those actions that are not substantial but only circumstantial to This denial of the Supper is but circumstantial to Gods Ordinances c. Gods Ordinances for we acknowledge the Ordinance of the Supper in Christs own Institution and Command and in its appointed elements and actions accordingly and thus we do administer it in the Church of God Again we have laboured before to prove that such as cannot examine themselves are by prohibition and Ordinance of Christ to abstain and not to receive so that for a Minister to deny the Communion to such is not to create a new Ordinance but only to be helpful to our brethren in putting that Ordinance or Prohibition of Christ into execution excluding those whom Christ excludes and admitting those only whom Christ admits 3. Lastly the denying of the Supper to ignorant persons is also one of those things that do openly plainly and directly tend 3. It directly tends to edification unto edification as edification is opposed to destruction for that tends plainly and directly unto edification as edification is opposed to destruction that doth plainly and directly preserve and keep from sin and judgement but now denial of this Sacrament to the grossely ignorant such as cannot discerne the Lords body or examine themselves doth directly and plainly preserve and keep from sinne viz. the guilt of the body and blood of Christ and judgement viz. eating and drinking damnation to our selves 1 Cor. 11. 26 27 28 29 The receiving of this Sacrament is a direct and proper means Obj. of edification therefore the denying of it is at best but accidently and indirectly so True to such as are worthy i. e. such as God hath commanded to communicate in it the Sacrament is directly and properly a means of their edification yea so it is in it selfe and in its own nature it being ordained of God for edification but yet it is not so to all not to heathens without or those within that have no right in it and whom God forbids to meddle with it The Sacrament
cannot be a proper means of edification to those for whom it was not appointed for the end and use of Sacraments depend upon their appointment but now the Sacrament was not appointed for the grossely ignorant or such as cannot examine themselves or discern the Lords body 2. The denying the Sacrament to such as sin by receiving as well as in receiving of it is not an accidental but a direct and proper means of edification as edification is opposed to destruction for what can be more properly said to be a means of such edification then that which doth immediately hinder from sin but the denying the Sacrament to those that cannot examine themselves c. is to deny it to such as sin by receiving as well as in receiving it I mean whose very receiving is a sin for such as are prohibited to receive by the Law of God therefore sin being the transgression of the Law the very receiving of such against the Law of God is sinne 3. Denying Communion in general to the excommunicate is a direct and proper mean of edification as edification is opposed to destruction for that no doubt is a proper mean for such an end as God himself hath appointed for that end and is to be executed in a direct intention and order to that end but so is denying Communion in general to the excommunicate appointed of God and to be executed by the Church in a direct intention and order to edification as edification is opposed to destruction as is plain 1 Cor. 5. 5 13. Now to apply this if all Communion wherein this part of the Supper is included may be denied and this denial be a direct and proper mean of edification c. what should hinder but that the denial of this part also to those whose very receiving it would be sinful may be a direct and proper means of edification as edification is opposed to destruction that is a direct and proper means of hindring destruction and consequently of edification But here the great question is how or by what meanes How may the ignorant be found out Quest may such as are thus grossely ignorant be detected or found out which way may Ministers proceed to discover ignorant persons I answer first in general by this Argument that which commands the end alloweth the means which necessarily help Answ or serve unto the end this must needs be yielded us as the most easie and reasonable limitation of the Rule posito fine ponuntur media Therefore such means as are necessarily conducing to this end of discovering the grossely ignorant and such as cannot examine themselves must needs be allowed and for my part I desire I plead for no more This will be generally granted me but yet some very learned and worthy men will limit the use of these means of discovering Obj. the ignorant to such only as may be fairly suspected to be ignorant To this I answer that to me it seemeth not only uncharitable but unreasonable to use means of discovering the knowledge Answ of such whose knowledge we are satisfied of before to this end that we may discover their knowledge this is but to seek the groat which is already found and the like uncharitablenesse and unreasonablenesse is also discovered by using means to discover ignorance which is not liable to any faire suspition But the great doubt is who may be thought to be suspicious Obj. or suspected of ignorance Who suspected 1. I conceive we shall not differ with many if in general we say that this suspition taketh in all the younger sort of people Answ 1 of whose knowledge the Church or Minister hath not the younger sort been satisfied The ground of this suspition lieth thus we know that all these were ignorant and we have not been satisfied of their knowledge as because we know that a person excommunicate was scandalous he is still justly liable to suspition until we are satisfied of his repentance This I think is generally allowed us seeing few deny us the liberty of examining youth in order to their admission to the Supper which I do verily beleeve give me leave to say so without offence if well emproved might lay a ground-work of a better Reformation for the next Age then we shall ever see by the zealous pressing the necessity of examination upon all in the present evil and froward generation 2. Neither I presume do any doubt but that some of the 2. Some of the elder sort elder sort of our people may be justly and reasonably suspected of ignorance the grounds of this suspition may be many 1. Because they may appear almost unreasonable in earthly things hence they may be fairly suspected to be grosse and ignorant in heavenly things which are further off from our understandings as our Saviour reasoned with Nicâ—demus John 5. 12 2. or because they are loth to be brought into discourse about spiritual things when no other reason appears for it but a fear of bewraying their ignorance as a guilty person is the more suspicious by his seeming unwilling to discourse of the matter in question or to come to his trial 3. Or if a person hath never from his youth given any satisfaction of his knowledge in the Fundamentals of Religion to the Church or his brethren he may upon the same grounds as the younger sort of the people be still under the suspition of the Church and accordingly liable to the Churches trial therein But it is added if there be more means of discovering the ignorent then one why should we make one absolutely necessary Obj. viz. Examination I answer I hope most of my brethren are of another minde Answ and practice Satisfaction in point of knowledge is necessary but no means in particular of discovery of this is so the end is acceptable by any means this is according to our agreement in these parts Our Agreement in these parts Indeed we desire a conference with all our people but not because it is the only way but because we judge it to be the best way to those ends for which we have exprest our selves to desire it And here I conceive we differ with none seeing none can deny a conference or mutual discourse to be the best means of discovering each others minde for if we call conference an examination none to extend the words of that learned Gentleman do so much question the conveniency of examining as the necessity thereof Mr. Morris p. 85. Yea I shall offer further if any one man though in it self most expedient fall under the suspition of any person much more of the people in general that may I think and ought to be yielded from if any other mean of satisfaction may be tendred or had Bur if none may be questioned for ignorance but such as are under a suspition thereof why do you desire a conference with Obj. all are all under such suspition I answer there are foure special reasons
warrant the casting the excommunicate out by degrees and prudence encouraged by general Scriptures doth doubtlesse prescribe and urge this as well as that yea and with better advantage Whereupon though not so early may I not say as wisely the Church afterwards took up this course of mercy and gentlenesse patience and forbearance in ejecting and indeed abated of the former rigour severity and zeal in readmitting by such slow degrees and who doubts but that the Gospel being so rich in mercy and forbearance and the Ministry standing in his stead who hath all fulnesse of grace and every Ordinance being a mean of salvation our liberty is broader and our errour lesse in the wayes of indulgency and clemency then of judgement and punishment the rule of mercy exceeded is but an errour of charity whereas excesse in justice proceeds into injury and cruelty But however that be concluded this sufficeth my present purpose if such suspention be not lawful then excommunication in whole is necessary for the rejecting a scandalous person from Church-priviledges and if it be lawful yet excommunication is still necessary hereunto seeing such suspension is nothing save onely as it is a part and beginning of excommunication and hath no warrant but in those Scriptures where excommunication is founded and is indeed excommunication and every person rejected regularly from the Supper stands excommunicate though but in part Hence will easily flow some seasonable intimations which I crave leave to note only 1. It hence then follows that we in our Churches may not reject any of our brethren from any part of our Church-communion for their conversation-sake if they be not liable to censure that is as before we explained if they be not guilty of some great sin and persist therein with obstinacy we are taught even from New-England that they proceed not to censure but in case of known offence and such offence as cannot be healed without censure and what Church among the very Brownists and Anabaptists proceeds by any other rule Let us impartially reckon of scandal and censure with the Scriprure either in the Old or New Testament and I presume this matter is ended we must not proceed to so high a censure as Excommunication upon stricter termes then the Scripture doth nor take scandal as deserving so high a censure in a stricter sense then the Scripture doth 2. Then to reckon any of our members among dogges and swine before they have been duly admonished if not excommunicated is rash judgement 3. Our provoking the Gommunicants when the fault is not known save privately to make publick exceptions against the lives or actions of any that deserve admission to the Sacrament and not rather to put them upon their proper duty of private admonition and correption seemeth to crosse our Saviours directions Matth. 15. 5. in this case CHAP. XLI We may not account the members of our Congregations to be without until they are cast out THe second inference touching Censures is this if wicked men be indeed consistent with visible Church-membership then we may not reckon any member of our Congregations to be without though wicked and scandalous until he is made such by Church-censure and cast out The reason of this connexion is evident for our Congregations are true Churches And secondly the members of true Churches are to be accounted to be within and not without until they are excommunicated or cast out notwithstanding their scandal The incestuous person is an invincible instance here 't is known that he was very scandalous yer 't is plain he was still within and accordingly liable to the Churches judgement until cast out Yea 3. Without hesitancy I assert that there is no way or means or remedy to be found in Scripture or in the practice or judgement of any Church of casting out scandalous persons from church-Church-communion or interest but the censure of excommunication But these things have I hope been demonstrated before I shall therefore here only adde my wonder at those that allow our Congregations to be true Churches and yet not only reckon of but even deal with many yea most of the members of such Congregations as heathens before any censure have passed from the Church upon them an easie way I confesse to cut off the trouble of duty in Admonition and Excommunication But I fear not so easie a way of satisfying conscience or quitting our selves to our Master in the day of our account O that men would seriously consider what Word of God or Church of Christ will owne such practice at that great day and yet is it not a general miscarriage the Loâ—d awaken us to see that there is no other way for scandalous members to become Mat. 18. as heathens but by not hearing the Church which presupposeth admonition CHAP. XLII We are bound to proceed against scandalous persons within our Congregations by way of Censure LAstly if wickednesse or scandal render not the members of our Congregations to be no Church-members then are we not bound to proceed against the scandalous in our congregations by way of censure this is indeed the hardest task but yet it is not a clear duty and the great and likeliest remedy of reforming the scandalous and preserving the rest from leaven and destruction If persons be scandalous and within what can free them from Ecclesiastical censure or excuse us from judging them with it do not ye judge them that are within i. e. quatenus within and consequently all that are within is not Christs discipline as extensive as his Church or is there any room in his house not under his keyes any Schollar in his School not under his Rod or any subject in his Kingdome not under his power where then is his glory Yea do not those forcible and plain commands Tell thy brother of his fault and if he hear thee not tell the Church and if he hear not the Church let him be to thee as an heathen and a publican an heretick after the first and second admonition reject In the Name of the Lord Jesus deliver such an one unto Satan Put away from among your selves that wicked person c. do not these direct and pressing commands convince reprove rebuke exhort both Ministers and people as with thunder and lightning doth not the rod of severer discipline in the ancient Churches in more perillous times lash our fearfulnesse lazinesse unbelief and neglects herein The good Lord spare and pardon yet shame us and rowse us to our duty that we may no longer conferre with that flesh and blood that cannot enter into the Kingdome of heaven tbat the Ministry may effectually quicken the people to a regular course of admonition and proceed with them to an high censure upon just complaints of such as are found obstinate Certainly this is the remedy appointed by Christ for a Reformation and while this way is obstructed either by us or our people it is no great wonder if mens devices though never so
absoluâ—ion had no reference to that in confirmation as if it were to signifie the restoration of those higher priviledges confer'd by confirmation but rather that imposition of hands being a ceremony universally added to solemnize any great and remarkable grace and honour confer'd on a person it was likewise introduced into absolution as to confirmation upon the same ground it having no more respect to confirmation in this Ordinance then to Ordination or any other great action that was usually adorned with the like ceremony Though I cannot but applaud the great ingenuity of my authour in this his very neat and uniform glosse I am the more confirm'd that the ancients intended no such thing by their laying on hands in absolution because 't is most evident that they had ecclesiastical censures even for the catechumeni nondum baptizati the catechumens none yet baptised and much rather for those that were baptized though not yet confirmed de catechumenis denique qui prolapsi sunt statuerunt tribus annis eos à Catechumenorum oratione sâ—pâ—ratos postea recipidebere Cent. Magd. 4. c. 6. p. 426. l. 44 therefore they appointed that if any of the Catechumens proved scandalous they should be separated from the prayer of the Catechumens for three yeares if it be demanded qui statuerunt Ruffinus tells us these words before recited are punctually and expresly the thirteenth canon of the counsel of Nice with which the Neocaesarian Synod in their fifth canon do well agree Catechumenus inquit id est Audiens qui ingreditur in ecclesiam stat cum catechuminis si peccare fueriâ— visus figens genua andiat verbum ut se abstineat ab illo peccato quod fecit quod si in eo perdurat objici omnino debere if a catechumen shall be seen to sinne he shall heare the word kneeling upon The Centurists note some difference between the Greek book and that of Ruffinus touching the censure of the catechumeni on his knees that he may leave his sinne but if he harden himselfe and continue in his sinne he shall be wholly cast out The Greek book of the Nicene canons the Centurists have observed to differ somewhat from those of Ruffinus collection and indeed it differs from it in this thirteenth canon about the censure of scandalous catechumens expressing it a little more plainly placuit hoc Sancto Magno concilio de catechumenis qui lapsi sunt ut tribus annis inter audientes verbum sunt tantummodo post haec vero orent cum catechumenis it pleased this holy and great councel concerning the catechumens who have sinned that for three yeares they abide among those who heare the Word onely and after that time they pray with the catechumens Give me leave to note a little difficulty here the counsel stiled A difficulty touching the audientes and competentes the Neocaesarian maketh catechumenus and audiens all one the Nicâ—nâ— counsel makes the state of the audientes to be below the state of the catechumeni into which these are cast back by Church-censure intâ—r audientes The former also makes the Censure of the catechumeni consist in the manner of their hearing figentes genua the latter makes it to consist in being cast from a state of Prayer to a state of hearing onely But the difficulty vanisheth by noting a distinction we finde Catechumenos duplices facit Rabanus l. 1. c. 16. de cler instit alii enim simpliciter catechumeni dicuntur ac erant ii qui audicbane discebant doctrinam fidei alii vero competentes qui jam so baptizari petebant Cent. 9. c. 7. p. 291. l. 50. of old made of the catechumeni some were properly audientes some competentâ— viz. such as desired baptisme So I think there was a difference in the censure belonging to them the audientes sinning were to hear figentes genua a continuing obstinate to be wholly cast out the competentes sinning were to be put back again inter audientes that is to loose the place of prayer to which it seems one sort of the catechumini viz. the competentes were admitted and the other viz. the audientes were not being audientes verbum tantummodo the Neocaesarian counsâ—l â—eeme to provide censure for the first viz. the audientes making them and the catechumeni all one and the Nicene counsel for the second viz. the competentes making these and the catechumeni one as may with easie observation of the Reader appear The Observation I would make hereof is that there is no relation to the Church but it hath its proper censure and persons offending No relation to the Church but hath its proper censure cannot be ejected from what they have not they shall from what they have persons that hear and pray too shall if offending be debarred from prayer and persons that hear onely from that manner of hearing they do enjoy or wholly be cast out and why not those that hear and pray and communicate too if offending be first onely denied the Supper however there is no Church-state without a Church censure in the practice of antiquity yea and this censure may be safely called excommunnication also if we consult the sixty seventh Canon of the Eleberine The censure of the catechumeni may be stiled excommunication counsel concerning the catechumeni prohibendum ne qua fidelis vel catechumena an t comicos aut viros scenicos habeat quecunque hoc fecerit a communiâ—ne arceatur though applied to a person neither confirmed nor baptized if under atechisme for it it is there forbidden that any woman whether among the number of the faithful or yet under catechumenacy should marry a Plaier and if any should the same Church-censure is applicable to both and the chatechumena as well as the fidelis is to be driven from the communion of the Church or to be excommunicated And for that passage of Erasmus though an excellent yet a later writer that if such children as have been baptized when A pâ—ssage of Erasmus considered they are grown up do being demanded deny to ratifie those things which their God-fathers did promise in their name fortassis expediet c. perhaps it will be expedient that they be not constrained but left to their own minde till they repent and in the mean time nec ad aliam interim vocari poenam nisi ut ab Eucharistia sumenda reliquisque Sacramentis arceantur have no other punishment inflicted upon them but this onely that they be debarred from receiving the Eucharist and other Sacraments Here first it may be noted that Erasmus makes it onely a matter of expediency not necessity 2. That also is much weakened with a fortassis perhaps it may be expedient to let such alone and perhaps it may be expedient at least in some Ages and some cases yea necessary to inflict a higher censure on them 3. Yea Erasmus doth more then intimate that the driving such as will not be confirm'd from the Supper and other
hardest after this Ordinance then the two former especially by our Authour hereby the party is admitted out of the Infant into the Adult estate and received into full communion By confirmation say the Waldenses is forthwith given Confirmatione protinus data est c. Nemo ad sacroSanctam communionem priu admittatur quam catechismum dedicerit confirmatus sit full power of communicating in the body and blood of Christ with all the faithful for none according to our own Lyturgy is to be admitted to the holy communion before he hath learned his catechisme and be confirmed viz. in his right therein Now for confirmation as to these three last uses for which it is now onely desired I shall crave leave to signifie mine opinion very briefly of First I conceive it is not to be found in expresse command or example or in any expresse mention or words in Scripture what the confirmation of Apostolical practice was we have already noted and yet I beleeve it was not like to this Secondly though the eminently Learned and judicious Calvine and some other very worthy Divines are very peremptory that this kinde of confirmation was in use in the Ancient Church I confesse though I have earnestly sought it and desired to see it in some ancient Writer I could never yet be made so happy neither did I ever yet see any words cited or pretended to be cited out of any such ancient Authour that did offer any thing like it viz. the admitting such as were baptized in Infarcy when growne of age upon their personal publick profession and engagement into farther communion with the Church by the coremony of imposition of hands and prayer What the ancient confirmation was hath been already intimated Thirdly yet I rejoyce to acknowledge that this moderne confirmation for the three great uses mentioned is not onely agreeable to the common principles of nature and reason but that likewise it is juxta consensum Scripturae according to the consent of Scripture as Chemnitius teacheth Fourthly which consent of Scripture hereunto is I conceive not onely negative but positively given in such general commands as require all Church-dispensations and more expressely those of discipline to be directed and leveld at edification for I doubt not but that such a confirmation may be piously used and to the edification of the Church as Chemnitius also affirmeth as a meanes most happily accommodated to this great end Fifthly therefore I must have leave to say that I verily beleeve after these my small endeavours upon the point that our Reverend and most Worthy Father Master Hughes hath hit the very white and that if this kinde of confirmation which is now sought for or that way of examination which many practice by some also termed a little more mildly a ministerâ—al conference which are all one for substance cannot stand upon his or such like grounds they will stand no where but must fall at last Sixthly moreover were the late superstitions and formallity removed as all good men must needs wish and the stated effects and provisoes allowed as I cannot but desire and the present season and temper of our people duely considered and found to be receptable of it which I am willing to hope I do here most solemnly judge that confirmation might prove through divine mercy a most effectual mean as of the edification of the Church so of reconciliation of the much to be lamented differing brethren and therefore to be both piously and charitably desired and not onely coldly and faintly to be wished but by all the lovers of truth and peace earnestly prayed for and seriously endeavoured both as a most needful and seasonable Ordinance Seventhly yea though after all due paines and endeavours used we should not be able to reconcile our principles in every point if yet we can meet in the same practice about confirmation though on some small differing grounds why may not the Church be happily edified and the peace thereof in a measure obtained by such an unity uniformity in practice while the persons differing but in lighter matters may wait upon the Lord in this good service for the great blessing of unanimity promised also May it be still provided I humbly offer first that confirmation be not thought to have any ingrediency into the nature or being of our membership Secondly that the temper of the people be found such as will admit of such a change without any dangerous disturbance among them threatening more hurt then sober men can rationally expect advantage to the Church thereby these methinks have some weight in them and may not be reckoned among the lighter matters 8. Lastly for the Ceremony of imposition of hands I cannot beleeve it to be so necessary as the substance of confirmation alreâ—dy declared is though with Chemnitius I doubt not but it may be added here without superstition especially when the substance of the work shall rather receive solemnity and reverence then disgrace or prejudice thereby as Calvine intimates it did of old to the end this action saith he which otherwise ought deservedly to be esteemed grave and holy might have the more reverence and respect Quo autem haec actio c. Inst l. 4. c. 19. s 4 the Ceremony also of imposition of hands was added to it After the Learned Doctor Hackwell I am apt to judge this ceremony of laying on of hands to arise from natures fountaine and thence to spread it self over all the world by universal custome Man-kinde being as it were prompted by nature to solemnize any great honour to be conferred on a person with this ceremony both Jew and Greek and the Church of God have taken it into common practice upon all sch occasions as is most apparent both in prophane and ecclesiastical hystory is And upon this ground with some special allusion to the practice of the Apostle who its like took it up from the former natural and universal custome with Jewes and Gentiles when they conferr'd the Holy Ghost I presume the Churches afterward annex'd it as a right to confirmation However if this kinde of confirmation be not found in Scripture this right of it imposition of hands as relating to it cannot be found there wherefore we can onely say this of it that it is a decent ecclesiastical ceremony as Luther calls it solemne and laudable and very fit to be added in confirmation when general prejudice or any other extraordinary impediment doth not prohibit it or when it is not likely to lose its end We propose two ends at present of setting up the practice Two ends of now deâ—â—ring confirmation of confirmation the Edification of the people and Reconciliation of Brethren in the Ministery give me leave to present unto you a double Consideration hereupon First whether imposition of hands added in confirmation by us now may not grate upon popular prejudice and hinder somewhat the first of our ends Secondly whether some worthy brethren who do not at all scruple the substance of the action but are haply ready to joyne with us in it yet because they see not that imposition of hands was ever used but but by a Bishop may not be stricken off further from us should we venture upon it and thus far we should faile of the other of our ends I dare conclude that neither of those two great patrons of confirmation Calvine or Chemnitius doth lay such a stresse upon imposition of hands therein but that the substance of the action being solemnly practiced this ceremony of laying on of hands in such a case as was now proposed may yea ought to be omitted I had thought to have added a fifth proviso namely that the children of such as are baptized and do usually joyne with us Prov. 5. Children of the non-confirmâ—d to be baptâ—zed in attendance upon the worship of God though they be not as yet confirmed be not denied their Infant Baptisme this also seems to be granted us in our Reverend Authours own principles our Authour questions not the membership of such parents yea p. 54 60. further he argueth that such though appearing unworthy of confirmation through ignorance or scandal they are not to be excommunicate or dismembred He also asserts that children are p. 25. with 53. baptized by vertue of their parents membership Thus hence we might be bold to reason where there is membership in the parent there the childe may be baptized if children are to be baptized by vertue of their parents membership But there is membership in such parents as are baptized and not excommunicated nor to be excommunicated Therefore the children of such parents may be baptized and that regularly as p. 53. our Authour addes according to the Word FINIS
had or be cut off that was never on or cast out that was never within 2. If it be my Opponents judgement that excommunication doth cut a person wholly off this cannot consist with that which we deny viz. that wickednesse doth so too for that which is already done cannot be done againe I meane according to the same act but if wickednesse which is the fault doth put a man wholly out of the Church then the man is wholly out before the censure of excommunication proceeds to do it for the fault is before the penalty and consequently excommunication is prevented in its work and doth not put a man out of the Church Learned Willet saw a necessity of this consequence wherefore having first concluded that excommunication doth cut off from the Church he addes that therefore wicked men are members of the Will. Synop. second controversie of the Church Church de facto though not de jure till cut off accordingly by excommunication 3. Yea if my Opponent affirme that excommunicate persons are yet not wholly cut off from the Church thereby then my conclusion gaineth advantage and forceth it self with greater strength for if excommunication which supposeth wickednesse procuring it doth not wholly cut off much lesse doth wickednesse do so of it selfe without this censure added to it and if wicked persons excommunicate have not lost all title to membership much lesse have wicked persons not Excommunicate thus lost it Object It may be urged here that wicked persons are de jure cast out before men or in the judgement of the Church though not excommunicate and therefore they are so de facto before God Answ This doth not follow for of the two the judgement of the Church is first viz. in nature and therefore the censure of God cannot be first in time the promise is that God will binde what the Church bindes * Heaven waits and expects the Priests sentence here on earth the Lord follows the servant and what the servant rightly binds and looses here on earth that the Lord confirms in heaven Chrysost Hom. 5. in Isa vid. Greg Hom 26 in evang intimating that in ordinary course of proceeding the Church must censure and binde first and then what she bindes on earth God according to his own Word will binde in heaven God who useth to work by means doth this also of casting out of the Church by the means or mediation of his Churches act clave non errante Besides that God doth account wicked persons not excommunicate to be members of his Church or of the number of his people notwithstanding their wickednesse hath I presume so fully appeared from his own words in my former discourse that nothing more can need to be added either to this answer or this Chapter CHAP. XXXII Excommunication doth not put a man wholly out of the Church YEt it may be questioned whether excommunication doth root up membership or break off all relation to the Church It hath been a long question betwixt the reformed Divines and the Papists whether excommunication wholly cut off from the Catholick Church or the Church of the saved though by Catholick the one side meant the invisible Church and the other the visible Our Divines do unanimously assert and undeniably evince that excommunication doth not cut off from the Church invisible though some few of them seem to intimate that it doth cut off from the visible Church Yet with respect to the visible Church they mince their assertion with a conditionaliter and say that upon condition and hope of repentance as Trelcatius or potentia as Willet an excommunicate person is a member of it However I presume they had as good deny them to be members of the visible Church altogether for what doth conditionaliter or potentia add to the excommunicate more then will fit a Turk or Pagan as well as them may it not be said of a Turk or Pagan that he is upon condition of repentance or in potentia a member of the Church both visible and invisible for indeed a person that is no more a member then upon condition of repentance or in power whether excommunicate or not is no more a member then an Heathen that is not at all till the condition be performed and the power be reduced into act for though there be degrees in power and there is a nearer power in the excommunicate then in Heathen yet if he be onely so in power it can onely be said that he may be so and thereby it is intimated that he is not so at all for the present Divines do generally distinguish of two degrees of excommunication the greater and the lesser if this distinction be allowed our present question concerneth the lesser degree of excommunication for I grant that if there be such a degree as the greater called Anathema Maranatha this doth in the usual understanding of it wholly cut off from the visible Church though I crave leave to adde that there are but few footsteps of it in the New Testament and that in the use and extent thereof as it is explained by Divines it belongs to such onely as have sinned the sinne against the holy Ghost and puts men out of the Church without hope of repentance and as accursed till our Lord shall come whereby it is rendred impossible to be inflicted by men before that day of his coming and therefore such as are by necessity cut off from our practice may be very well exempt from our present discourse of choice Now concerning the common censure called the lesser or the lesser degree of excommunication which yet I yeeld to be more then suspension I renue the question whether this doth wholly dismember or cut one wholly off from the visible Church and for the negative I offer Reas 1. If there be two degrees of excommunication then the first degree doth not put a man wholly out of the Church for the gâ—eatest and last degree of excommunication is a Church-censure as well as the first and lesser now if the first degree of excommunication did wholly put out of the Church where iâ—â—here roome for the second if by the first they be put wholly out how shall the latter judgement of the Church reach them for what hath she to do to judge those that are without therefore she judging those that are within with this last censure also they are concluded to be within in some sonse that are capable of such judgement though under the lesser excommunication before Now that there are two such degrees of censure in the power of the Church is not questioned by most that are likely to oppose me in this controversie so that this may serve at least as an argument to them Reas 2. But to the thing such excommunication as we discourse of doth not sever a man from the community of the Church which is its essence nor yet wholly from its communion or its formal actions so that a person though