you tell it to the Church that is to the Sanedrim to the Magistrate of your own Religion and Nation and if he refuse to hear him if he stand not to the judgment of your own chief Judicatures you may without just offence to any man deal with him as with a Publican or Heathen that should do you any injury and whom you cannot implead nor call before any other Authority but the Roman Tribunals XLII That this is the proper and genuine Interpretation of the place is plain and evident from the whole tenor and series of the Discourse but especially from the conclusion of it and from all its circumstances For First Christ talks not here of any enormous and publick Transgressions which belong'd to Religion and the Laws and Rites of their Nation for these the Sanedrim or great Councils of the Jews were to redress but his discourse is of private wrongs which every man had power for himself to remit One manifest proof of the truth of what I say may be for that all the whole Oration runs in the singular number If thy Brother shall trespass 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against thee go and tell him his faults between thee and him alone and again tell the Church c. and let him be to thee as an Heathen c. So Luke 17. v. 3. If thy Brother 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and v. 4. if he trespass against thee seven times in a day and seven times in a day turn again to thee saying I repent thou shalt forgive him We can no ways interpret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against thee here to be meant against the Church For when 't is after said Tell it to the Church the sence would be O Church tell it to the Church And again we can as little interpret it with thy privity and knowledge for neither the sence of the words nor the nature or circumstances of the discourse will admit of such an Explication For why am I requir'd to tell a man his fault betwixt me and him alone if I was but as one privy to his Crime and that he trespassed not privately and against me alone Why should I not rather be enjoyn'd to take in them with me whom he directly injur'd that they and I might reprove him together But Christ gives not that scope and liberty to take others with me in my first Applications to my injuring Brother And therefore 't is plain Christ speaks of Injuries done me by my Brother privately But farther yet how can the words of St. Luke If he turn again to thee thou shalt forgive him be accommodated to this sence Can we say that here To thee is put for Thou being privy and conscious to the injury done by him What must then the meaning be of Thou shalt forgive him Must we here also say Thou shalt be privy and conscious to his forgiveness Did the prodigal son Luke 15. 11. that sinn'd against Heaven onely sin in the sight and privity of Heaven 'T is indeed plain enough in 1 Cor. 8. 12. that we sin against the Brethren when we do a thing which may become a Stumbling block to them through their weakness But this of St. Matthew is quite of a different nature and truly the whole frame of this Discourse and way of wording it can't allow us to expound it of any other than private wrongs which every man has power and right in himself to remit and forgive And if the Injurer repent him not of his own accord this is to be done on the part of the Injured to bring him to it Secondly This is again proved for that the Apostles of Christ did not otherwise understand him as may be gather'd from St. Peter's Question v. 21. Whether his seven times forgiving his offending Brother would be enough Peter could not be to learn that he neither could nor ought to pardon an offence which concern'd others or the whole Church Thirdly The words Unto thee v. 17. is a farther proof hereof Christ doth not say Let him be unto us or unto others or unto the Church but let him be unto thee as a Publican unto thee who art or hast been the injur'd man Christ though he address his discourse to all the Apostles equally yet commands that the Wrong Doer be held for an Heathen and Publican by him alone who is the Sufferer thereby and that too not till the Church that is the lawful Magistracy of the Jews in their Sanedrim had admonish'd him Besides he speaks not there of things which relate to the whole Church or to any number of persons but which relate to private men Fourthly Christ speaks of such Trespasses which we are obliged to pardon as often as the Offender says he repents And that this Remission and Forgiveness transacted between two alone puts an end to the Controversie appears from these words v. 19. Again I say unto you If two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask it shall be done for them of my Father which is in Heaven But an hanious and publick Offence which concerns many persons or perhaps the whole Church may not be remitted by one alone And here we may take notice by the by of that Adverb again whereby he intimates his having spoke before to the same purpose though in different words Fifthly Christ speaks of Trespasses and Offences which the actor of them is not asham'd of or which he will not stick frankly to confess and own before any man Had he spoke of Crimes of a deeper dye which concern'd many or the whole Church 't would be in vain to bring him to others that might bear witness as 't is v. 16. for such an Action if 't were yet private no Offender would avow it before witness which might endanger him But in all things here discoursed of this gradual procedure recommended by Christ must be observ'd and therefore he speaks of private Injuries which others have nothing to do with Sixthly Christ speaks of such Offences which the Church he here speaks of doth not otherwise punish than by admonishing the Offender with bare words for 't would be needless to have added If he hear not the Church could an open punishment have redress'd the Offence Seventhly The Parable that follows v. 23. gives a clear proof to this matter its conclusion being that God will not forgive them their Trespasses who from their hearts forgive not the Trespasses of a repenting Brother without exacting farther pains or penalties upon him But the Church as some of our Adversaries tell us ought not thus to forgive but ought to keep them at least for a time from the Sacraments till they shall have given testimony of their Repentance to Elders surrogated and appointed for that purpose So that such a Church will not seven times a day forgive them that say they repent but will see the argument and proof of that Repentance things which Christ says not a word of he
requires no farther argument than the Confession of the Fault which scarce any man will have occasion to repeat seven times a day who hath not plaid the Hypocrite in some or all of the former six We have I think from all this evidently prov'd that Christ in this 18th Chapter of St. Matthew speaks nothing of Crimes that are to be redressed by Excommunications but of light and private Injuries and the way and means of making them up and reconciling them and therefore belongs not to the business of Excommunication If indeed we do but well weigh the close of that Chapter all doubt from hence must be at an end XLIII He that can and will needs imagine that Christ in this 18th Chapter of St. Matthew set up or instituted Excommunication ought to shew in which of the words 't is contain'd If he cannot shew it any where there comprized 't is to no purpose to say 't is there commanded But if it be there it must either be in these words v. 17. Tell it unto the Church or in these Let him be to thee as an heathen and a publican or lastly in these v. 18. Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven c. But I doubt not to prove it with most unanswerable Arguments that none of these words comprize any such matter and since it can be found in no other 't is lost labour to enquire here after it XLIV These words of Christ Tell it unto the Church prove no more than this that he who has been injur'd by his Brother and all his endeavours of reconciliation with him have been ineffectual may honestly and lawfully complain of him to the Church or to the Governours and Rulers of the Church And further that this same Church hath a right and authority to reprehend and admonish the Wrong Doer that he cease from being so But no more of power is here given to the Church than v. 17. was before given to the one or two Witnesses excepting onely in this that the Cause is not to be brought before the Church without the Witnesses Is it not therefore a weak way of reasoning to say The Church has power to admonish him that trespasses against his Brother therefore has she power to excommunicate him or to debâ—â— him the Sacrament But now some may perhaps urge that the Church not having a Right or Authority of punishing the guilty with Death and other corporal punishments she is necessitated to have recourse to this way of denying them the Sacrament But I answer Were the Antecedent as true as indeed from both the old Testament from the History of all Ages from what our own Eyes and Senses tell us we are assured 't is quite otherwise no such consequence could be drawn from it nor can it be ever proved that these things have any necessary coherence one with another The Church hath not the power of the Sword she can't kill and slay therefore may she must she drive from the Sacrament those who own and profess the same Religion the same saving Faith she must drive from that Sacrament that was instituted for and ought to be open and common to all that outwardly profess the same Faith XLV If yet our Adversaries think Excommunication to have been instituted in these other words Let him be to thee as an heathen man and a publican I utterly deny it Nether can it by any Art or Rhetorick Perswasion or Argument whatever be demonstrated whilst the world stands that this form of Speech Let him be to thee as an heathen man and a publican should tantamount to this Let him be excommunicate let him be kept from the Sacrament for even in the days of Christ the circumcised Publicans were they Jews or Gentiles were not prohibited the Temple Sacrifices Rites Ceremonies and Sacraments And truly Christ may seem to have joyn'd the Publican with the Heathen to prevent all thoughts and suspition of his here interdicting them such Rites and Sacraments How could the Publicans by the Jewish Law be shut out from the Temple and from worshipping God there when 't was not so much as a sin to be a Farmer or Collector of Taxes and Tribute-money nor found to be any where prohibited by God Sure 't is that Christ nowhere forbad it When the Publicans askt John what they must do to be saved he doth not bid them quit their Employments but directs them Luke 3. 13. not to exact more than that which was appointed them And Luke 19. 5. Christ doth not order Zacheus the Chief among the Publicans to lay down his Office nor finds any fault with him on account of his Employ and the Publican that Luke 18. 10. went up into the Temple to pray and return'd to his house more Justified in the judgment of Christ than the Pharisee we do not read that he left off being a Publican nor those others who Luke 7. 29. and Luke 15. 7. justified and praised God and were dear and intimate with Christ and his Apostles In short I say that the Holy Writ that is God hath not at any time or place condemn'd or any ways spoke against Publicans for their very being Publicans that is Tax-gatherers which all sober men will voluntarily grant me Upon which Concession I argue thus God in Scripture condemns not a Publican as a Publican Now whom God condemns not he cannot be excommunicated by any Law of God therefore no Publican could by the Law of God be prohibited access to the Temple or to Divine Worship I therefore make this conclusion No Publican could by the Law be condemned or excommunicated but Christ commands that he that neglects to hear that Church which he there speaks of should be to him as a Publican therefore he wills that he should be to him as a man who was not by the Law of God accursed that is not barely for his being a Publican And whereas these Excommunication-men say that the words Let him be to thee as a Publican signifie as much as if he had said Let him be to thee as a Publican is to the Pharisees 't is both absurd false and impossible for 't is in no sort credible that Christ in the same place in which he design'd to institute as our Adversaries will have it a thing of that weight and moment and so beneficial and necessary to the Church should or would make the wicked action of most profligate men the Rule and Measure for all the World to go by afterwards Besides it hath been already prov'd that no man was ever excommunicated by the Jews after the rate that we now talk of Excommunication And lastly all the words of Christ are inconsistent with this their interpretation for Christ here talks neither of nor with the Pharisees but all is betwixt him and the Disciples and the subject of the discourse is of avoiding Scandals and this is the thing that Christ says If the Wrong Doer neglect to hear the
Church let him be to thee that is he is to thee as a Publican to thee not to the Pharisees Moreover 't is plain that Christ and his Disciples and other good men had no hatred for the Publicans most certainly they never thought them to deserve Excommunication but did dayly eat and live with them And in that Christ joyns the Heathen and Publican together we must needs acknowledge that Christ speaks of a matter common to them both therefore these words Let him be to thee as a Publican must have quite another meaning from these Let him be to thee as an excommunicate person This therefore must be the meaning of the place If he neglect to hear the Church you may as to this matter proceed against him without offence or scandal to any man as if you had to do with an Heathen man or a Publican Now he that had a Controversie with any such was forced to submit his Cause to the Roman Magistracy which is plain as to the Heathens alone and that 't was so for the Publicans may easily appear for that they were the sworn Officers of the Romans even against their own Nation and for that also that they could expect scarce common Justice from the Pharisees and Chiefs of the Jews who accounted them the most despicable and profligate of mankind But Christ allowed not this Appeal to the Roman Magistrate against a Brother-Jew till he had endeavoured a Reconciliation that way which Christ proposed and which had before been prescribed them by the Law St. Paul's excuse for himself in the last of the Acts looks much the same way to wit that he had never appeal'd unto Caesar had he not been constrain'd nor did he it to accuse the Jews but defend himself from violence and wrong The Apostle 1 Cor. 6. 1. commands that if any Christian had a matter against another he should decide it before the Saints and not presently go to law before the unjust But if a Christian had just cause of Action against an Infidel what doubt is there but that he might prosecute his Right before an Heathen Magistrate So if any one did neglect or despise the Sentence Judgment and Admonitions of the Elders of the Church he that was the Sufferer the injur'd person might without offence to his Neighbour appeal unto the Heathen Magistrate XLVI But we shall handle this matter with the more perspicuity if we take into examination what and of what nature that Church was which Christ commanded the injur'd person to tell it unto in the clearing of which I lay this for the entrance and foundation which I doubt not but all men will allow of and I know none that ever denies it viz. That Christ speaks of a Church that was then in being how could he otherwise have bid them tell it to a Church which was then nowhere to be found and of which and of its nature and constitution they as yet heard nothing Had he design'd the raising a new Church or new form of Government as yet unknown to the Apostles he had deliver'd them but a very lame Institution for that he neither told them who were that Church nor how nor of what sort or number of men it was to be made up of nor the ways of their judicial proceedings nor what penalties they might inflict and the like Neither did he speak of all kind of sins as I have before proved and even they who build their Excommunication upon this Text are forc'd themselves to confess as well as we for they openly own that Christ took notice here onely of private Trespasses But whenever Christ made any new Institution he omitted nothing that was requisite to its being and subsistency here he onely says Tell it unto the Church and if he neglect to hear her he gives the Complainant liberty to look on him as a Publican here 's no penalty annext to the Contumacy St. Luke when he sets down the same passage recounts it not with all those particularities as St. Matthew does The other two Evangelists make not the least mention of it who yet would scarce have pass'd over a matter of such moment and necessity had they known that Christ had then first made any such new Institution To which we may adde that the Apostles were all along firmly perswaded that Christ should not die or change the Jewish Rites nor did they here by word or otherwise declare themselves not to understand what Christ here taught them or shew any forwardness to ask farther after it or to wonder as if he had told them an unusual and unheard of piece of Doctrine Peter onely wondered at this that he was requir'd to forgive his Brother so many times together Surely therefore they never took these words of Christ to be institutive of a new form of Government which they had never dreamt of before but believed themselves to be taught as truly they were when and for what they might without offence and scandal accuse or implead a Brother Jew before an Heathen Magistrate And at this day 't is rarely seen that Jews go to law with Jews before Christian Judges XLVII But if any ask me whether and how then can this Precept reach all men whether it be of farther use than for those alone that live under an Unchristian Magistracy my answer is That the first part of it of labouring a Reconciliation before we appeal to the Magistrate or go to law about the matter belongs to all Christians but the latter is of no force or use but where true Professors live under an Unchristian or Antichristian Magistrate St. Paul 1 Cor. 6. v. 1. 4. therefore advises the Corinthians to chuse out some among themselves who may judge such Controversies betwixt man and man that they GO NOT TO LAW BEFORE THE VNIVST that is the Heathen Roman Judges Who doubts but that the Corinthians might lawfully have conven'd a Christian Brother that had injur'd them before the Roman and Gentile Tribunals if he had refused to stand to the Determination of those who were chose from among themselves to judge on such occasions or if he mended not upon their Sentence 'T is certain that St. Paul when he saw himself hardly pressed by the Jews appealed unto Caesar Acts 25. 11. which Acts 28. 19. he excuses to those Jews that lived at Rome But he that shall carefully compare Lev. 19. with Ecclus 19. and 1 Cor. 6. with this Chapter of St. Matthew will be able much more clearly and easily to understand this whole matter and may observe how well all hangs together especially if he diligently note the latter part of Christ's and of St. Paul's words which were justly omitted in Moses and Ecclesiasticus there being then no occasion for them for that the Jewish Nation was not then subject to any forreign Power as they were in our Saviour's and St. Paul's time to the Roman Empire XLVIII And thus far as I conceive all will easily
self-same thing God plainly and expresly and with reiterated Precepts commands that every Male except the unclean and such as were in a Journey should keep the Passover He never therefore intended to frighten away some under the figure of the Leaven There were then plenty enough of bad men present that it must be needless to typifie and shadow them out by Leaven And the wickedness of men was a thing as obvious to mens senses and as much to be taken notice of as the Leaven that should represent it Therefore since no figures are commonly instituted of such things as are at hand and in view and which with equal clearness strike the Senses 't is in vain to seek for any Figure there How much more where the things figured are more notorious and common than the Figures themselves But besides Moses does not command that the Eater of Leaven should be debarr'd eating the Passover but commands him to be slain Therefore sinners should not so much be kept from the Lords Supper as they should be capitally punished Which is a Consequence I should be so far from admitting with difficulty that I rather wish it might so be for I desire nothing more than that the strictest Moral Discipline might be observ'd in the Church but such still as is of Gods appointment not of mans invention Secondly The Jews might eat Leaven all the year round excepting onely those seven days of Unleavened Bread which they did commence from the eating of the Passover Now if you would parallel this with the Lords Supper you must of necessity grant a liberty for licentious living all the year provided you abstained from vice all the time you were celebrating the Lords Supper Thirdly Moses speaks here of the Passover onely not of any other Sacraments by Analogie therefore wicked men should onely be kept from the Lords Supper not from Baptism Fourthly The Apostle makes not the comparison to run betwixt the Feast of the Jews and the Lords Supper but betwixt that and our whole course of life he says we are unleavened as men that are washed in the Bloud of Christ and purged from all Leaven and therefore says he let us keep the Feast that is let us live not with the Leaven of Malice but with the Unleavened Bread of Sincerity and Truth There is a vast difference betwixt Leaven simply so called and the Leaven of Malice or Wrath There is none but knows that in the second sence 't is taken figuratively and School-men say that an analogical or figurative sence proves nothing This is certain whatever is meant by Leaven Excommunication can never be maintain'd or justifi'd from it against Gods precept XVIII But some may object that Paul speaks here of the Passover but what I pray makes this to our business as if this word Passover were put for the Lords Supper in the New Testament Christ saith the Apostle 1 Cor. 5. 7. is our Passover sacrificed or slain for us not his Supper The meaning of the words is this As the Jews who onely began their Feast of Unleavened Bread with eating the Lamb did eat Unleavened Bread all that week after so should you who have begun to believe in Christ and are purified and become unleavened through his Bloud you should lead a pure and unspotted life all the rest of the week that is all the days of your life XIX Now that nothing of different nature is to be met with in the other Books of the Old Testament may be known and proved if it were but from this alone that the Jews Posterity were to live according to the Laws and Institutions of Moses contrary to which they might not by any means institute or enjoyn any thing which related to the Worship of God Most certainly the good and pious Judges Priests Prophets and Kings forced away none from their Sacraments and Sacrifices but rather invited all to them with the greater earnestness and zeal The story of good King it should be Hezekiah I suppose See 2 Chron. 35. Josiah 2 Chron. 35. v. 18. is well known who called together all the Children of Israel as well those whom he knew to have sacrificed and burnt Incense to strange Gods or Devils as those who for the shortness of the warning could not be cleansed 2 Chron. 30. v. 19. according to the purification of the Sanctuary From whence 't is observable that Sacraments are Provocations and Allurements to Religion and Piety and that men grow better rather by frequenting than by being robb'd of them provided they are rightly and faithfully instructed XX. Excommunication therefore can never be maintain'd from the first Chapter of Isaiah v. 13. Psal 50. v. 8. and many places of like import where 't is said that God will have nothing to do with the Sacrifices and Oblations of the Wicked for God doth in all those places condemn the abuse of them in that they thought that they fully perform'd the Will of God by the meer external performance at what rate soever their Soul stood affected Besides God neither commands the Prophet nor any one else by him to exclude the Wicked from the Sacrifices and Rites but shews that God will not hear them unless that withal they amend their lives Now the external Policy and Government of the Church stands upon a different foot with the Will of God to us-ward as himself is the Approver or Condemner of our thoughts and actions In fine from the self-same places it may directly and in the same manner be demonstrated that none that is a sinner may call upon the Name of the Almighty nay that 't is unlawful for such an one so much as to praise or give thanks unto God and then 't will be incumbent on the Priests and Elders to forbid the Wicked all these for God hath a like aversion to those when they come from wicked men as is plain as well from the Texts instanc'd in as from places of the like import And if this latter carries absurdity in it no less doth the former XXI Neither doth that of 1 Esdras chap. 9. v. 3. 4. make any whit against us for that was a matter of Policy and no ways relating to the Sacraments for the Magistracy not Esdras the Priest alone though he too was a part of the Magistracy for as Josephus bears witness though they had a Leader yet were they govern'd by the Optimacy or Nobility set forth a Proclamation That whosoever met not at Jerusalem within two or three days their Cattel should be seized to the use of the Temple and they be cast out from them that were of the Captivity not from their Sacraments and Sacrifices But we make it not the enquiry of this place whether the Magistrate hath a right of punishing so or so but whether the Priests had any authority of removing dissolute and bad Livers from the Sacrifices Esdras could not do this contrary to the Command of God Adde to this that Moses never commanded
well belov'd by all many took it very ill at his hands for he was but newly got to that Dignity and not approv'd of or confirm'd in it by the Roman Governour And Eusebius in the second of his Ecclesiastical History chap. 23. tells us that this High Priest snatcht at this occasion of the interregnum But what 's all this to our purpose Was not Archelaus who was stiled King in his Father Herod's last Will and that by the Allowance and Gift of Caesar was he not therefore King because he refus'd the Name and Authority of a King till he had Caesar's confirmation for it And not the Magistrates of some Cities of which there are many in Germany who are subject to some particular Prince not true and lawful Magistrates because on the death of the Prince they are requir'd to pray the Confirmation of their Priviledges from the Successor But now that the High Priest had power after his Confirmation to convoke the Judges of the Sanedrim is clear enough for that they do not say to Albinus that this summoning them was in it self unlawful but that it ought not to have been done by him without the apprebation and privity of Albinus LII It has now been fully and solidly prov'd that Tell it unto the Church signifies no more than Tell it unto the Magistrate of thy People or who is of the same Religion with thy self before you implead your Brother in the Heathen Courts as St. Paul 1 Cor. 6. 5. hath incomparably expounded it where he commands them for this cause to chuse persons out of themselves to judge and arbitrate their Quarrels But now who doubts but that this Precept holds not where God hath blessed us with a pious Christian Magistracy a Magistracy of the same Religion with our selves Indeed St. Augustine in the second Chapter of Faith and Works plainly enough informs us that he accounted Excommunication supplied the place and defect of the visible Sword when the Church wanted that external aid for as he would have it Moses his punishing Transgressors with Death and Phineas his slaying the Adulterers did typifie and prefigure the punishing evil men by Degradations and Excommunications that is at such time as the material Sword the Civil Temporal Power should be wanting in the Church I remember that some Modern Writers hold that the Jews had and retain'd this Custom of Excommunicating because the Sword was taken from them which I have prov'd by irrefragable Reason Argument and Testimonies to be utterly false but were it but thus far true it must necessarily follow that there 's no occasion for Excommunication in such a Church which hath the Civil Authority of its side Nor is it requir'd as a thing obligatory to us to chuse Judges or Arbitrators other than the lawful Judicatures of the Land Be it how it will nothing can be more certain than that the word Church in this passage of Matthew signifies nothing less than a Church-Senate a Council of Clergie-men or Ecclesiasticks endowed with a Faculty a Right or Power to shut out whom they please from the Sacraments LIII Two Objections yet remain First How any one can be said to neglect to hear the Church if that and the Civil Magistrate who hath the power of the Sword are the same thing Secondly How that passage of binding and loosing Mat. 18. v. 18. suits with this matter To the first the Answer is intimated before That the Jews had not then power of judging in all matters but almost every thing that related not to Religion belong'd to the Roman Judicatures And therefore Christ permits that if any one neglects or contemns the Authority of the Sanedrim in such matters the injur'd person may prosecute his Right before the Heathen Magistrate in like manner as if he were to sue an Heathen or Publican Besides many cases may occur which the Law had not provided a distinct and proper punishment for or had not prohibited under any penalty at all in which case it may well be that the Offender may be dismist without more ado than a verbal chiding or admonition Now if the Wrong Doer does not yet leave wronging him the party injur'd may seek farther satisfaction and may again and again apply himself to the Church or Magistrate to punish the other's obstinacy But though this Answer hold true yet the former seems in my mind more apposite and suitable to the purpose and designe of Christ as well as to the several circumstances of time and place and the like LIV. To the second there is as little difficulty in framing it an Answer for since the manner of speaking is the same and almost the self-same words are here repeated which are used by Christ Mat. 16. 19. 't is necessary that they signifie either the same thing or something very like it but in Mat. 16. 19. to bind and to loose signifies nothing else but to preach the Gospel whereby he that believes in it is loosed from Sin and from Death and therefore can signifie here no more than the desiring his Brother to leave injuring him and rather to become good and affectionate to him this being a thing acceptable unto God and he will surely punish those that break this great Commandment of Love and Charity Now he that thus wins upon his Brother by soft advice and entreaties to forbear wronging him and urging to him the revealed Will of God and what Wrath he has in store for them that thus offend if his Admonitions have their effect he hath gained his Brother that is he hath loosed him if they return unsuccessful he is still bound the Wrath of God remains upon him in like manner as it doth upon him who having heard the Word of the Gospel preached unto him believes or disbelieves it But now that we might be ready and forward to forgive them that repent Christ labour'd to perswade us to it by that most apposite Parable of the Kings taking account of his servants which he subjoyn'd to this passage whereby Christ's meaning and purpose is mightily cleared as to the sence we have put upon it before LV. I cannot but infinitely wonder how or why some men do here expound this binding or loosing by driving men from the Sacraments and readmitting them thither again when throughout the whole Bible these words are never put for any such matter and the Apostles have neither by word or otherwise discover'd that they understood Christ in such a sence There is extant a Precept of Christ that if any refused to receive the Gospel they should depart out of that house or City shaking off the dust of their feet against them Luke 10. 11. Mat. 10. 14. which they put in practice Acts 13. 25. and 18. 6. But that they should deny any Sacrament to those that believed the Word and were baptized unto Christ and embraced his Religion and Doctrine we nowhere find it either enjoyned unto or practised by them as hath been before abundantly
that this poor Soul remain'd for some months under great Terrors and Agonies of mind till he had receiv'd the joyful intelligence of Paul's remitting the Punishment That the matter was manag'd much after this rate may be plainly collected out of that second Epistle to the Corinthians LXI From what has been already alleadg'd as well as from what might yet be urg'd 't is so clearly and solidly demonstrated that this delivering up to Satan was quite another thing from that which we now-a-days call Excommunication or Suspension from the Sacrament that sure none but those who are as defective in understanding as in love to the Truth can have the face to deny it I said just now that some ancient Writers expounded this place as we do Augustine whose Testimony I cited before is one of them there is another passage of his in his first Book upon Christ's Sermon in the Mount concurring with us as doth also Athanasius and after him Chrysostom and his Compiler Theophylact. LXII Let us now take a short survey of those other places which our Opponents flie unto for their own defence Some lay a stress upon that passage of St. Paul to Timothy 1 Tim. 5. 17. Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour especially they who labour in the Word and Doctrine for hereby they fancy themselves able to squeeze out a proof that there were some Elders who did not labour in the Word and on these they bestow another Office to wit that of inspecting and censuring our Manners and Behaviour of being Observators of our sins and failings of admonishing the Stubborn and Refractory of certifying their fellow-Elders that is say they the Church and lastly in conjunction with these of excommunicating such as hear not or obey not the Church LXIII But we think it evident from the Writings of the Apostles Peter and Paul that Ministers Bishops and Presbyters or Elders if Office Function and Ministry be meant by those two last and not their Age were all the same in the Apostles time and so that there was no Presbyter who was not a Teacher or Preacher as we now call them that is who did not labour in the Doctrine unless any are desirous to stretch this word to those Judges and Arbitrators of Suits and Controversies mentioned 1 Cor. 6. 4. But we talk not of them at present since their Duty was of a quite different nature This Opinion of ours which we think grounded upon apparent truth hath both Hierom and Ambrose to vouch for it onely this latter says that Bishops were first nominated out of the Order of Presbyters This therefore is the manner of Paul's Discoursing as if I should say I love all Ministers and Pastors but especially those who with unwearied Industry and a constant waking Care and Sedulity feed the Sheep committed to their charge I love all studious persons but especially those who sit to it night and day I do not now by saying thus say that there are some Pastors who never feed their Sheep or some Students who never study but I suppose thereby some more diligent than others though I do not say that any do more than they ought to do or than their Function requires of them That this is the genuine and true Exposition of the Apostles meaning and words the subsequent words v. 18. concerning the reward proves it for 't is in no sort probable that the same reward was at any time allotted in the Church to them that did and to them that did not teach for the first should be charg'd with a double Duty and the other with but a single one yet the Apostle stiles them both worthy of double honour Besides the Apostle quotes that passage of the Ox treading out the Corn to prove that Sustenance is due to the Ministry and the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confirms our Exposition which signifies not barely labouring but wearying our selves with labour or using an extraordinary diligence therein And thus is it always taken in the New Testament where it often occurs And the Greeks call that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Latins call Lassitudo Weariness And as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 differ so do their Verbs LXIV They say withal that Christ did forbid to cast Pearls before Swine and to give things that are holy unto Dogs I answer Christ speaks of them that despise those Pearls and tread them under their feet and turn again and rend the Donors of them that is he speaks of the Enemies of the Gospel with whom we have nothing to do in this dispute for we meddle not with any here but Christians who are rightly principl'd in that Doctrine and approve the same and are desirous to be Partakers of the Sacraments with their fellow-Christians though they live not up to that Integrity that others do Besides Christ speaks not there of Sacraments but of the Doctrine of the Gospel which ought not to be offer'd to Dogs and Swine that is to such as refuse and trample it under feet of which nature is that Parable of the Pearl Mat. 13. 45. where Christ likens the Kingdom of Heaven to a Merchant-man who bought a Pearl of great price and therefore it makes nothing to our purpose LXV Whereas again they remember us that St. Paul gave it in charge to Timothy 1 Tim. 5. 29. That them that sin he should rebuke before all We deny not the thing but deny that it relates to our purpose I will not muster up multitudes of Arguments to prove it this onely shall I say That 't is beyond the wit of man to make it out that to reprove or rebuke any man before or in the presence of the Church is the same thing with forbidding him the Sacrament Nay they that object this object it to no purpose unless they can shew it to be the same Who can prove that the Apostle so much as thought here of interdicting the Sacrament Again the Apostle treats not here of sins that are committed openly and in the face of the world but those that sin says he that is that persevere continue in sin rebuke before all that thereby both he that hath sinned and others that saw it may fear with him and do no more wickedly He puts no distinction here between little and great venial and moral sins much less between publick and private sins To speak once for all 't is a leaden Objection and will melt away like wax at the Fire of Truth and vanish like the smoak Besides St. Paul's words stand in perfect opposition to this Excommengent for he commands him that sins to be rebuk'd not to be excommunicated before all subjoyning it as a reason that all may fear as if he should say If he will not repent and mend himself at least others shall thereby learn to be and do better Where by him that sins is not meant him that has left