Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
church_n hear_v heathen_a publican_n 4,379 5 11.4435 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
B20551 A discourse concerning excommunication. By THomas Comber DD. Precentor of York. Comber, Thomas, 1645-1699. 1684 (1684) Wing C5459 99,055 127

There are 8 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

not to Peter only but to all the Apostles yea to all the Clergy and the whole Church (d) Haec autem ligandi solvendi potestas quamvis soli Petro data videatur à Domino tamen caeteris Apostolis datur necnon etiam in Episcopis Presbyteris toti Ecclesiae Raban Maurus And our Saviour himself to anticipate this unjust Claim doth afterwards twice grant the same Power to all the Apostles which here he seems only to give to S. Peter Matth. xviii 18. John xx 21 22. Yet this false Gloss of the Romanists with the wild and extravagant Inferences deduced from thence hath put some Learned Protestants into the other extream that is into denying there is any Power granted to the Apostles here more than the Power of a Doctor or Teacher and they will have the Key to be only the Key of Knowledge Luke xi 52. and out of the Talmud they go about to prove that binding and loosing signify nothing else but determining what things are lawful and these are said to be loosed and what things are unlawful which are said to be bound (e) Gamero in loc item Lightfoot horae Hebr in Matth. But we must not let the Sense of the Fathers and the Power of the Keys to be at once wrested out of our hands by this Novel fancy For first the place cannot bear this Sense since it is ridiculous to affirm that Christ gave his Apostles such a Power That whatever they declared or taught to be unlawful on Earth should be unlawful in Heaven and whatever they taught was lawful God would make that lawful this were to give them a power which God himself never did assume viz. to change the eternal and unalterable Rules of Good and Evil And besides in the parallel place where these words are repeated by Christ Matth. xviii 18. they are applyed to Offenders refusing to Repent upon the Churches admonition which obstinate sinners are to be avoided as Heathens and Publicans by private Christians and if they value not this as being an Act only of their Equals Christ supposes his Apostles will then bind them by Excommunication and to shew the weight of that Censure he saith Whatsoever they bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven ver 18. which being spoken of the validity of the Punishment inflicted on evil Men can never be drawn to signifie only Teaching yea after our Lords Resurrection he who is the best expounder of his own meaning declares that binding and loosing signifies remitting or retaining of sins John xx 21. and turns the Whatsoever ye shall bind c. into Whosesoever sins ye remit c. Again since the Misna which is the oldest part of the Talmud was written 150 years after the destruction of Jerusalem which is later than any Canonical part of the New Testament (e) Sixt. Senens Biblioth lib. 2. pag. 148. those Learned Men above mentioned ought not to expound the more ancient Phrases of the Gospel by these Talmudical expressions yet even in the Talmud Binding and Loosing is often used for Excommunicating and Absolving (f) R. Samuel status cornu ligat et flatus cornu solvit Talm. Bab. Moed Katon c. 3. fol. 16. Os quod solvit est os quod ligat Tract Demai cap. 6. §. 11. which is the more obvious and natural Sense of the Words and because the doing things forbidden by the Rabbins caused Men to be Excommunicated or bound by this Censure Therefore by a Trope the things themselves were said to be bound So that we may conclude That our Saviour doth actually here give Authority to his Apostles and to their lawful Successors to shut Men who are scandalously wicked out of his Church and to let them in again upon their Repentance declaring their Sentence shall be ratified in Heaven And thus the Ancients generally expound this place and from thence they frequently speak of the Power of the Keys given by Christ to the Church in order to the Excommunicating and Absolving of Sinners Of which because there are innumerable Instances one or two shall suffice (g) Ecclesia quae fundatur in Christo claves ab eo regni coelorum accepit in Petro i. e. potestatem ligandi solvendique peccata Aug. Tract 124 in Johan Cum excommunicat Ecclesia ligatur in Coelo excommunicatus Aug. in Psal 108. Vid. Ambros de poenit l. 1. c. 6. that so Reason and Authority both may shew our Exposition of this Place is true and certain which will be further confirmed by considering the second place where this Power is mentioned viz. Matth. xviii 18. Verily I say unto you whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever ye shall loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven the very same words with those spoken to Peter Chap. xvi 19. But if we look back to the occasion of them here it will appear they can be meant of nothing but of Ecclesiastical Discipline For in this xviiith Chapter Our Lord first labours to prevent the doing Injuries and Offences to the meanest of his Disciples ver 1. to ver 14. But secondly in case Injuries be done or any Scandal or Offence given Christ teaches the offended Person what method to take viz. First privately to admonish the Offender ver 15. If that prevail not the grieved party must rebuke him before witness ver 16. And if this also prove unsuccessful and the Offender remain obstinate then he must complain to the Church which is supposed to rebuke and if need be to Censure the stubborn Criminal and if he do not hear the Church that is submit to its Sentence and make reparation then Private Christians are to renounce all Communion and Commerce with that Man and carry themselves toward him as the Jews did to a Heathen or Publican with whom they would not discourse nor eat Matth. ix 11. Galat. ii 12. nor yet suffer them to come into that Court of the Temple where they were wont to pray Acts xxi 28. for on the Gate was written Let no Stranger go into the Holy Place (h) Joseph Bell. Jud. lib. 6. cap. 14. That is they must no longer count this Man a Member of the Christian Church nor call him a Brother but esteem him as a Pagan and one who never yet was admitted or a Publican who for living in open Sins was cast out and with such a Man the rest of the sound Christians were not to have any Commerce in Civil or Religious Matters But if all this will neither shame nor terrifie the wicked Wretch so as to bring him to Repentance because he may think this Sentence inflicted by the Church is but an Human Act and pronounced only by Mortal Men Our Lord declares That this Sentence is of Divine Authority and though it be pronounced only by Men yet it shall be confirmed in Heaven For saith he Verily I say unto you whatsoever ye shall bind c. ver 18. And
Laying on of Hands Cypr. Epist ad Pleb num xii before they had repented lest he should make himself liable to other Mens sins ver 22. In like manner S. Paul advises Titus his Vicegerent and Successor in Crete concerning those Jewish Seducers who subverted many and concerning those Cretians who were seduced by them To rebuke them sharply (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Titus i. 13. See 1 Cor. xiii 10. that they might be sound in the Faith And more plainly Chap. iii. 10. he commands him After the first and second Admonition to reject a Man that is an Heretick which is a direction for depriving him of the Communion of the Church since whomsoever the Bishop did reject he was necessarily excluded from Divine Offices and all the Faithful who cleaved always to their Bishop renounced such a Man's Consersation for in so doing they observed our Saviour's Order that when any would not hear the Church they should count him as an Heathen man and a Publican Matth. xviii 17. which was the Case of an obstinate Heretick that would not hear the Bishop's Admonitions And as the more Religious Jews would not eat with Publicans or Sinners i.e. Gentiles so the Faithful were enjoyned by the Apostles with notorious Criminals no not to eat 1 Cor. v. 11. that is not to eat a common Meal with them as the Jews would not eat with one Excommunicated by Niddui and indeed eating was a sign of Friendship which Orthodox Christians were not to have with these who were an abomination to them Genes xliii 32. and Galat. ii 12. Now it is in my Opinion a very weak Enquiry to ask here Whether this eating be meant of the Lord's Supper or no Because it is certain à minori ad majus that if a Christian might not eat an ordinary Meal with an excommunicate Person in a private House much more ought he to avoid his Company in so high an Act of Religion as eating the Lord's Supper For no doubt whosoever was under Censure so as to be shut out of the Houses of Christians were not admitted to their Religious Assemblies For these Disturbers of Christian Unity like dead Branches or gangren'd Members were to be wholly cut off from the Body of Christ's Church as S. Paul speaks Galat. v. 12. in so much that S. John expresly forbids the Faithful to shew any kindness by way of common Civility to those who hold not the right Faith saying If any come to you and bring not this Doctrine do not receive him into your House nor bid him God speed 2 Epist S. John ver 10. Which aversation and utter disclaiming all Testimonies of Friendship were grounded on those Anathema's pronounced by the Apostles against all such notorious Hereticks who were by all to be esteemed as excommunicated ipso facto And hence arose that usage in the Ancient Church not to salute any that was excommunicated as we see in Synesius's Epistles (r) Synesij Epist 58. p. 503. and in the Capitulars (s) Capitul Francor lib. 5. cap. 42. p. 96. and we may be sure if they would not pray for them in way of usual Civility they would not endure them in their Houses of Prayer it being recorded of this S. John That he leapt out of the Bath unwashed when he saw Cerinthus the Heretick come in thither (t) Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 3. And truly it was useful and safe for the Orthodox Christians thus totally to renounce all Conversation with these Seducers whose words might easily infect them if once they held communication with them But if any Scruple yet remain concerning the excluding the excommunicated from Religious Assemblies and consequently from Prayers and Sacraments in the time of the Apostles the Instance of Diotrephes will sufficiently remove it for he bearing himself as a Bishop would not communicate with those who came from S. John and if any did hold Communion with them he Cast them out of the Church 3 Epist S. John ver 10. or Excommunicated them by forbidding them to come into the Christian Assemblies and denying to them the participation of Divine Offices which was the principal part of the Penalty in that Exclusion And his doing this to such as he counted false-Teachers and Men walking disorderly shews it was frequently practised in that time Thus we have seen how the Apostles exercised that Authority which our Lord Jesus gave them as often as there was Occasion And by what hath been said we may observe That they made Christ Jesus the Author of this holy Discipline and the Apostles with their Successors the sole Ministers thereof That they inflicted this Censure for Heresie Schism and for gross Impieties and Immoralities and counted the Person who was thus Censured in a very deplorable and damnable Condition and one who was no Member of the Church and so would have no Communion with him in Civil or Religious Actions yet in all this they aimed only at his Repentance and upon unfeigned signs of that the Church Governours were ready to Absolve him and take him in again which being the Pattern of our Excommunication proves it to be of Divine Right § II. By what is Recorded in S. Paul's Epistle to Timothy and Titus it doth appear That the Apostles communicated that Power of hearing Complaints and of rebuking and censuring Offenders which they had received from Christ unto those Persons whom they fixed as Bishops in the Churches they had planted And it was necessary they should do so because otherwise they had not invested them with sufficient Power to discharge their Duty nor to keep the Churches committed to them in good order And as an undoubted Proof that the Primitive Bishops who succeeded the Apostles had this Authority vested in them we shall now shew That they did exercise this Power of the Keys in the purest Ages of the Church and declared they did it by Commission from Christ and his Apostles which considering the Charity and Integrity of those Ages none can imagine they would have pretended if it had not been really so The first Instance we shall remark is that famous Excommunication of Aquila of Pontus who had translated the Old Testament into the Greek Tongue and who was Converted and Baptized by the Disciples of the Apostles at Jerusalem yet continuing his former vain belief of Astrology and also drawing Schemes of his own Nativity he was admonished and rebuked by all the Doctors of the Church for this and not amending but rather opposing them and contentiously disputing with them about Fate they cast him out of the Church as one unlikely to be saved saith Epiphanius (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. de ponder mensuris This happened about the year of Christ 120. in the Reign of Adrian and about twenty years after S. John's death In which Relation we note First That this Censure was inflicted by the Doctors of the Church that is the Bishops met perhaps in a Synod at
and that they were odious to God and Men and though this may seem severe yet many good ends were gained by this Discipline for this tended exceedingly to the Honour of the Christian Church which thus shewed its detestation of all wickedness and it was an excellent means to bring the Sinners to a Sense of their Transgressions and a Purpose to amend as well as to preserve and warn the Faithful that they did not fall into the like Crimes lest they suffered in the like kind Soon after this the famous Origen flourished An. 230 Who is very clear as to the exercise of this Discipline Affirming That among the Christians some were ordained to enquire into the Lives and Actions of those who were admitted and such as did unlawful things were by these forbidden to come to their Common Assemblies (k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p p. And their discipline was very severe towards all Sinners especially those who were defiled with Lust whom they drove out of their Communion and like the Pythagoreans lamented them as dead to God (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. in Cels l. 3. p. 142. Where these ordained Censors of Manners are no doubt the Bishops and Clergy and the Criminals are not only deprived of Sacred but Civil commerce also yea and esteemed as quite out of Gods favour and dead to all hopes of Salvation while they remain in that estate The same Author also in his Homilies frequently mentions this Rite telling us That every unclean person is cast out of the Assembly of the Pious (m) Orig. hom 8. in Lev. 12. And though he should be concealed from the Bishop or escape being cast out by partiality yet he is condemned by his own Conscience (n) Idem hom 12. in Lev. 21. And elsewhere he saith The Bishop casts one out of the Church that many may be preserved sound (o) Idem hom 9. in Jesai 13. Yea he expresly interprets the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven of this very Discipline He that judges uprightly hath the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven and opens to them that are absolved on Earth so that they are loosed in Heaven Again he shuts to them who by right Judgment are bound on Earth so that they are as it were bound and judged in Heaven (p) Idem hom 1 in Matth. 16. Finally to this matter also he applies the phrase of delivering to Sathan (q) Idem hom 12. in Matth. 20. saying The Bishop ought sometimes to use his power and deliver Sinners to Sathan for the destruction of the Flesh that the Spirit may be saved In all which places this learned Father plainly shews That the Excommunications in his time were laid on by the Bishops and were derived from the Power left by Christ and exercised by his Apostles so that no doubt he thought them of Divine right Not long after him followed that Excommunication of the Heretick Noetius Author of the Patripassian Blasphemy who was cited before the Presbyters of Ephesus they having then no Bishop Ann. 240 and after two Admonitions he and his Companions persisting in their Heresie were expelled out of the Church and he and his Brother continuing obstinate to their death were denyed Christian burial (r) Epiphan Panar lib. 2. Tom. I. haeres 57. p. 213. Which was another Ceremony attending these Primitive Excommunications to shew the detestation they had of them and this continues among us to this day But none is more full of instances and clear in the Divine original of this holy Discipline than S. Cyprian that blessed Martyr who lived about the Year 250. in his Epistle to Cornelius Bp. of Rome he expresses his joy That Cornelius had Excommunicated Felicissimus the Novatian and cast him out of the Church there who in Africa long before had been cast out of it by the Majesty of God and the severity of Christ the great Judge So S. Cyprian calls the Censure which he and his fellow Bishops had inflicted on him for as he there observes The Bp. is for the present a Judge in Christs stead to whom if all Christians were obedient none would presume after his Consecration to make themselves Judges not of the Bishop but of God (s) Pulsum de Ecclesiâ esse de quâ jampridem Dei majestate Christi domini judicis nostri severitate depulsus est Sacerdos ad tempus juden vice Christi c. vide Cypr. ad Cornel. l. I. ep 3. And a little after he mentions Fortunatus Maximus Privatus Foelix and Jovinus Novatian Hereticks all which he had Excommunicated and cast out of the Church at Carthage and though they did as he speaks despise the Majesty and Censure of God yet he desires Cornelius not to receive them into his Communion but to warn all his People to avoid their Company and Discourse to have no Commerce with them no nor so much as to eat with them and for this he cites those places of Scripture which we have quoted before viz. If he hear not the Church let him be to thee as a Heathen man and a Publican Matth. xviii 17. and Withdraw from every Brother which walketh disorderly 2 Thess iii. 6. And a Man that is an Heretick after the first and second Admonition reject Titus iii. 10. So that we are not the first who have applyed these places to Excommunication but S. Cyprian did it above 1400 years ago and his Exposition may well be more authentick than our yesterdays Criticks who would extort some other meaning from them And since he is so clear for the Divine Right upon which Excommunication is founded we shall not much value what interest and design hath since persuaded some to say to the Contrary But to proceed In his Epistle to Pomponius the same S. Cyprian commends him for Excommunicating a Deacon and others for Fornication telling him That if they were obstinate they could not on good grounds hope for Salvation for if under the old Law those who obeyed not the Priest were to be slain with the material Sword doubtless by parity of reason the Proud and Contumacious are slain with the Spiritual Sword when they are cast out of the Church for there is no life out of it since the House of God is but one and there is no Salvation but in the Church (t) Spirituali gladio superbi contumaces necantur dum de Ecclesiâ ejiciuntur Cypr. ad Pompon l. 1. ep 11. Again In his Epistle to Rogatianus who had complained to him of one of his Deacons who had reproached and abused him he bids him use the power of his Honourable Office against him and either Depose him or Excommunicate him together with his Companion in that Crime (u) Fungaris circa cum potestate honoris tui et cum vel deponas vel abstineas c. Cypr. ad Rogat l. 3. ep 9. Another instance there is of Novatian the Heretick who was Excommunicated by S.
him (z) 1 Sam. xiv 45. Which makes it not unlikely that before the Malefactor was put to death some Curse was solemnly denounced on him by which he was cut off from the Priviledges of God's People If it be objected to this That we Christians have Civil Magistrates who do thus punish Malefactors with Death and so we need not Ecclesiastical Censures now any more than the Jews did I shall reply with the most Judicious and Learned Grotius whose words are This Argument taken from the Jews is of no force For their Law for Penalties was wholly accommodated to a Carnal People and all were equally obliged by it so that the Commonwealth and Church there was all one But the Laws of Christ do require more than either is or can be required of the Subjects of any worldly Empire The most men mind evil things and the Civil Laws do their Office if they restrain great Crimes and such as most hurt the Publick State But things done against the Laws of Charity Meekness and Patience which are not within the Civil Laws are within the Rules of the Gospel by which his Church chosen out of the World ought to judge Wherefore Constantine and the following Emperors did rightly leave the Church its proper Judicatory and confirmed it by their Laws (a) Grot. in Luc. vi 22. Which apposite place I could not but transcribe at large to shew the weakness of those who not considering the different circumstances of the Jews do impose their Methods upon the Christian Church And this may shew how necessary it is that there should always be in the Church some way and means to exclude scandalous Offenders and if there be divers Methods under different Dispensations that doth not take off from the usefulness or from the necessity of the present way of proceeding which is as agreeable to the ends and designs of the Gospel as the other was to those of the Law yea this variety shews it must always be done in some way or other and makes it manifest that the Church cannot subsist without it I have been the larger in these Reasons because the Learned Selden and many of his far loss Learned Followers triumph extreamly in this difference between the proceeding of the Ancient Jews and the Modern Christians and use this variety as an Artifice to perswade the World that our Censures are not of Divine Institution and to wrest all Authority out of the Churches hands that their Schism and some other Crimes which no other Judicatory with us doth take cognizance of may go wholly unpunished But as their evil design makes their Argument suspicious so I hope this fair account will shew it to be Fallacious and that even while the Jewish Polity stood there were Evidences enough to convince any unprejudiced Man that it was always God's will scandalous Offenders should be punished by those who had the ordering of Religion But thirdly After the Jewish Commonwealth was subverted and their Government altered by the Babylonian Captivity and afterwards when they were in subjection to the Romans and had lost the power of the Temporal Sword then they were obliged to make a frequenter use of Excommunication and came nearer to the Form of the Christian Church as we shall now shew There was saith Grotius a greater necessity of this Rite after the People became Captive and with their Liberty lost the Power of Civil Judicatures for Natural Reason compelled them to have recourse unto those Methods of Coercion which they could use without usurping on the Supream Powers (b) Idem in Luc. vi 22. So that though it be not true which Mr. Selden affirms that there were no Instances of this Rite for we have shewed in Miriam Uzziah and Benjamin there were some Examples yet there were indeed far more Instances afterwards For Ezra the Priest on the Return from the Captivity doth denounce an Excommunication against all that should not appear within three days to put away the strange Wives they had taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Penalty agreed upon between him and the Princes was That he who did not come up to Jerusalem all his Goods should be forfeited which seems to be the Civil Sanction and himself should be separated from the Congregation of the Captivity which was the Ecclesiastical Censure Ezra 10.8 where we see the Commonwealth and the Church agreed in this matter And the Interpreter of Josephus in this Story hath kept the very word he shall be Excommunicated (c) Ut excommunicetur bonaque ejus sacro aerario addicantur Joseph Ant. l. xi c. 5. ex interp Gelen pag. 29. which is the sense of the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he shall be made a Stranger that is cut off from the Communion of the Church and be treated as an Heathen according to our Saviour's description of the Excommunicate under the Gospel whom we are to account as Heathens or Publicans if they fall under the Censures of the Church for their Contumacy Nehemiah also who was the chief Ruler of the returning Jews in a General Assembly wherein there were many of the Priests did make the Congregation enter into a Curse and an Oath to walk in the Law of God that is saith Mr. Selden They denounced an Excommunication against the breakers thereof Nehem. x. 29. Aben Ezra also understands that Curse pronounced against those who had married strange Wives Chap. xiii 25. and the Expulsion of the High-Priests Grand-child ver 28. to have been the two sorts of Excommunication Cherem and Niddui executed by Nehemiah according to the Decree made by Ezra Chap. x. 8. which is also mentioned in the Jerusalem Targum And Rabbi Benjamin Ben Moses affirms That if any fall into great Crimes for which in the time of the Captivity no judgment could be executed on them they ought to repent and undertake to live better but if the fear of God will not ingage them to do this we put them under an Anathema and separate them from our Company according to that of Ezra x. 8. (d) Rab. Benjamin ap Seld. de Synedr lib. 1. c. 7. And Josephus mentions such a kind of Excommunication against the Jews of Delos (e) Joseph Antiq lib. 14. cap. 17. pag. 250. in the time of Julius Caesar But we shall not need collect these Examples since it is more to our purpose to consider how the Matter stood in the time of our Saviour Christ while the Romans had Supream power over them We read that the Rulers had decreed That whosoever should confess Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 John ix 22. he should be excommunicated The fear of which punishment kept the Parents of the blind Man from owning their Faith in Jesus And the same fear restrained divers of the Sanhedrin it self from Confessing our Lord lest they should be cast out of the Synagogue John xii 42. where Vatablus hath in the Margin Ne excommunicarentur and our
And when the Deacons have turned him out they are to return and beg of the Bishop to admit him to Repentance (h) Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 19. And a little after it is said If they do not separate a Wicked Man from the Church they make Gods House a Den of Thieves (i) Idem ibid. In the next Chapter The Bishop ought to remember his Dignity because he hath received power both to bind and to loose (k) Idem lib. 2. cap. 20. Afterwards the Bishop is directed to admonish him twice according to Christs precept who hath offended and if he be still obdurate then he is to declare his Obstinacy to the Church and after that to account him as a Heathen and a Publican and not to admit him into the Church as a Christian but to avoid him as a Heathen (l) Idem lib. 2. cap. 41. cap. 42. Finally There is reckoned up the several sorts of Offenders who are to be Excommunicated or to be utterly rejected (m) Idem lib. 8. cap. 38. Adulterers and all that minister to unlawful Lusts such as make Idols and live by the Stage those that use Divination and follow the Jewish or Gentile Superstitions all these are to be Excommunicated till they forsake their evil ways But upon their repentance to be received Which evidently proves That Excommunication was then believed to be the Bishops Office and that this power was derived from Christ and founded upon those Words of the Gospel which we have cited before It were endless to cite all the Councils which mention this Sacred punishment because it is mentioned in every one But it may be worth observing That in the famous General Council of Chalcedon which was confirmed by the Emperors Authority there are Decrees for Excommunicating some Offenders and for Anathematizing others (n) An. 450. Concil Chalced. Can. 2 4 7 8 15 16 20. 27. And this Canonical punishment is particularly ordered to be inflicted on any belonging to the Church who forsake the Judgment of their own Bishop and fly to secular Tribunals (o) Ibid. Can. 9. So that the Bishops did determine what Offences were thus to be punished and the Emperors were so far from hindring them that they confirmed all their Determinations so that such as were obstinate durst not but submit to them in regard the Civil Powers gave them the force of Laws and by Temporal Penalties compelled Men to obey the Canons which is one great end of Christian Magistrates as Mr. Selden confesseth out of Isidore The Magistrates would not be necessary in the Church but only that what the Priest cannot effect by the Word and Doctrine the Magistrate may cause to be done by the Terror of his Discipline (o) Isidor Hispal Sent. l. 3. cap. 53. But to proceed It was a manifest Sign that these Ages did believe Excommunication had its effect upon Mens Souls and not only excluded them out of the Society of Christians upon Earth but also put them into extream danger of Damnation in the next World because in all the Old Councils such care is taken that none who had submitted to Penitence should dye without being absolved and admitted to the Holy Communion for their restoring to the Communion of the Visible Church could signifie little to them who were never like to walk abroad again or to come to the Church any more wherefore this was intended to prevent the sad effects which this Sentence unreversed might have upon them in another World as being laid on by the Authority of Christ The old Canons which take this care may be seen together in Albaspinaeus But the same Proviso was made in the Councils of this Age also viz. That such as were Excommunicated and fell into Mortal Sickness should have the Sacrament before they died (p) An. 524. Concil Ilerd can 2. Can. 5. Item An. 540. Concil 3. Aurel. Can. 6. Can. 16. Cum multis alijs And here also I must note That about this time there was a Custom Annually to Excommunicate some kind of Notorious Offenders which is mentioned in the third Council of Orleance (q) An. 540. Concil 3. Aurel. Can. 13. Can. 30. though some would pretend it to be a Custom of later times only As to the Condition of Persons Excommunicate the Ancient Discipline was still observed They were to put on the habit of Mourners (r) An. 506. Concil Agathens Can. 15. none were to eat with them (s) An. 507. Concil I. Aurel. Can. 13. For which the Apostles words are quoted (t) An. 524. Concil Ilerd Can. 4. They were to be deprived of all Conversation and discourse with the Faithful (u) An. 531. Concil 2. Tole tan Can. 3. And finally whosoever did either Pray with these or Eat or Converse with them were also to be Excommunicated (w) Concil Bracar l. Can. 33. An. 563. An. 590. Concil Antissid Can. 38 39. So that we may see the Ancient Discipline was still in force until the year 600 after Christ and that with little or no Variation unless in the dealing more gently with Penitents because the World could scarce bear those ancient severities so many years together After this we may observe out of Gregory the Great that it was then the General Opinion That Bishops held the place of the Apostles and they who had obtained this Degreee for Government had received the power of Binding and Loosing Yea that whether the Pastor laid on this Bond justly or no it was to be dreaded by those of his Flock (x) An. 600. Greg. M. hom 26. in Evang. Tom. II. pag. 129. And in his Epistles which passed for Law through divers Ages there are many Instances of the exercise of this Power which S. Gregory would not have any Bishop use rashly nor to revenge his private wrongs because it was designed for more Spiritual ends (y) Greg. M. Epist lib. 2. ind XI ep 45. Item ibid. ind c. X. Ep. 34. And it seems the Pope did not then pretend a General Commission to Absolve all that other Bishops Excommunicated for he gives this reason why he Absolves one of Milan because the Bishop who censured him was dead and no Successor chosen (z) Ibid. ind XI epist 65. And in the Instructions he gives to Augustine the Monk for the right Governing the newly Converted English Saxons he doth allow him in some Cases to Excommunicate (a) Greg. resp ad interrog August Cap. 7. Spelm. p. 98. though since it was a new planted Church he adviseth him to proceed gently However it is certain that the use of this Censure came into this Nation with their Christianity And that Almighty God did shew his Judgments upon those who despised this Sentence which was pronounced in his Name may be seen in that memorable Example related by Beda who tells us That S. Chad Bishop of the East-Saxons Excommunicated one of King Sigebert's Earls for an
old English Version uses the word Excommunicated in both places Which Decree was actually put in execution and the Penalty inflicted upon the poor blind Man whom our Saviour had restored to sight John ix 34. They cast him out that is they excommunicated him and when Jesus heard of it ver 35. He receives him into the number of those that believed in him declaring to him that he was the Son of God And a little before our Saviour's Passion he foretels his Disciples that the Jews would Cast them out of their Synagogues John xvi 2. where Vatablus again in the Margin hath Excommunicabunt vos they will excommunicate you of which he had also warned them before and armed them against the fear of this Censure by assuring them They should be blessed by God when they were thus ill treated by Men saying Blessed are you when Men shall hate you and when they shall separate you from their Company and shall reproach you and cast out your name as evil for the Son of Mans sake Luke vi 22. Which is a plain description of Excommunication For this Separation is plainly Niddui (f) Niddui est remotio ab aliorum congressu tam Sacro quam politico domestico ad quatuor passus Instit ep Hebr. pag. 55. the lesser sort of Excommunication by which they excluded the Offenders from any near converse with them either in Civil or Sacred Actions the Person thus separated being not to come within four Paces of any other Jew either in any Religious or Common place as Buxtorfius doth inform us So that these were not quite excluded from the Temple but only made to come in at a Gate peculiar to themselves and to worship at a distance and separated from the rest of the Jews which Gate was called the Gate of Mourners said to be built by Solomon and this I suppose was the reason why the Publican who may well be thought to be under this Sentence of Separation is said to worship standing afar off Luke xviii 13. But the whole Rite is fully described by R. Juda in the Book of Musar When Solomon built the House of the Sanctuary he built two Gates one for the Rejoycers and the other for the Mourners and the Excommunicate If any came in by this Gate with his upper lip vailed they knew he was a Mourner and said to him He that dwelleth in this House chear and comfort thee If his upper lip were not covered they knew him to be under Niddui and said unto him He that dwells in this House put it into thy heart to hear the words of thy Brethren that they may receive thee (g) R. Juda lib. Musar fol. 95. col 1. Which Custom may well be thought very ancient if we observe how early the Primitive Christians placed their Penitents in this manner at the Church door and how they there begged the Prayers of the Faithful who went near and worshipped But to return to the place of S. Luke Dr. Hammond thinks that reproaching them and casting out their name as evil is a description of Cherem the higher kind of Excommunication wherein they did proclaim the Person Accursed and devoted him to suffer the highest and heaviest Judgment as a most vile and desperately wicked Man Which severe sort of proceeding Grotius thinks was not used towards the Christians till some time after our Saviour's Resurrection So that the Learned Selden need not wonder why Christ and his Apostles did appear in the Jewish Temple and Synagogues since he supposes them excommunicated For first we have no Evidence that they were actually under this Censure while mention is made of their coming to the Temple nor is it likely they would have lost the opportunity of doing good to so many as met in those places for any such unjust Sentence if it had been executed on them by malicious Men since they had an express Commission from Heaven to Convert the Jews and in order to that it was necessary they should meet in the Publick Assemblies yea though the Jewish Rulers threatned them never so severely it is plain they omitted not their Duty And lastly if it were only Niddui or the Separation which was inflicted on them it seems they might come to the Religious Assemblies notwithstanding that Sentence though Drusius thinks that Niddui only excluded from the Synagogue and not from the Temple and its Service (h) Drusij Prae●erit lib. 4. in Johan ix 22. But in this Case of our Saviour and his Apostles I rather think that the Jewish Rulers were not content with so gentle a Penalty as this Separation for the Leaders of this new Society and rather fought to suppress them by Imprisonment Scourging and Death it self For it seems evident to me that there was such a Punishment then in use as Excluding Men from Sacred as well as Civil Commerce signified by that word Casting them out of their Synagogue Which though Mr. Selden labours to expound only of Exclusion from Civil Commerce meerly designing to make this a Penalty belonging to the Civil Magistrate yet there are many Evidences that it must be expounded of interdicting Men from Religious Assemblies also For the prime notion of a Synagogue is a place set apart principally for Acts of Religion and because there was but One Temple in all Judaea for the most Solemn Worship to which all the Nation did resort at some set times in the year as well within the Borders of Canaan as without it was very necessary for those in the remoter parts of Canaan and especially for those of the dispersion to have some places appropriate to Religion for their ordinary Duties at less Solemn Times Such were those Schools of the Prophets in the Old Testament 1 Sam. x. 5. and Chap. xix 23. And those called Synagogues in the New which in our Saviour's time were undoubtedly Schools for Learning the Law and Houses of Prayer or Proseucha's Hence that of our Saviour who notes that the Pharisees loved to stand praying in the Synagogues Matth. vi 5. and there also the Law was expounded as is clear from many places of the New Testament Matth. iv 23. Luke iv 16. Acts xiii 15. especially every Sabbath Day Acts xv 21. Wherefore Philo calls these Synagogues The Houses of Prayer in every City (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philo legat ad Cajum and saith They were Schools of Wisdom and Fortitude of Modesty and Righteousness of Piety of Holiness and of all Vertue Nor is any thing more frequent in the Talmud and those that expound it than to mention Prayers made in the Synagogues (k) Glos in Baeb Beracoth fol. 2. col 1. So Maimonides tells us Whereever there are Ten of Israel live together there they must huild a House of Prayer to meet in at the hours for Prayer and this House is called a Synagogue (l) Maimon Tephil cap. ii And he saith it is forbidden for Men to pass by a
years Can. 16. To be absent from Church for three Sundays together was punished with Excommunication Can. 21. A Convert from Heresie was to repent three years before he were received to the Churches Communion Can. 22. To keep Idols in their Houses was punished with Exclusion from the Church Can. 41. And no Bishop must receive any Criminal into the Church but he which cast him out Can. 53. These with many other Rules there prescribed shew that Excommunication was the proper Ecclesiastical Penalty for all Crimes and that it was laid on for longer or shorter time according to the nature of the Offence And since the Bishops who used these Censures were Men of so great Integrity and Piety and many of them Martyrs for the Faith we cannot suspect they would have falsly assumed a Power as of Divine Right which Christ never gave them Nor would the Faithful have submitted to the severities of those Primitive Penances nor have esteemed Excommunication so dreadful or desired Absolution so Earnestly if they had not firmly believed that their Bishops Acted by Authority from Christ and his Holy Apostles And indeed the Evidence for this Opinion in this Age is so clear that Mr. Selden confesses it saying Excommunication was even then believed to rely upon Divine Right and express command of God (p) Jure etiam divino eoque praeceptivo eam niti existimatum jam est Seld. Synedr lib. 1. cap. 9. pag. 139. Which Testimony is the more to be valued because it comes from a Man who with more Learning than Success most industriously labours to prove the Primitive Christians mistaken in this Notion In which dispute I must briefly note there are many Evidences of his partiality For first when he professes to write of the use of Excommunication before Constantine he spends not two Pages on that Copious Subject viz. Lib. 1. Chap. 9. pag. 139 140. and saith this is enough and too much and so indeed it is enough to confute his Novel Fancy and too much to be answered by those slight Evasions there made use of For he spends all the rest of that Chapter to shew the Error of the Primitive Doctors in this point Secondly He would gladly perswade us that Christian Excommunication was a Branch of the Jewish derived from it and standing on the same grounds with it being the very Transcript of it Yet he grants two essential differences First That the Jews did not deny Communion in holy things to such as were Excommunicated but he owns that the Christians did exclude them from Religious assemblies and Offices before the times of Origen Tertullian and Irenaeus also Ibid. pag. 141. That is as early as we have any Records to instruct us and consequently the Christian and Jewish Excommunication if his supposition as to the Jews be true differed in the main point from the beginning Secondly He saith every Private person among the Jews could Excommunicate and hath not given one instance of any such thing among Christians as any private Mans assuming this Power yet he pretends he knows not when this Custom ceased in the Christian Church which doubtless never began there For he confesses That it is plain in Irenaeus Origen and Tertullians time none but the Governors of the Church could rightly Excommunicate Seld. Synedr pag. 143. yea it is plain That Tertullian saith it was only in the Presidents power to Excommunicate in the Apostles days As for that African Custom of the Martyrs Absolving some in Prison S. Cyprian who mentions the practice condemns it as irregular and it proceeded only from a Superstitious conceit of the interest the Martyrs would have in Heaven after their decease to obtain remission for the lapsed And therefore Albaspinaeus observes their Absolution was not thought good till after their Martyrdom But this usage quickly ceased and was nothing like the Jewish Custom We conclude therefore that Christian Censures were not grounded upon the practice of the Synagogue Thirdly We must observe how unseasonably he labours to pervert those places of holy Scripture which the Fathers brought to prove the Divine Right That of Deut. xvii 12. of putting him to death that disobeyed the Priest is alledged by S. Cyprian (q) Cypr. lib. 1. ep 11. by S. Hierom and S. Augustine also only by way of allusion and they argue only by parity of reason That if the Legal Priests had Temporal the Evangelical ought to have Spiritual coercive Power The next place viz. Math. xvi 19. about the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven he would evade by pretending the Key is not an Instrument of Excluding c. whereas all know it is the Instrument of Opening and Shutting and he himself cites Artemidorus to prove it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 148. yea he grants the Key is an Emblem of great Power and Authority among the Eastern Nations and he quotes for this Isai 22.22 pag. 147. whence it follows That our Lord made the Apostles his Vicegerents and Stewards and gave them this Power to lock Men up in the Bonds of their Sins and keep them out of the Church on Earth yea and out of the Kingdom of Heaven too if they did not repent Nor will Mr. Selden easily perswade the World that all those holy Fathers who thus explained this place spoke that which was not good Sense Again That other Text Math. xviii 17. Tell the Church he would have to signifie Tell it to the Jewish Consistory as if our Saviour would send his injured Disciples to complain to their Mortal Foes who would injure them much more And though he use a gross Prolepsis in explaining 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Gospel by the Talmudical Phrases of later date and by Modern Translations yet he will not allow an easy Prolepsis to the Fathers who think Christ spake with respect to the Christian Church shortly to be instituted and which was to continue to the end of the World Nor a Common Trope by which the name of the Society is put for the Governing part In the same verse He labours to prove that Heathens and Publicans were not interdicted the Jewish Worship now by Heathens is not meant Proselytes but Idolaters the Proselytes being called by a gentler Name And these Idolatrous Heathens were denied access to all parts of the Temple which were accounted Holy as we shewed before and the pious Jews would neither eat nor willingly converse with them nor Publicans often blaming our Saviour for doing this though only in order to their Conversion So that our Lord means that they must have no Conversation with those who would not repent upon the Churches Admonition So for binding and loosing Matth. xviii 18. which the Ancients make one main ground of Excommunication he forgets Christs own Exposition of it by remitting and retaining Sins and runs out into the later Rabinical Notion of Permitting and prohibiting as a Teacher which cannot be applied to this place of S. Matthew where Christ is not
Concil Nicaen Tom. 2. p. 72. were by various steps and Degrees admitted to the peace of the Church and the participation of Holy Offices again although they did begin to be sensible of their Crimes For they made four Orders of these Penitents First The Mourners who stood without the Church Lamenting their Sins in Sackcloth and Ashes kneeling down to the Priests and Faithful who went in and begging their Prayers for them When they had continued under this severe Discipline one or more years according to the nature of their offence they were then let in to the Church-Door and stood there below among the Catechumens and heard the Scriptures read and Preached whence they were called Hearers and then these were excluded out of the Church for some Years After this they were admitted into the lower part of the inner Temple where the Faithful stood but so as that they were to fall down prostrate to beg Pardon of the Bishop and therefore they were called the Prostrate and these also were sent away after the Prayer for Penitents was said over them Lastly The Bishop admitted them to stand up among the Faithful and stay all the time of Prayers among them Yet so as they were still excluded from the Participation of the holy Sacrament and these were called The Standers up In which state having continued a while they were Absolved and admitted to full Communion by partaking of the blessed Eucharist Now this whole description of these Orders of Penitents which is so frequently mentioned in all the Authors of this Age that we cannot understand any of them without the knowledge of it I say all this was determined only by Ecclesiastical Canons and by the Bishops Authority without any Grant from the Emperors yet it was freely submitted to by all good Christians and is an unanswerable proof That the whole Church did then believe Bishops had Power from God to expel Offenders from Sacred Assemblies and Offices and that they only could bind and loose This shews they doubted not but that such as were Excommunicated by the Bishop were in danger of damnation and till they became Penitent were as Heathens and Publicans and in a worse Estate than the new Converts not yet Baptized And since this Discipline began before the Empire was Christian and continued long after it without any Grant from the Secular Powers it follows That it was Founded Originally on a Divine Right which great Truth we will now further confirm from the Practice and Opinion of the most eminent Holy Bishops of these Ages St. Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria Excommunicated one of the Emperors Prefects who did much oppress the Churches of Libya and certified S. Basil of it by his Letter whereupon S. Basil also excommunicated the same Person in his Church (y) Baron Annal An. Dom. 370. Where we may observe the Custom of Bishops sending Epistles to other Churches that they also might avoid the Communion of such as they had Excommunicated Of which we have a memorable instance in S. Augustine who Excommunicated Primianus the Donatist and sent his Tractatorian Letter to all his fellow Bishops to avoid him (z) Conducibile existimavimus omnes Sanctos consacerdotes c. hâc nostrâ Tractatoriâ commonere ut omnes Primiani Communionem diligenti curâ horreant Aug. Conc. 2. in Psal 36. Vide item Epist 162. For he that was censured and excluded in one Church was so in all and not to be admitted into Communion again without the consent of him that first cast him out About this time lived that famous Bishop Gregory Nyssen who is very clear for the Divine Right of Excommunication saying Do not believe that Excommunication is a piece of Episcopal presumption for it is a Law of our Fathers an ancient Order of the Church beginning from the Law of Moses and was Established in the Gospel (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Nyssen Orat. de Castigat Where we see it is evidently affirmed That though it had been Practised under the Law yet it was Established under the dispensation of Grace and on that ground always used in the Church before his time And here we cannot but note Mr. Selden's partiality who designing to make this a proof that Christian Excommunications were derived from the Jews translates the last words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quae à lege traxit originem et in gratiâ obtinuit (b) Seld. Synedr l. 1. cap. 10. p. 226. contrary to the plain Sense of the phrases and the meaning of that Father who doth not say it had its Original from the Law and obtained under the Gospel but only that it began under the Law and was confirmed or established in the Gospel S. Ambrose lived not long after viz. An. 380. And he speaking of the Power of absolving Penitents saith Christ granted this to his Apostles which from the Apostles is transmitted to the Episcopal Office (c) Ambros de poenit l. 2. cap. 2. Tom. 4. p. 403. And adds The Prodigal which went into a far Country is he that is separated from the Holy Altar for he is removed from Hierusalen that is in Heaven and from being a Fellow-Citizen with the Saints and of the Houshold of God (d) Ibid. Cap. 3. p. 404. Again he notes That it is the part of a good Bishop to labour to heal the weak and to take away spreading Ulcers to scorch some rather than take them wholly away Yet finally what cannot be healed to cut it off with grief (e) de Officijs l. 2. cap. 27. Tom. 4. p. 61. So that he reckons this properly and only the Bishops Office Yea to shew how little he thought this Power was derived from the Emperors it is well known that he did interdict the Emperor Theodosius from the Communion for some time telling him That after the bloody slaughter of so many Men He ought to submit to that Bond which by the Sentence of God above was laid upon him being a Bond that was medicinal and designed for his Cure Which advice the good Emperor submitted to and returned very penitent to his Palace for he had been brought up in the knowledge of Gods Word and understood what was properly the Office of a Bishop and what was the Office of a King (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret Histor lib. 5. cap. 17. pag. 158. They are the words of Theodoret and shew that Excommunication was then known to be no part of the Princes Office but only of the Priests and that by Authority given them from God whence the same Historian saith That the Emperor a while after lamented because he was not only excluded from the Church but from Heaven it self since Christ had declared What they bound on Earth should be bound in Heaven (g) Idem ibidem So that no doubt the Emperor who believed this did think Excommunication was of Divine Right and founded upon the same Text we now alledge for