former Becanus for the latter Tannerus You will say peradventure that Protestant Writers hold the Sacraments to be 1. Significant or declarative signes 2. Obsignative or confirming signes 3. Exhibitive signes so that the thing signified is given and exhibite to the soul. I answer That exhibition which they speak of is not the giving of grace where it is not as is manifest by the afore quoted Testimonies but an exhibition to beleevers a real effectual lively application of Christ and of all his benefits to every one that beleeveth for the staying strengthening confirming and comforting of the soul. Chamierus contractus Tom. 4. lib. 1. cap. 2. Docemus ergo in Sacramentorum perceptione effici gratiam in fidelibus hactenus Sacramenta dicenda efficacia Polan Syntag. lib. â— cap. 49. saith the visible external thing in the Sacrament is thus far exhibitive quia bona spiritualia per eam fidelibus significantur exhibentur communicantur obsignantur So that in this point Habenti dabitur is a good rule For unto every one that hath shall be given and he shall have abundance but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath Maith 25. 29. Our Divines do not say that the Sacraments are exhibitive Ordinances wherein grace is communicated to those who have none of it to unconverted or unbeleeving persons By this time it may appear I suppose that the controversie between us and the Papists concerning the effect of the Sacraments setting aside the opus operatum which is a distinct controversie and is distinctly spoken to by our Writers setting aside also the casualitas phisica and insita by which some of the Papists say the Sacraments give grace though diverse others of them hold the Sacraments to be onely moral causes of grace is thus far the same with the present controversie between Mr. Prynn and me that Protestant Writers do not onely oppose the opus operatum and the casualitas physica insita but they oppose as is manifest by the Testimonies already cited all casuality or working of the first grace of conversion and faith in or by the Sacraments supposing alwaies a man to be a beleever and within the Covenant of grace before the Sacrament and that he is not made such nor translated to the state of grace in or by the Sacrament This the Papists contradict and therein Mr. Prynn joyneth with them When Bellarmine brings an impertinent Argument The Sacraments saith he have not the same relation to faith which the Word hath Nam verbum Dei praecedit fidem Sacramenta autem sequuntur saltem in adultis The Word of God doth go before faith but the Sacraments follow after it at least in those who are of age Dr. Ames Bell. enerv Tom. 3. lib. 1. cap. 5. corrects his great mistake or oblivion Hoc illud est quod nos docemus Sacramenta confirmare fidem per verbum Dei prius ingeneratam saltem in adultis This saith he is that which we teach that the Sacraments confirm that faith which was first begotten by the Word of God at least in those who are of age Mr. Prynns assertion is that the Lords Supper is a converting as well as a sealing Ordinance for clearing whereof hâ— premiseth two distinctions There are two sorts both of conversion and sealing which he saith his Antagonists to delude the vulgar have ignorantly wilfully or injudiciously confounded Whether such language beseems a man fearing God or honouring them that do fear God let every one judge who knoweth any thing of Christian moderation See now if there be any reason for this grievous charge First saith he there is an external conversion of men from Paganisme or Gentilisme to the external profession of the faith of Christ. This he saith is wrought by the Word or by Miracles and effected by Baptisme in reference to infants of Christian Parents But how the Baptismâ— of such Infants is brought under the head of conversion from Paganisme to the external profession of Christ I am yet to learn Secondly saith he There is a conversion from a meer external formal profession of the Doctrine and Faith of Christ to an inward spiritual embracing and application of Christ with his merits and promises to our souls by the saving grace of Faith and to an holy Christian real change of heart and life In this last conversion the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is not onely a sealing or confirming but likewise a regenerating and converting Ordinance as well as the Word He might upon as good reason have made a third sort of conversion from a scandalous and prophane life to the external obedience of the will and commandements of God But all this is to seek a knot in the rush for there is but one sort of conversion which is a saving conversion and that is a conversion from nature to grace from sin to sanctification from the power of Sathan to God whether it be from paganisme or from prophanenesse or from an external formal profession Now that conversion which Mr. Prynn ascribes to the Sacrament is a true sanctifying and saving conversion The other conversion which he ascribes not to the Sacrament is not a saving conversion for the external conversion of men from Paganisme or Gentilisme to the external profession of the faith of Christ without the other conversion to an inward spiritual embracing of Christ doth but make men seven fold more the children of Hell So that Mr. Prynn hath more opened his sore when he thought to cover and patch it The other distinction which he gives us is of a twofold sealing But by the way he tells us that Baptisme and the Lords Supper are termed Sacraments and Seals without any Text of Scripture to warrant it Hereby as he gratifieth the Socinians not a little who will not have the Lords Supper to be called either seal or Sacrament but an obediential act and a good work of ours and tell us that we make the Lords Supper but too holy to delude the vulgar So he correcteth all Orthodox Writers Ancient and Modern The Apostlâ— describeth Circumcision to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a seal of the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4. 11. Whence Divines give the name of seals to all Sacraments Rectè autem saith Aretius Theol. Probl. Loc. 76. speciebus imis intermediis generibus eadem â—…ssignantur in definiendo genera Circumcision is a seal therefore a Sacrament is a seal as well as this Justice is a habit therefore vertue is a habit Man is a substance therefore a living creature is a substance And further if Circumcision was a seal the Lords Supper is much more a seal as we shall see afterwards The honourable Houses of Parliament after advice had with the Assembly of Divines have judged this point which Mr. Prynn so much quarrelleth to be not onely true but so far necessary and fundamental that in their Ordinance of October 20. 1645. for keeping
mayest Act. 10. 47. Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the holy Ghost as well as we Now if Baptisme it self which is the Sacrament of our initiation supposeth according to the tenor and meaning of Christs institution that the party baptized if of age doth actually convert and beleeve and if an infant supposeth an interest in Jesus Christ and in the Covenant of grace for if he be a child of an Heathen or an Infidel although taken into a Christian Family yet the Synod of Dort Sess. 19. adviseth not to baptize such a child till it come to such age as to be instructed in the principles of Christian Religion How much more doth the Lords Supper necessarily by Christs institution suppose that the receivers are not unconverted and unbeleeving persons The previous qualifications which are supposed in Baptisme must be much more supposed in the Lords Supper Thirdly That which gives us the new food supposeth that we have the new birth and spiritual life and that we are not still dead in sins and trespasses But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper gives us the new food Ergo it supposeth we have the new birth The proposition I prove thus A man must first be born by the new birth before he can be fed with the new food and how can a man eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ and yet be supposed not to have a spiritual life before that act but to get a spiritual life in that very act Doth a man get life because he eats and drinks or doth he not rather eat and drink because he lives The Assumption is a received and uncontroverted truth And hence do Divines give this reason why we are but once baptized but do many times receive the Lordâ— Supper because it is enough to be once born but not enough to be once nourished or strengthened See the Belgick confession Art 34. and D. Parei Miscellanea Catechetica pag. 79. I shall strengthen my Argument by the Confession of Bohemia Cap. 11. The Sacraments cannot give to any such which before was not inwardly quickened by the holy Ghost either grace or justifying and quickening faith and therefore they cannot justifie any man nor inwardly quicken or regenerate any mans Spirit for faith must go before And after For if a dead man or one that is unworthy do come to the Sacraments certainly they do not give him life and worthinesse c. See the Harmony of Confessions printed at London 1643. pag. 280. 281. To what end then is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper instituted For that see the Confession of Belgia Ibid. pag. 320. We beleeve and confesse that Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour hath instituted the holy Sacrament of his Supper that in it he might nourish and sustain those whom he hath regenerated and ingrafted into his Family which is the Church Both these Chapters did Mr. Prynn cite in the Question of Iudas which yet prove not what he affirmeth in that point as I have noted before but it seems he did not observe these passages which make directly against him in this Question of conversion or conferring of grace by the Sacrament I add also Mr. Pemble in his Christian disections for receiving the Sacrament The Sacrament saith he is appointed for our nourishment in grace where we grow not by it it is a signe this food was not digested but vomited up again Where faith repentance thankfulnesse and obedience are not increased there Christ crucified was not remembred But how can there be any nourishment in grace or any increase of grace in those who come to the Sacrament without the first grace or in the state of unregeneration Fourthly That Ordinance which is instituted onely for beleevers and justified persons is no converting but sealing Ordinance But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is instituted onely for beleevers and justified persons Ergo. The Proposition hath light enough in it self for converting Ordinances do belong even to unjustified and unconverted persons Therefore that which is instituted onely for beleevers is no converting Ordinance All the Question will be of the Assumption which I shall the rather confirm because it is the very principle from which Polanus and others argue for the suspension of scandalous persons from the Lords Table Now I prove the Assumption thus Every Sacrament even a Sacrament of initiation is a seal of the righteousnesse of Faith If Circumcision was a seal of the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4. 11. then Baptisme which hath succeeded to Circumcision is also a seal of the righteousnesse of faith and that more fully and clearly then Circâ—mcision was and if Baptisme be a seal of the righteousnesse of faith much more is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper a seal of the righteousnesse of Faith which is also proved by Mat. 26. 28. For this is my blood of the new Covenant which is shed for many for the remission of sins Chrysostome on Rom. 4. considering those words vers 11. a seal of the righteousnesse of Faith hath this meditation upon it that a Sacrament is no signe no seal except where the thing is which is signified and sealed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For of what shall it be a signe or of what shall it be a seal when there is none to be sealed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For faith he if it be a signe of righteousnesse and thou hast not righteousnesse neither hast thou the signe If therefore a Sacrament be a seal of the righteousnesse of faith then it is instituted onely for beleevers and justified persons because to such onely it can seal the righteousnesse of faith Upon this ground saith Ursinus that the Sacraments are to the wicked and unbeleevers no Sacraments which agreeth with that Rom. 2. 25. If thou be a breaker of the Law thy Circumcision is made uncircumcisâ—…on Fifthly The Apostle argues that Abraham the father of the faithfull and whose justification is as it were a pattern of ours was not justified by Circumcision or as Aquinas confesseth upon the place that Circumcision was not the cause but the signe of Justification Rom. 4. 9. 10. 11. We say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousnesse How was it then reckoned When he was in Circumcision or in uncircumcision Not in Circumcision but in uncircumcision And he received the signe of Circumcision a seal of the righteousnesse of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised If Abraham the father of the faithful got not so much as the Sacrament of initiation till after he was justified and sanctified how shall we think of receiving not onely the Sacrament of initiation but the Sacrament of spiritual nourishment while unjustified and unsanctified And if God did by his Word make a Covenant with Abraham before he received Circumcision the seal of that Covenant must it not much more be supposed that they are within the Covenant of grace
discipline against them that certainly makes us partakers of their sin I mean in a reformed and well constituted Church where the thing is feasible But where it cannot be done because of persecution or because of the invincible opposition either of authority or of a prevalent profane multitude in that case we have onely this comfort left us Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousnesse and in magnis voluisse sat est Fifthly neither doth this Question concerning the pollution or profanation or abuse of the Sacrament concern those peccata quotidianae incursionis such sins of infirmity as all the godly or at least the generallay of the godly are subject unto and guilty of as long as they are in the world for then the Sacrament should be polluted to all for Who can say I have made my heart clean I am pure from my sins but onely grosse and scandalous sins such as make the Name of God and the profession of Religion to be evil spoken of and reproached those roots of bitternesse which spring up whereby many are like to be defiled those that are guilty of such sins and have given no evidence of true Repentance if they be received to the Sacrament it is a profaning of the Ordinance Now that the admission of scandalous and notorious sinners to the Sacrament in a reformed and constituted Church is a profanation or pollution of that Ordinance may be thus proved First Paraeus upon the 82 Question in the Heidelberg Catechism where it is affirmed that by the admission of scandalous sinners to the Sacrament the Covenant of God is profaned giveth this reason for it Because as they who having no Faith nor Repentance if they take the sâ—als of the Covenant do thereby profane the Covenant so they who consent to known wicked and scandalous persons their taking of the seals or to their coming to the Sacrament do by such consenting make themselves guilty of profaning the Covenant of God for the doer and the consenter fall under the same breach of law yea so far do they sin by such consenting as that they do thereby acknowledge the children of the devil to be the children of God and the enemies of God to be in Covenant and to have fellowship with God He distinguisheth these two things who ought to come to the Sacrament and who ought to be admitted None ought to come except those who truely believe and repent None ought to be admitted except such as are supposed to be believers and penitent there being nothing known to the contrary If any impenitent sinner take the Sacrament he profanes the Covenant of God If the Church admit to the Sacrament any known to live in wickednesse without repentance the Church profaneth the Covenant of God Secondly that Ordinance which is not a converting but a sealing Ordinance which is not appointed for the conversion of sinners but for the communion of Saints is certainly profaned and abused contrary to the nature institution and proper end thereof if those who are manifestly ungodly profane impenitent and unconverted be admitted to the participation thereof But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is not a converting but a sealing Ordinance c. which I have proved by infallible demonstrations Ergo. Thirdly That use of the Sacrament which is repugnant and contradictory to the Word truly and faithfully preached in the name of Christ is a prophaning of the Sacrament But to give the Sacrament to those who are known to live in grosse sins without repentance is an use of the Sacrament which is repugnant and contradictory to the Word truly and faithfully preached in the Name of Christ. Ergo. I suppose no man will denie that if we truly and faithfully preach the Word we may and ought to pronounce and declare such as live in sin impenitent and unconverted to be under Gods wrath and displeasure as long as they continue in that estate Be not deceived saith the Apostle neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor effeminate nor abusers of themselves with mankind nor theeves nor covetous nor drunkards nor revilers nor extortioners shall inherit the Kingdom of God 1 Cor. 6. 9. 10. See the like Ephes. 5. 5 6 7. Whence it is that doctrinally we warn the ignorant and scandalous and all such as live in known sins without repentance that they presume not to come and prophane that holy Table Of which Ministers are appointed by the Directory to give warning How then can we by giving the Sacrament to such as these give the lye to the Word For what other thing shall we do if those whom the Word pronounceth to have no part in the Kingdom of God nor of Christ shall be admitted as well as the Godly to eat and drink at the Lords Table while known to continue in the committing of their damnable sins or while it is known that they have not repented of the uncleannesse and fernication and lasciviousnesse which they have committed 2 Cor. 12. 21. What is this but to absolve in the Sacrament those who are condemned in the Word and to open the Kingdom of Heaven in the Sacrament unto those on whom the Word shutteth it Fourthly That use of the Sacrament which strengtheneth the hands of the wicked so that he turneth not from his wickednesse is an abuse and profanation of the Sacrament But the giving of the Sacrament to any known prophane impenitent person is such an use of the Sacrament as strengtheneth the hands of the wicked so that he turneth not from his wickednesse Ergo. I appeal to the experience of all godly and faithful ministers whether they have not found it a great deal more difficult to convince or convert such prophane men as have been usually admitted to the Sacrament then to convince or convert such as have been kept back from the Sacrament No marvel that such prophane ones as have usually received the seals of the Covenant of grace and joyned in the highest act of Church-communion live in a good opinion of their souls estate and trust in lying words Have we not eaten and drunken at thy Table The Sacrament The Sacrament as of old The Temple The Temple Mr. Prynn thinks that the Minister hath fully discharged his duty and conscience if he give warning to unworthy Communicants of the danger they incurre by their unworthy approaches to the Lords Table Vindic. pag. 28 29. But he may be pleased to receive an answer from himself pag. 43. The things we see with our eyes do more affect and beget deeper impressions in our hearts then the things we hear The Word preached is Verbum audibile the Sacrament is Verbum visibile How shall prophane ones be perswaded by their ears to beleeve that whereof they see the contrary with their eyes they will give more credit in Mr. Prynns own opinion to the visible Word then to the audible Word Fifthly If it were a prophanation of the Sacrament of Baptisme to baptize a
Supper the Disciples oâ—…ely Hence he inferreth Quare mysteria haec ad solos fideles pertinent Wherefore these mysteries do pertain to the faithful alone that is to those who are supposed to be converted and beleevers Vossius Disp. de Sacram. effic part poster After he hath observed two respects in which the Sacraments do excel the Word 1. That Infants who are not capable of hearing the Word are capable of the Sacrament of Baptisme and are brought to the laver of regeneration 2. That the Sacraments do visibly and clearly set before our eyes that which is invisible in the Word He adds Thes. 49. other two respects in which the Word doth far excel the Sacraments 1. That the Word can both beget confirm faith the Sacraments cannot beget faith in those that are come to age but onely conserve and increase it 2. That without the word we cannot be saved for he that beleeves not is condemned now faith commeth by hearing but the Sacraments though profitable means of grace yet are not simply necessary The confession of the faith of the Church of Scotland in the Article entituled to whom Sacraments appertain saith thus But the Supper of the Lord we confesse to appertain to such onely as be of the houshold of faith and can try and examine themselves as well in their faith as in thâ—…ir duty towards their neighbours The Belgick Confession Art 33. saith of the Sacraments in generall that God hath instituted them to seal his promises in us to be pledges of his love to us and to nourish and strengthen our Faith And Art 35. They plainly hold that the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is intended and instituted by Christ for such as are already regenerate and are already quickned with the life of grace The Synod of Dort in their Judgement of the fifth Article of the Remonstrants Sect. 14. ascribeth both the inchoation and conservation of grace to the Word but ascribeth oâ—ely to the Sacraments the conserving continuing and perfecting of that begun grace In the Belgick form of the administration of the Lords Supper See Corpus Disciplinae lately published by the Ministers and Elders of the Dutch Church at London pag. 16. it is said thus Those which do not feel this Testimony in their hearts concerning their examining of themselves touching their repentance faith and purpose of true obedience they eat and drink judgement to themselves Wherefore we also according to the Commandement of Christ and the Apostle Paul do admonish all those who find themselves guilty of these ensuing sins to refrain from comming to the Lords Table and do denounce unto them that they have no part in the Kingdom of Christ. Here follows an enumeration of diverse scandalous sins concluded with this general and all those which lead a scandalous life All these as long as they continue in such sins shall refrain from this spiritual food which Christ onely ordained for his faithful people that so their â—…udgement and damnation may not be the greater Which plainly intimates that they hold this Sacrament to be a sealing not a converting Ordinance And this they also signifie Ibid. pag. 17. And to the end we may firmly beleeve that we do belong to this gracious Covenant the Lord Jesus in his last Supper took bread c. Paraeus puts this difference between the Word and Sacraments that the Word is a mean appointed both for beginning and confirming faith the Sacraments means of confirming it after it is begun That the Word belongs both to the converted and to the unconverted the Sacraments are intended for those who are converted and do beleeve and for none others And though the Lutherans make some controversie with us about the effect of the Sacraments yet Ioh. Gerhardus doth agree with us in this point that the Lords Supper is not a regenerating but a confirming and strengthening Ordinance and this difference he puts between it and Baptisme Walaeus asserteth both against Papists and against some of the Lutherans that Sacraments do instrumentally confirme and increase faith and regeneration but not begin nor work faith and regeneration where they are not Petrus Hinkelmannus de Anabaptismo Disp. 9. cap. 1. Error 6. disputeth against this as a Tenent of the Calviâ—…ists Fideles habent Spiritum S. habent res signatas ante Sacramenta the faithful have the holy Spirit they have the things which are sealed before they receive the Sacraments Brochmand System Theol. Tom. 3. de Sacram. Cap. 2. Quaest. 1. condemneth this as one of the Calvinian errors Sacramenta non esse gratiae conferendae divinituâ—… ordinata media that Sacraments are not instituted and appointed of God to be means of conferring or giving grace Which he saith is the assertion of Zuinglius Beza Danaeus Musculus Piscator Vorstius The Lutheran opinion he propounds ibid. quaest 6. that the Sacraments are means appointed of God to confer grace to give faith and being given to increase it Esthius in Sent. lib. 4. dist 1. Sect. 9. stateth the opinion of the Calvinists as he calls us thus justificationem usu Sacramenti esse priorem obtentam nimirum per fidem quâ homo jam ante credidit sibi remitti peccata Sacramentum verò postea adhiberi ut verbo quidem promissionis fides confirmetur elemento verò ceu sigillo quodam diplomati appenso eadem fides obsignetur atque ita per Sacramentum declaretur testatumque fiat hominem jam prius esse per fidem justicatum This he saith is manifestly contrary to the doctrine of the Church of Rome from which saith he the Lutherans do not so far recede as the Calvinists Gregorius de Valentia in tertiam partem Thomae Disp. 3. Quaest. 3. punct 1. thus explaineth the Tenent which he holdeth against the Protestants concerning the Sacraments giving of grace Sacramenta esse veras causas qualitatis gratia non principales sed instrumentales hoc ipso videlicet quod Deus illis utitur ad productionem illius effectus qui 〈◊〉 gratia tamet si supra naturam seu efficacitatem naturaleâ—… ipsorum The Papists dispute indeed what manner of casuality or vertue it is by which the Sacraments work grace whether Phisica or Ethica whether infita or adsita In which questions they do not all go one way See Gamachaeus in tertiam partem Tho. Quest. 62. Cap. 5. But that the Sacraments do work or give grace to all such as do not ponere obicem they all hold against the Protestants They dispute also whether all the Sacraments give the first grace or whether Baptisme and Pennance onely give the first habitual grace and the other five Sacraments as they make the number give increase of grace But in this they all agree that habitual grace is given in all the Sacraments of the New-Testament the Thomists hold further that the very first grace is de facto given in any of the Sacraments See for the
the very same he makes to have been before the Sacrament to prove that Iudas was a scandalous sinner when he was admitted to the Sacrament He yeeldeth upon the matter that Iudas received not the Sacrament That before Iudas went forth none of the Apostles knew him to be the Traytor except Iohn yea some hold that Iohn knew it not That Christs words to Iudas Thou hast said did not make known to the Apostles that he was the Traitor and if they had yet by their principles who hold that Iudas received the Sacrament these words were not spoken before the Sacrament Divers Authors hold that Iudas was a secret not a scandalous sinner at that time when it is supposed he received the Sacrament yea M. Prynne himselfe holdeth so in another place He loseth much by proposing as a president to Ministers what Christ did to Iudas in the last Supper Christ did upon the matter excommunicate Iudas which many gather from these words That thou dost doe quickly And if Christ had admitted him to the Sacrament it could be no president to us CHAP. XI Whether it be a full discharge of duty to admonish a scandalous person of the danger of unworthy communicating And whether a Minister in giving him the Sacrament after such admonition be no way guilty Mr Prynne doth here mistake his marke or not hit it whether the Question be stated in reference to the Censure of Suspension or in reference to the personall duty of the Minister Five duties of the Minister in this businesse beside Admonition Admonition no Church censure properly Six conclusions promised by M Prynne examined His Syllogism concerning the true right of all visible members of the visible Church to the Sacrament discussed Four sorts of persons beside children and fooles not able to examine themselves and so not to be admitted to the Lords Supper by that limitation which M. Prynne yeedeth His Argument from the admission of carnall persons to Baptisme upon a meere externall sleight profession answered His eleven reasons for the affirmative of this present Question answered The Erastian Argument from 1 Cor. 11. 28. Let a man examine himselfe not others nor others him faileth many waies M. Prynne endeavours to pacifie the consciences of Ministers by perswading them to believe that a scandalous person is outwardly fitted and prepared for the Sacrament How dangerous a way it is to give the Sacrament to a scandalous person upon hopes that Omnipotency can at that instant change his heart and his life Of a mans eating and drinking judgement to himselfe CHAP. XII Whether the Sacrament of the Lords Supper be a converting or regenerating Ordinance Mr Prynne in this controversie joyneth not onely with the more rigid Lutherans but with the Papists The testimonies of Calvin Bullinger Ursinus Musculus Bucerus Festus Honnius Aretius Vossius Pareus the Belgicke confession and forme of administration the Synod of Dort Gerhardus Walaeus Chamierus Polanus Amesius are produced against M. Prynne all these and many others denying the Lords Supper to be a converting Ordinance How both Lutherans and Papists state their controversie with Calvinists as they call them concerning the efficacy of the Sacraments M. Prynnes distinctions of two sorts of conversion and two sorts of sealing being duely examined doe but the more open his errour instead of covering it Of the words Sacrament and Seale concerning which M. Prynne as he leaneth toward the Socinian opinion so he greatly cals in question that truth without the knowledge whereof the Ordinance of Parliament appointeth men to be kept backe from the Sacrament Foure distinctions of my own premised that the true state of the Question may be rightly apprehended The 1. Distinction between the absolute power of God and the revealed will of God 2. Between the Sacrament it selfe and other Ordinances which doe accompany it 3. Between the first grace and the following graces 4. Between visible Saints and invisible Saints CHAP. XIII Twenty Arguments to prove that the Lords Supper is not a converting Ordinance 1. FRom the nature of signes instituted to signifie the being or having of a thing The significancy of Sacraments à parte ante 2. Sacraments suppose faith and an interest had in Christ therefore doe not give it 3. The Lords Supper gives the new food therefore it supposeth the new life 4. It is a seale of the righteousnesse of faith therefore instituted for justified persons onely 5. From the example of Abrahams Justification before circumcision 6. From the duty of self-examination which an unregenerate person cannot performe 7. From the necessity of the wedding garment 8. Faith comes by hearing not by seeing or receiving 9. Neither promise nor example in Scripture of conversion by the Lords Supper 10. Every unconverted and unworthy person if he come while such to the Lords Table cannot but eate and drink unworthily therefore ought not to come 11. The wicked have no part in an Eucharisticall consolatory Ordinance 12. Christ calleth none to this Feast but such as have spirituall gracious qualifications 13. They that are visibly no Saints ought not to partake in the Communion of Saints 14. Baptisme it selfe at least when administred to persons of age is not a regenerating but a sealing Ordinance 15. From the necessity of the precedency of Baptisme before the Lords Supper 16. From the method of the Parable of the lost sonne 17. From the doctrinall dehorting of all impenitent unworthy persons from comming to the Sacrament unlesse they repent reforme c. allowed by M. Prynne himselfe which a Minister may not doe if it be a converting Ordinance 18. From the incommunicablenesse of this Ordinance to Pagans or to excommunicated Christians for their conversion 19. From the instrumentall causality of a converting Ordinance which in order doth not follow but precede conversion and therefore is administred to men not qua penitent but qua impenitent which can not be said of the Sacrament 20. Antiquity against M. Prynne in this point Witnesse the Sancta Sanctis Witnesse also Dionysius Areopagita Justin Martyr Chrysostome Augustine Isidorus Pelusiotâ—… Prosper Beda Isidorus Hispalensis Rabanus Maurus besides Scotus Alensis and other Schoolmen CHAP. XIV Master Prynne his twelve Arguments brought to prove that the Lords Supper is a converting Ordinance discussed and answered HIs first Argument answered by three distinctions His second proveth nothing against us but yeeldeth somewhat which is for us His third charged with divers absurdities His fourth concerning the greatest proximity and most immediate presence of God and of Christ in the Sacrament retorted against himselfe and moreover not proved nor made good by him His fifth Argument hath both universall grace and other absurdities in it His sixth concerning conversion by the eye by the booke of nature by Sacrifices by Miracles as well as by the eare examined and confuted in the particulars His seventh not proved Nor yet his eighth concerning conversion by afflictions without the word His ninth concerning the rule of contraries
who eat and drink at the Lords Table and consequently that those who are children of disobedience and wrath and strangers to Christ and the Covenant of Grace apparently and manifestly such though not professedly ought not to be admitted to the Lords Table under colour of a converting Ordinance it being indeed a seal of the Covenant of grace Sixthly That Ordinance which is appointed onely for such as can and do rightly examine themselves concerning their spiritual estate regeneration repentance faith and conversation is no converting Ordinance But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is an Ordinance which is appointed onely for such as can and do rightly examine themselves concerning their spiritual estate regeneration repentance faith and conversation Ergo it is no converting Ordinance The reason of the Proposition is because unconverted persons cannot nor do not rightly examine themselves concerning their spiritual estate regeneration c. For such are a generation pure in their own eyes and yet not washed from their filthinesse Proverb 16. 2. and 21. 2. and 30. 12. and the natural man cannot know the things of the Spirit of God because they are spiritually discerned But he that is spiritual judgeth all things 1 Cor. 2. 14. 15. The carnal mind is enmity against God Rom. 8. 7. The Assumption is proved by 1 Cor. 11. 28. But let a man examine himself and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that Cup. This self-examination Interpreters say must be concerning a mans knowledge repentance faith and conversation The Apostle expounds himself 2 Cor. 13. 5. Examine your selves whether ye be in the Faith prove your own selves how that Jesus Christ is in you except ye be reprobates or counterfeit and unapproved This self examination as it is requisite at other times so especially before our comming to the Lords Table and an unconverted man can no more do it truly and rightly according to the Apostles meaning then he can convert himself And here that which Mr. Prynn did object maketh against himself the Apostle saith Let a man examine himself not others for the examination there spoken of belongs to the Court of a mans own Conscience and to the inward man saith Martyr upon the place not to the Ecclesiastical Court But a natural unconverted man may possibly examine others and espie a mote in his brothers eye he cannot in any right or acceptable manner examine his own Conscience nor go about the taking of the beam out of his own eye He therefore who either cannot through ignorance or doth not through impenitency and hardnesse of heart examine himself and is known to be such a one by his excusing justifying or not confessing his scandalous sin or continuing in the practice thereof ought not to be admitted to that holy Ordinance which is instituted onely for such as can and do humbly and soundly examine themselves and consequently not intended for unconverted impenitent persons Seventhly That Ordinance unto which one may not come without a wedding garment is no converting Ordinance But the Supper of the Lord the marriage feast of the Kings son is an Ordinance unto which one may not come without a wedding garment Ergo. The Proposition hath this reason for it If a man must needs have a wedding garment that comes then he must needs be converted that comes for what-ever ye call the wedding garment sure it is a thing proper to the Saints and not common to unconverted sinners and the want of it doth condemn a man into utter darknes Matth. 22. 13. The Assumption is clear from Matth. 22. 11. 12. When the King came in to see the Guests he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment And he saith unto him Friend how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment and he was speechlesse If he had been of Mr. Prynns opinion he needed not be speechlesse for Mr. Prynns divinity might have put this answer in his mouth Lord I thought this to be a converting Ordinance and that thou wouldest not reject those that come in without a wedding garment provided that here at the marriage feast they get one But we see the King condemneth the man for comming in thither without a wedding garment Eightly That Ordinance which is not appointed to work faith is no converting ordinance But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is not appointed to work faith Ergo. The proposition must be granted unlesse a man will say that conversion may be without faith The Assumption is proved by Rom. 10. 14. men cannot pray if they do not beleeve and they cannot beleeve if they do not hear the Word v. 17. So then faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the word of God If faith commeth by hearing then not by seeing if by the word then not by the Sacrament Ninthly That Ordinance which hath neither a promise of the grace of conversion annexed to it nor any example in the Word of God of any converted by it is no converting Ordinance But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper hath neither a promise of the grace of conversion annexed to it nor is there any example in all the Scripture of any ever converted by it Therefore it is no converting Ordinance Tenthly That Ordinance whereof Christ would have no unworthy person to partake is not a converting Ordinance But the Lords Supper is an Ordinance whereof Christ would have no unworthy person to partake Ergo. The proposition I prove thus It is not the will of Christ that converting Ordinances should be dispenced to no unworthy person for else how should they be converted but onely he hath forbidden to dispence unto unworthy persons such Ordinances as belong to the Communion Saints The Assumption I prove from 1 Cor. 11. 27. Whosoever though otherwise a worthy person one converted to the state of grace shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily shal be guilty of the body blood of the Lord. v. 29. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself not discerning the Lords body If the unworthines of that particular act in respect of the manner of doing it make a man so guilty and liable to such judgement how much more the unworthinesse of the person that eats and drinks For a mans state the course of his life and the frame of his Spirit is more then one single act This therefore doth prove that he that is an unworthy person if he come to the Lords Table doth eat and drink unworthily Whence is that where the Apostle saith vers 29. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily the Syriack Interpreter hath it he that eateth and drinketh thereof being unworthy or indignus existens Which may be also gathered from the interweaving of vers 28. between vers 27. and vers 29. He that eats and drinks not having before rightly examined himself eats and drinks unworthily But he that is an unworthy person and comes to the