you In the Common-prayer book it is Take eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee Drink this in remembrance that Christs blood was shed for thee The Directory saith in Pauls words This is the body of Christ which is broken for you Whence I argue The Lords Supper ought not to be administred to them to whom these words may not be spoken particularly in the administration of it But to such unbelievers as are such in respect of their notorious visible disobedience to the Gospel these words may not be spoken particularly in the administration of the Sacrament Therefore to them the Lords Supper ought not to be administred The Major is above exception For those ought not to be admitted to whom the Minister may not say what he ought to apply to the communicants The Minor I shall further insist upon and labour to clear In order whereto I must enquire into the meaning of the foresaid words to be used in the form of administration It must be acknowledged that these words considered absolutely and in themselves may be interpreted more generally either 1. of Christs being sacrificed for the redemption of all the world of mankind the genus humanum and that not onely sufficienter for that which is paid for the redemption of persons is not strictly a price because it is sufficient in its own nature to be a worthy and valuable consideration to redeem them but conditionally by way of Christs intention also to redeem mankind that is upon the condition of believing So that this Gospel may be preached to every humane creature not so to any lapsed Angel He that believeth and is baptized shal be saved God so loved the world c. Or 2. if this please not the fuller explication whereof may be seen in learned Camero and the larger disquisition of it in the acute Amyraldus Christ dyed for all in that he bought all to be Lord and Ruler over them as Mediator in the Kingdome he hath received by dispensation from the Father to be Lord of all Or 3. as he procured some common benefits for all But I conceive it 's manifest these words of administration considered as words of administration in the Sacrament and so with speciall relation to the Sacrament cannot be understood in so large a sense q d. Christ died for thee if thou will believe or on condition of thy faith or Christ died for thee or was broken for thee that he might have power over thee as Lord and Judge or to purchase some common benefits for thee as he did for all mankind For so they might be applyed to heathens yea to the most wicked of heathens and such as are visibly in the most nototious opposition of and apostasie from the very name of Christianity and so this should be no more an application of comfort to the visibly most worthy receiver then is applicable to the vilest Mahumetan on the face of the earth §. 11. There is another as narrow a sense put on the words as the former is large and that is to restrain them to the application of the benefits of Christs death absolutely to every receiver q. d. This is the body of Christ in which thou hast saving interest As surely as thou receivest the outward signes so certainly is the inward grace there also But this cannot be the meaning here because no Church nor Minister can certainly tell who those are who are sincere believers who onely are partakers absolutely of the remission of sins purchased by Christs broken body and his blood made over unto them There remains onely a third sense that I know of which is a mean betwixt the two former And this is to be founded on the manifest sense of other such like passages in Scripture and the nature of the Lords Supper it self Paul saith to the Corinthians 1 Cor. 5.11 But ye are washed but ye are are sanctified but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the spirit of our God And to the Ephesians Eph. 2.1 8 19 20 21 22. You hath he qu ekned who were dead in trespasses and sins by grace ye are saved through faith chap. 5.8 Ye were sometimes darkness but now are ye light in the Lord. Abundance of such passages there be in Scripture where it is manifest the Apostle applies to them the comforts and benefits of sincere believers as theirs and yet he knew not their sincerity absolutely It must needs then be that according to his knowledge of their sincerity so was the application he makes to them of the priviledges annexed onely to sincerity that is according to the judgement of the Church which received them as such probably If they were such as Ecclesiastieally they appeared to be then all these benefits were really theirs And hence the baptized are said to be illuminated and sanctified because in the judgement of the Church they were such who were admitted to baptisme who if they were really what they were by the Church esteemed to be were certainly sanctified and enlightned so I humbly conceive the meaning of these words This is the body of Christ which is broken for you is this q. d. If thou be really what the Church taking thee into her fellowship judgeth thee to be whiles it being in a capacity to judge hath not judged thee contrary then thou art certainly partaker of the inward grace of this Sacrament All the saving benefits flowing from Christs blood are thine If thou art sincere as the Church or Minister hopes and judgeth of thee in admitting thee then Christ is thine really Not if thou wilt believe Christ is thine but if thou now dost sincerely believe as thou now appearest to do which supposeth that he is taken for one who doth sincerely believe by them who regularly admit him the governing Church or Minister alone in some cases How incongruous would it be to say to a rebell who was erewhile visibly in Armes and was breathing out treason against his Soveraign and hath not yet visibly recanted the same and therefore is still visibly in the way of treason how incongruous would it be to say to such a one If thou art a good subject the King is thy friend And it is manifest in part by what hath been before quoted from the Common-prayer book and Canons that the Church of England which used that form of administration Christ died for thee understood it as to be applied onely to the visibly justified believers because they excluded the notoriously disobedient though not fully excommunicated and warned all to refrain who lived and allowed themselves wilfully in secret sins which the governors of the Church could take no cognizance of Thus in the third Exhortation after the warning of the wicked persons that they come not to the Lords Table In the invitation following those onely are called who are truly penitent To them it 's said Draw neer and take this holy Sacrament to your comfort They never seemed
longer I shall make bold at the urgent request of some whose judgement is not to be sleighted here to annex a short discourse concerning the privacy or publiquenesse of administring the other Sacrament viz. of Baptisme which will not be unsutably joyned with the main subject of the discourse following And this challengeth its place here because it so particularly concernes the Ministry and is therefore to be submissively presented to your serious consideration and candid censure Let this then be the Question to be discussed before you viz. Whether or if at all in what cases Baptisme may be now administred privately not publiquely To publique is sometimes opposed in Scripture that which we render from house to house especially in that text Act. 20.20 But I humbly conceive the phrase so rendred viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not equivalent to private or per singulas demos as Erasmus in Act. 2.46 renders the phrase for which he is justly blamed by the Learned Beza The phrase and the importance thereof is worth a strict enquiry In Pauls farewel speech to the Elders or Bishops of the Church of Ephesus Act. 20. for to them only he there speaks and if from house to house be to be understood of private houses its manifest it must relate only to the private houses of the said Bishops not the private houses of the people he avoucheth his integrity in the discharge of his Apostolical Ministry as in other Instances thereof so especially in that he saith ver 20. I have kept back nothing from you that was profitable for you But have shewed and taught you publiquely and from house to house or at the houses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 testifying both to Jewes and also to the Greeks repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ This adverb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seemes to signifie not only publiquely but openly popularly and agrees to an action exposed to open view and cognizance of the people and multitude without distinction of Christians from Jewes or Heathens and that with or pretending to the State authority Act. 5.18 the word is translated openly Act. 16.37 They have saith Paul beaten us openly i. e. exposed us to open shame before the promiscuous multitude Act. 18.28 Apollos mightily convinced the Jewes and that publiquely in their Synagogue vers 26. that Jesus was the Christ And being here opposed to the Christian houses it denotes the Temple Synagogue Market places or such open conventions to which persecutors and enemies as well as Christians had a free accesse and then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not meere private houses but the Church Assemblyes which used to convene in severall houses appointed for that purpose which are therefore opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because they were not built nor appointed by any publique act of the State and 2. because here was not a reception of the people friends foes promiscuously at least not at all times but of the brethren joyned together in ecclesiastical Christian society For the cleering hereof I shall shew 1. that this phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the N. T. though sundry times there used is ever appropriated to the signifying of the Church meetings in their houses 2. And always I take it some other phrase is used to denote such as are in a meere private house This latter may be seene in Act. 16.32 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 11.34 14.35 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gal 2.2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The former I shal more insist upon for the demonstration whereof I shal produce all the places of the N. T. where the phrase is used Rom. 16.5 Greet the Church in their house 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 16.19 Aquila and Priscilla salute you with the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col. 4.15 Salute Nymphas and the Church which is at his house 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philemon vers 2. to the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That this phrase in these Texts signifies the Church meetings and Christian Assemblyes is demonstrated already by the learned Mr. Mede above all contradiction I shall only quote one passage or two of his for this which he hath in his discourse called Churches i. e. appropriate places for Christian worship p. 22. Unlesse saith he this should be the meaning why should this appendant be so singularly mentioned in the salutation of some and not of others and that not once but againe if the same names be again remembred as of Aquila and Priscilla Had none in those catalogues of salutation christian families but some only who are thus remembred It is very improbable nay if peruse them well we shal find they had but otherwise expressed as in that prolix catalogue Rom. 16. we find Aristobulus and Narcissus saluted with their houshold Asyncritus Phlegon c. with the brethren which are with them c. Others with the Saints which are with them 2 Tim. 4.19 the houshold of Onesiphorus this therefore so singular an appendix must meane some singular thing not common to them with the rest but peculiar to them alone And what should this be but what I have shewed thus that happy Interpreter There are only two more places where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used in the N. T. both which comply with the forementioned sense of Church meetings in houses Act. 2.46 Breaking bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compared with ver 42. referring to the love-feasts which they had in common to which the celebration of the Lords Supper was sometimes annexed in several houses appointed among them for that purpose see Beza on the place Act. 5.42 the Apostles dayly in the Temple and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ceased not to teach preach Jesus Christ where preaching in the Temple promiscuously is opposed to the preaching in Church meetings of the Christian brethren as it was in the text last quoted and therefore is fairly interpreted to the same sense here as it was there I shal only adde one thing more which makes it probable that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Act. 20.20 should denote the Church Assemblyes rather then the private houses of the Ephesian Elders as such One designe of Pauls speech appeares to be the confirming the Ephesian Elders by his example of constancy and boldness in the Christian faith and his function notwithanding all persecutions v. 19. Yet saith he v. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have not through fear or cowardize withdrawn in any thing needful see the importance of the word as it s used elswhere Gal. 2.12 Heb. 10.23 25. comp with ver 38. his boldness is instanced in preaching both publiquely or openly before friends and foes and at their Church Assemblyes notwithstāding the danger of coming thither which made some to withdraw themselves Heb. 10.25 Now to instruct privately in Christian families was no such instance of boldness as
usefull and necessary to be remembred in this dispute I shall therefore further illustrate it by a familiar similitude If one should say that no flagitious Englishman who is not cut off from the freedom of the Corporation where he is a member may legally be whipt I need not to contradict him prove that all flagitious English persons not deprived of their freedome aforesaid may be whipt but to prove that some may in some cases is a sufficient contradiction to him who saith none may in any case so is the present case in reference to Ecclesiasticall polity In opposition therefore to the foresaid position I assert That it is lawfull for some persons in some cases to debar by disswasion suspending their own act of administring or by Ecclesiastical Censure I say to debar some persons from the Lords Supper who are baptized and not warn'd to depart or kept from other publique Ordinances of hearing praying singing c. in the publique Congregations of the Church Arg. 1. Those who are visibly such whom the Lord hath in his Word declared to be persons to whom he would not have the Lords Supper administred may be sulpended from the Lords Supper But some baptized persons not fully excommunicated may be visibly such whom the Lord hath in his word declared to be persons to whom he would not have the Lords Supper administred Ergo some baptized persons at years not fully excommunicate may be suspended from the Lords Supper The major is cleere if it be understood that by visibly I meane such as are proved and appeare so to be by Scripture Characters And now the major is not likely to be deny'd Because God hath placed a power somewhere in his Church for the managing of his Ordinances so as that they may not be dispensed to such as he hath declared in his word he would not have them administred unto The minor is thus proved Those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly such to whom the Lord would not according to the revelation of his will in his word have the Lords Supper administred But some baptized persons at years not fully excommunicate may be such as openly by word renounce the Lord Jesus Christ Ergo some baptized persons at years not fully excommunicat may be visibly such to whom the Lord would not have the Sacrament administred The major here againe I thinke will not be deny'd But least it should I thus prove it Those who are visibly unbelievers I meane who ought to be judged and taken to be unbelievers are visibly such to whom according to the word the Sacrament of the Lords Supper ought not to be administred But those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ ought to be judged and taken to be unbelievers Ergo those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly such to whom according to the word of God the Lords Supper ought not to be administred The first of these is cleare For if the word warrant us to administer the Sacrament only to believers which none can deny that is such as are to be taken for believers then it excludes all them who are to be judged and taken to be unbelievers The latter is no lesse manifest For to professe to renounce Christ is to professe not to believe and he that seemes seriously for so I intend it to profess his not believing that is his renouncing Christianity cannot be by any warrantably judged or taken to be a believer If to the minor of my second Syllogisme which was this Some baptized persons at years not fully excommunicate may be such as openly by word renounce the Lord Jesus Christ it be answered Excep 1. That no baptized person at years not fully excommunicate tendring himselfe to receive will or doth ever so openly by word renounce the Lord Jesus Christ I answer Ans 1. The case may yet be supposed yea it may happen and if in any case supposable which may fall out suspension as distinct from that full excommunication before mentioned may have place according to the Rule of the Word which shuts out professed open unbelievers from the Sacraments then suspension cannot be denied universally to have any place distinct from that full excommunication That is really a power for Censure which may be exerted upon an occasion which may possibly occurre whether that occasion do ever occurre or not actually So a fuperiour may have power to correct his inferiour in such a manner for such a fault if he do commit it though perhaps he never do commit it 2. Besides the case is supposable not only as possible but probable to occurre if that which my Antagonists in this Question so much commend and which they say was happily exercised under the Episcopal Government in England should be revived and brought againe into practice among us viz. That all baptized persons of years should be required under a purse penalty to communicate once or twice in the year then many open rejecters of Christianity and who professe against the same and averre there is no Christ without them c. might to escape the penalty tender themselves to communicate I have been credibly informed concerning the Atheisme of an eminent person who not many yeares agoe dyed in London who on his death-bed told his friend who urged him to receive before his death That to gratifie him he was willing to communicate but yet with all professed he looked for no good from such things Whereupon the Bishop who was there to have given hâ—m the Sacrament turned away from him But what speak I of one These times declare that there are hundreds I feare thousands who are above all Ordinances and count the Sacraments carnall things and say so who yet its probable to escape a penalty would come to ask the Sacrament 2 Excep If againe it be said that persons baptized and tendring themselves to receive cannot openly at that time profess their rejecting Christ because that in this tender of themselves to this Ordinance they offer to profess the contrary viz. their owning of Christ Ans I say first the case under our present consideration supposeth him at the same time when he tenders himselfe to be admitted to the Communion to professe being asked against his owning Christ at least in this Ordinance q. d. I desire to do as others doe in receiving but I am resolved at present I will not now receive the commands of Christ nor part with my lusts which Christ bids me fly from I would I had not known such a sad case as this occurre 2. It s not impossible for such a man to profess contradictions so that you cannot conclude he professeth not against Christ because he professeth for Christ at the same time or with one breath 3. He that openly denyes Christ expressly he professeth to receive Christ only by consequence from the nature of the Ordinance which he desires to joyn in although perhaps he
understand it not or doth plainly reject his owning of that Consequence 3 Excep But some will say Such an one at that time should be fully excommunicated and may be as well as suspended Ans Whereunto I returne But there may not ordinarily cannot be power in that particular Congregation or the Officers thereof fully to excommunicate him How should he be excommunicated at that time when a meeting of other Officers a Classis cannot then be had by whose advise and authority full excommunication should be managed And other barres besides may sufficiently disswade from an instantaneous full excommunication as soon as a person discovers his rejecting of Christ 4. Excep Furthermore If it be pleaded That we have no such instance in our times and therefore it s to little purpose to perplex our thoughts with forecasting what might be done in such an extraordinary case But the present Controversie is concerning such as in word do professe to own Christ when they tender themselves to communicate although there be visible testimony that their lives are not agreeable hitherto to this profession Ans I answer It s no needlesse point of wisdome to labour to foresee the necessary ill Consequents which may ensue upon the receiving of a principle although at present there is no opportunity for the actuall existency of them If a wise man foresee that his principle if followed close will in some cases which may occurre run him on the rocks he may justly suspect his principle not to be so good as it should be If suspension in the case proposed cannot be deny'd then it must not be universally rejected as having no place in the Church 2. But I shall further adde though not for confirmation of the argument I have already proposed to prove and evince this conclusion viz. That some baptized persons at yeares not fully excommunicate may be suspended for that needs not this addition But for the improving the argument to further usefulnesse I shall I say further adde That this case already proposed though it seeme so rare and extraordinary yet by necessary consequence it concludes other instances of daily and ordinary incursion For if he who in words rejects Christ may be debarred then he who by some notorious deeds rejects Christ though not in words may be debarred although he be a person baptized at yeares not fully excommunicate The consequence I prove thus If this consequence do not hold it must be either because no deed-rejection of Christ is so manifest visible notorious and hainous a rejecting of Christ as word rejecting of Christ is or els because the Officers in the Church have some good Rule according to which they may dispense with or not deny the Sacrament for deed-rejecting of Christ rather then word rejecting of Christ But neither of these do enervate the consequence nor any other Reason Ergo its good and valid Not the latter because no such Rule can be produced but rather the contrary Titus 1.16 1 Cor. 5. Math. 18.15 16 17. Rev. 2.2 Not the former Because words are no otherwise Testimonies then as they are signes of a persons rejecting or owning what in and by these words he professeth to own or reject And some deeds are more satisfactory Testimonies then words Validior est vox operis quam oris Where there be two cross-witnesses the Testimony of the more credible witnesse justly prevailes against the other So when deeds cross words in the present case the Deeds may be more credible Testimonies and signes of a persons rejecting Christ then his words are of the contrary And therefore this deed-witnesse is to prevaile against the word witnesse I have heard from a great Lawyer that in our common Laws they have this Rule that Actions speak either assent or dissent And shall not the Church make use of the same meanes naturally subservient to the discerning of persons who are to be admitted to or rejected from the Sacraments Furthermore If the deed-rejecting of Christ were not of as certaine credible signification concerning a persons infidelity as word rejecting is Then no person who denies not Christ in words may be fully excommunicated especially if he desire to cōmmunicate and that earnestly which these men say is a testimony of his seriousnesse which we may not refuse in his profession to believe And doubtlesse the Church ought not by full excommunication to declare a person to be as an Infidel and so to be dealt with who now makes a credibly serious profession of his faith and willingness to submit himselfe to the Lord Jesus Christ But if they do fully excommunicate him they do declare him in a state wherein he is to be looked on and to be dealt with as with an Heathen or by word-professed Infidel By all this which hath been said as an Appendix to this Argument and much more might be added to the same purpose It may appear that If it be granted that one though formerly baptized and not yet fully excommunicated yet now being an openly and by word professed Infidel may be suspended in any case when there is a barre against his then full excommunication then at least in the like case some scandalous livers in the Church may be suspended And therefore because so much depends upon the former I have so largely insisted on the proving and cleering of the same I remember I have read somewhere in Salvian Qui Christiani Nominis opus non agit Christianus non esse videatur And Infidelis sit necesse est qui fidei commissa non servat Agreeable whereunto is what I finde quoted from Tertull. apolog cap. 44. who speaking of the Heathens prisons saith Nemo illic Christianus nisi planè tantum Christianus aut si aliud jam non Christianus ¶ There was another argument in my paper for the taking off the imputation of novelty which is charged on suspension But not above a fourth part of it is printed by Mr. W. the rest not answered by him So I shall not here transcribe it Perhaps divers things therein will occasionally fall in to be mentioned elsewhere And I have no such conceipt of my writings as to trouble the Reader with any more of them then I am in a manner forced unto I shall now apply my selfe to the consideration of Mr. W. his pretended refutation of the argument mentioned and I shall intend to omit nothing material he hath produced yea I shall take in much more then I apprehend pertinent alledged by him But the most of the Digressions as about examination Elders and the like I shall designe to speak to by themselves that the discussion of the argument be not made too confused by the intermixture of those heterogeneals therein And there are few things but are mentioned by Mr. W. many times over and therefore though I sometimes lightly pass over some things he hath in his first or second perhaps third or fourth speaking of them I must entreat the Readers patience and
the Canon it selfe speakes 2. But as to the substance of his exception I answer briefly thus for the overthrowing of it Either the Common prayer booke was not abolished by a lawfull authority sufficient for the nulling and abrogating of that sanction whereby it was formerly established or els it was If it were not then Ministers by vertue of the Common prayer booke may as opportunity is offered suspend according to the Directions therein given them which remaine still in force if not nulled by a sufficient authority But if the Common prayer booke was abolished by a lawfull authority sufficient for the abrogating that sanction whereby it was formerly established then certainly they who had such power to abrogate that government and order had power also to establish our suspension It belonging to the same power or authority to null as to make a law And then the same suspension in substance is delegated to Church Officers still in the Ordinance of 48 for Presbyterial Government where this is appointed by the Lords and Commons by whom only the Service booke was abrogated I have the rather hinted this for the satisfaction of some godly persons who have not been well satisfied with the State proceedings in reference to Church Government who yet have an high esteem of the former constitutions of the Church of England And me thinkes where the same thing for substance is appointed and practiced they should not reject it And now let the Reader if he please judge whether M. W. or we behave our selves most like Ministers of the Church of England in reference to the degrees of excommunication and specially in reference to suspension the neglect whereof he out of Mr. P. chargeth us with Mr. W. proceeds to carp at may be in my syllogisme when as yet may be was in the position I opposed And the question was whether such cases may occurre not whether they did occurre wherein the persons spoken of might be suspended as appeares in my M S. at numb 6.17 But our Doctor resolutissimus absolutissimus descends not so low as to observe the state of the Question he had rather it seemes be shewing his Logick to his weaker consciences for whose satisfaction his title page designes his booke and telling them p. 43 44. which are the subjects and the predicats in the Propositions and the medius terminus in the syllogisme they will it may be applaud their Doctor with an Egregiam veró laudem But if any of his weaker consciences meet with these lines I am of opinion they will not so farre admire those logical termes as to refuse the plaine and wholesome provision I now offer them to share with me in the PSAIM 119. Part 4. D. 25 Down on the dust my sad soul stayes Let thy truth life afford 26 Declar'd to thee I have my wayes Thou heardst Teach me thy Word 27 Disclose thy Precopts-way to me Thy wondrous workes I 'le tell 28 Deep griefe my soul melts strengthen me After thy Word right well 29 Drive lying wayes from me thy Law Grant to me graciously 30 Duely I chose thy Truth and saw Thy Judgements with mine eye 31 Dearly thy witness'd Truth I hold From shame Lord me discharge 32 Daily in thy wayes run I would If thou my heart enlarge CHAP. V. §. 1. THe confirmation of the Major Proposition in my second syllogisme at numb 25. in my M S. Mr. W. repeats in his p. 44. where he hath such jejune and lanquid exceptions against some explications being inserted in Parentheses and so separated from the syllogisme it selfe that I judge it needless to make any defence against them There being none I thinke who manage a dispute in writing who do not use the like Although its true in disputations face to face there is less need of them any mistake which might occurre about the meaning of the termes being soone rectified by explication thereof The like frivolous complaint he makes of some various equipollent phrases used viz. visibly unbeleevers and such as ought to be judged and taken to be unbeleevers when as I had expresly signified the equipollency of them numb 25. The proposition I was to prove was Those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly such to whom the Lord would not according to the revelation of his will in his Word have the Lords Supper administred Now my conclusion in the syllogisme I brought to prove this was Those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly such to whom according to the word of God the Lords Supper ought not to be administred An ordinary Reader I think would see no difference betwixt them to whom according to the word of God the Lords Supper ought not to be administred and them to whom the Lord would not according to the revelation of his will in his word have the Lords Supper administred But Mr. W. that he may seeme to see further into a milstone than another can doe hath spyed the disagreement He was belike at a great want for exceptions who takes up these and considering his necessity he may be better excused It s better to pick strawes than to doe just nothing But at last he hath unbutton'd his eyes and can perceive some strength in my proofe when it hath been he thinkes beholding to him for a better dresse p. 46. where he thus formes it Those who are visibly unbeleevers are visibly such to whom the Lords Supper ought not to be administred But those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly unbeleevers Ergo Those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly such to whom the Sacrament of the Lords Supper ought not to be administred § 2. Well now he hath the honour as he speakes to be opponent himselfe I hope he will be more civil in his answer and not be captious against his own creature Wherein now saith he p. 47. doth this argument advance your pretensions or disparage ours and then explaining that Question or shewing that he is not at a want of other artificiall words to say the same thing againe as pompously he addes What evidence doth it artificially and intrinsecally give for you or against us My conclusion was those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly such to whom according to the word of God the Lords Supper ought not to be administred The conclusion he hath made for me is those who by word openly renounce the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly such to whom the Sacrament of the Lords Supper ought not to be administred Let the Reader judge what material difference there is betwixt them Yet he grants the latter when he quarreld the former But then as bethinking himselfe that the argument is mine though the dress be his he will now have another thrust at it and denies the Minor yet not absolutely but with distinction now he attempts to play the part of a
ground thereof Doth not the soul thus argue Could I love God so little and the World so much be so mindless of Gods service so sluggish so careless of my soul if I did really believe the truth of Gods promises the immortality and pretiousness of my soul the vanity of the world the danger of Gods displeasure and that now is the day of grace offered to me the continuance whereof I have no assurance for an houre longer If a man promise to poor beggars that if they will but come to such a Prince a few miles off they shall there have great riches c. and yet they sit still and stirre not would not another suspect and may not they suspect themselves that they believe not there is truth in the proposition and motion made unto them Quis enim Domino mente credit facultate non credit Quis Deo animam suam mane pat pecuniam negat Quis promissis coelestibus fidem commodat non agit ut esse possit particeps promissionum Et ideo cum videamus homines haec non agere cogimur non credentes palam evidenter agnoscere Salvian ad Eccl. Cathol l. 2. And I think the great Physical if I may so call it work of conversion lies in illumination of the understanding Eph. 1.17 18 19 20. And the will is sweetly moved according to the nature of such a faculty yet necessarily in respect of the event to close with such through convictions A man may profess a dogmaticall faith and so also a justifying faith who hath it not And we must believe his credible profession But I think that man whose understanding is so farre enlightned with Gospel-truth as a sincere believers is is a sincere and justified believer that predominat assent being inseparably joyned with consent also This consideration I have the more insisted on that it might be an answer to that Objection viz. If justifying faith onely intitle to the Sacrament then none may receive who want assurance Let those who hold dogmaticall faith intitles to the Sacrament answer and say what he must do who doubts and wants assurance of his dogmaticall faith and it will serve to direct him who doubts concerning his justifying faith the case is the same in both 3. Mr. W. here insinuates if I understand him how we must have a certainty of their being believers whom we administer to viz. by our having a certainty of their baptisme and their true doctrinall consession of the Faith This will rationally put an end to the Controversie about that which is called Examination before admission to the Sacrament But that is not now to be insisted on 4. I grant after they have once given a certainty that they have in their own persons made a true doctrinall confession of the Faith with professed consent thereunto their right to the Lords Supper is not to be denied till they do by notorious wickedness as before hath been declared incurre Ecclesiasticall censure §. 3. 5. I know not well what Mr. W. means by visible conformity to the means of Faith and solemnities of publick worship which he saith is a visible testimony of their owning the Christian Religion If he mean that their conversations are not notoriously opposite to the faith they have professed I concurre If their coming to Church what ever their lives be otherwise then I demand whether a Christian may be censured for no misdemeanour unless he neglect coming to Church And if he may then his coming to Church is not a sufficient testimony that he is such a visible believer who hath right to the Sacrament 6. That should seem to be intended as an argument which Mr. W. adds viz. For Ministers are but the outward Ministrators of the Elements and then it would be to this purpose If Ministers are but outward Ministrators of the Elements in the Lords Supper then the outward administration to them who are baptized and come to Church though notoriously prophane in their lives is equally their outward right with the strictest livers But Ergo. I deny the consequence neither is there any semblance of connexion in it If the governing Church do retain prophane persons in their sacramentall communion that might have some more probability of inferring the Ministers duty to administer to them But what is that to our case §. 4. 7. Whereas Mr. W. further adds therefore as long as the Church holds men baptized and grown to years in her outward communion in other ordinances so long doth she hold them in the outward worship of celebrating the Lords Supper with her members as their due and duty I answer Nay rather from what was before asserted whence this is inferred by Mr. W. viz. That Ministers are but Ministrators it follows that they are to minister and officiate to them as in the Churches communion only so far as the Church retains them in her communion And therefore if the governing Church exclude any from the Sacrament though not some other Ordinances the Minister answerably may officiat to them in other ordinances but not in that 8. Whether the governing Church may exclude some from communion in the Lords Supper who are retained in other Ordinances I know is questioned and perhaps Mr. W. may aim at such a thing here But I see not how his words do signifie it I shall not therefore here stand upon it having laid down those grounds before upon which the question may be determined in the affirmative And thus have I adventured more particularly than otherwise I should have thought needfull to answer Mr. W. his Pretensions in this thing because that in his confidence of my weakness he here so vauntingly vapours and concludes in these words p. 62. In your next let me understand what you can produce and offer for refutation hereof which I believe you neither will do nor can do PSALM 119. Part 11. L. 81 Longing for thy heart faints my heart In thy word I hope Lord. 82 Looking thou shouldst comfort impart Mine eyes fail for thy word 83 Like to smoak't Bottles I am now Thine Hests I 'le not forget 84 Let me my dayes-count know when thou wilt pay my Foes their debt 85 Leud men have digged pits for me in pride ' gainst thy word true 86 Lawes made by thee all faithful bee help me when Foes pursue 87 Loe they on earth almost me spent but I left not thy Law 88 Let thy kind love my dulness rent I le keep thy word with aw CHAP. XII §. 1. HAving cleared and confirmed that those who are visibly in a notorious way of wickedness inconsistent with the exercise of true faith are on that account such unbelievers visibly as have no immediate right to the Lords Supper and so ought not to have it administred unto them The Assumption follows at numb 25. in my M. S. That those who by word openly refuse the Lord Jesus Christ are visibly such unbelievers and therefore they are such visibly
But look back and see whether this reason of mine he assaults was at all mentioned much lesse answered before in the dispute thy two eyes will give thee better information herein than his tale twice two times told §. 2. 2. In the next place he saith You know we are not against the excommunicating of scandalous notorious and stubborn delinquents but before such excommunication we maintain their externall right unto the Lords Supper and their right of free accesse thereunto And a Ministers admission of them is not considerable in the present case They come not thereunto upon his courtesie as if he had power to admit or not admit This is extrinsecal to the matter in hand But they come upon their own proper and internal right i. e. their baptismal interest as Christians to perform visible homage to their Lord and Saviour And he that debars them as long as they are in visible communion with Christians in other ordinances of equal sanctity is injurious to God and to them also 1. Reader suppose all this true and see whether it wound my Reason he is answering Will it hence follow that some deeds of wickedness are not as significative of a persons rejecting Christ as words are which was the proposition by me to be proved or that if this were not so no man who in words did not renounce Christ might be fully excommunicated which was my Reason to prove the foresaid proposition by 20 To the things he mentions though impertinent to this place I shall also make some reply 1. Though mine Antagonists do not simply deny excommunication yet they some of them at least so lay their train as to deny excommunication among us in England in these times For they quarrell with any power claiming to manage it Congregational Independent power will not sure be allowed by them and Classical Presbyterial power is the object of their scorns and contempt And unless we could have Bishops again and those assisted by the State I see not how they would allow of excommunication here in England In England I say For I hope to the reformed Churches beyond Seas they will be more favourable than to deny them the use of Church censures for want of Prelates But if they are impartial and will take in them too whose case to say truth differs not from ours then shall excommunication be owned by them in all Europe no where or onely among the Papists who still have Prelates And are not these Gentlemen very libeâ—all now that they should tell us of it themselves for granting excommunication on this fashion §. 3. 2. I hold also that after a person is regularly admitted to the participation of the Lords Supper that is after a solemne personall owning of his baptismall engagements he is not to be debarred the Lords Supper before he fall under some excommunication viz. either jure or facto less or greater 3. One while M. W. speaks of their externall right to the Lords Supper as if he asserted onely their external right But soon after he saith They come upon their own proper and internal right i. e. their baptismall interest c. 1. We should here distinguish of 1. a direct and proper right they may have by Gods grant to them to receive the Lords Supper and the benefits represented therein 2. an improper right and collateral by Gods authorizing the Ministers to administer to them whiles they visibly appear such as have interest in those benefits Many may have right in the later sense externally or before the Church i. e. Ecclesia judice who have not right in the former sense internally and properly A man who onely seems to be poor and distressed may have an external improper collaterall right to my almes before men as I am bound to relieve him and sin if I do not Prov. 3.27 Withhold not good from him to whom it is due that is the Needy as the LXX turns it when it is in the power of thine hand to do it Yet if he do but counterfeit poverty and distress 〈◊〉 hath no inward proper right to my almes These two therâ—fore should not have been confounded and jumbled together as they are here by our Authour 4. If such as we have spoken of have no right to be admitted and do visibly so appear I think the Minister is concerned in the admission or debarring of them if he will approve himself a faithfull Steward of the divine Mysteries that it lyes wholly in him where there is no governing Church but where there is it lies on him joyntly with others instructed by the Church As for that passage often before of the Ministers courtefie in admission it hath been once and again repelled as an odious and wretched impertinent and false insinuation he must admit according to the Rule prescribed him by his master to whom he must give account without being swayed awry either by base fear and passion or partiall respects I think Chrysostome was of this mind when in his 60. Homily ad Pop. Antioch de sumentibus indignè c. he saith Let no cruell unmercifull man approach no impure one any way These things I would have spoken as well to you who communicate as to you who minister No small punishment hangs over your head if ye permit any to partake of this Table whom you know to be held with any wickedness for his blood shall be required at your hands c. 5. Their baptismall engagement to celebrate the Lords Supper doth not hinder their being justly debarred in the case under consideration no more than a Heathen who hears the Gospel preached to him his engagement to be baptized doth hinder his being justly debarred baptisme for want of scrious profession of the Christian faith antecedently necessary to baptisme as all I think do grant Let Mr W. shew the contrary if he can I say the one is aeque though not aequaliter engaged as the other as truly though not so solemnly and multifariously A man is as truly obliged to obey God who hears his will clearly revealed as he is who hath by his own profession further positively bound himself to obey 6. The learned and ingenuous Mr Humphreys a Gentleman worthy indeed to be answered acknowledgeth as we have seen above that as an heathen so an excommunicate may be admitted both to the prayers and hearing of the word preached in the Church and the thing is manifest in it selfe as hâ—th been shewed And yet saith this our confident Authour â—â—â—ou hear He that debars them as long as they are in visible communion with Christians in other ordinances is injurious to God and to them also What he will say he means by visible communion in other ordinances I know not But they may be present with them in the Congregation and that in a constant course and that as doing their dutie there as well as others and they may account themselves and so be lawfully owned by others as Church-members
and oblige them to a performance of conditions Now upon this ground I would propose it to consideration whether a notoriously ungodly parent yea excommunicate who in words professeth assent to the Christian faith and knows what the Christian faith is as to the fundamentalls of it may not justly and fairly be presumed by the Church and Minister heartily to consent to dedicate his child to God in Gods way although he himselfe is so bewitched with and enslaved to his lusts that he doth not consent as it appeares by his contradictory deeds to give up himselfe to God in his way For my part I doe verily thinke many a drunkard would have his child sober and temperate and many a wanton desires his child may be chast c. And in general many a wicked parent appears cordially to rejoyce in the towardliness and godlinesse of his children c. And then according to the foresaid position of this accurate and pious Author the child of such a wicked parent may be admitted to enter and therefore to seale his entrance into Covenant with God in Baptisme he consenting understandingly for him upon Gospel termes whose he is and in whose will the childes will is interpretatively involved Yet because the scandalousnes of the said parent gives just occasion to the Church of suspition feare and jealousie least he should alter his will and desire now signified to have his child truly a Christian and godly and so faile in using necessary meanes for his childes instruction during its non-age in the Christian faith It s but equitable the Church should demand sureties for the same according to Ames his resolution of the case de conscientiâ lib. 4. qu. 1. Resp 8. Excommunicatorum contumacium liberi non expedit baptizari nisi sponsorum idoncoâ—um interventu I must beg the Readers pardon for this excursion which I fell into almost unawares and having engaged in it of some I shall have cause to crave their excuse for saying so much and of others for saying no more the point indeed deserveth a larger disquisition But mine apology to the former shall be that Mr. W. his exception I was answering did in the latitude of it comprehend this and therefore I would not wholly pass it by and to the latter that his words do not cleerly import he had any special reference to this point and therefore I thought the less might serve to note concerning it in my Reply unto him PSALM 119. part 19. T. 145 This whole heart cryd to thee Lord heare Thy statutes I 'le fulfill 146 To thee I cal'd save me most deare Thine hests I shall keep still 147 The day-break my cryes do prevent Trusting thy word I waite 148 The night too mine eyes are intent Thy truth to meditate 149 To my voice heark in kindnesse true Thy Judgements quicken mee 150 They draw nigh who mischeife pursue Far from thy Lawes they bee 151 Thou Lord art neere and very true Are thy Commandments sure 152 Thine hests thou hast of old I knew Founded aye to endure CHAP. XX. §. 1. I Shall now proceed to what remaines 3 In the next place Mr. W. answers my forementioned Reason to this purpose p. 110 111. If the man supposed in the case comes and desires to communicate and that earnestly this Mr. W. saith is rightly affirmed by mine Antagonists to be a Testimony of his seriousnesse which we may not upon his profession thereof refuse to beleeve And this Mr. W. proves in these words For Sir if you grant the case viz. that he desires to communicate and that earnestly then shew a Reason if you can why all godly minded Christians should not in charity believe upon his profession hereof that this is to us in foro externo a credible testimony of his seriousness Nay you adde moreover that who makes a credible serious profession of his faith and willingness to submit to the Lord Jesus Christ the Church ought not to excommunicate Nay you adde doubtlesse the Church ought not And we adde that doubtlesse the Church ought not to deny such an one the Lords Supper or suspend him from it What a schisme will do we know not c. The Reader may be pleased to beare in memory that after I had evinced that a man baptized at yeares and not fully excommunicate might be debarred the Sacrament if at the time when he tenders himselfe to be admitted when the time of celebration begins to draw neere he in words renounce Christ or an essential of Christianity which is not that I finde denied by Mr. W. In the procedure of my argument I added that if such word rejecting of Christ as before-said may debar the person aforesaid then some deed-rejecting of Christ may also Because that by some deeds of wickednesse there is as credibly a signification of a mans rejecting Christ as in words And this was proved as by other arguings so by this under our hand at present viz. If some deeds do not as credibly signifie a persons rejecting of Christ as words might doe then none could be excommunicated for sinfull deeds whiles they renounce not Christ in words but in words profess their earnest desire to be admitted to the Sacrament This consequence is valid at least ad hominem because mine Antagonists intimate that he who verbally professeth his desire to receive must be by us accounted a serious professor of faith what ever his works are And I averre that no visibly serious professor of faith is to be excoÌ„municated For then one in the way of a visible exercise of faith and true repentance should be excommunicated which none sure will affirme And this Consequence I cannot see that Mr. W. sticks at But now whereas I should assume But some may be excommunicated for sinfull deeds notwithstanding that in words they renounce not Christ but verbally professe their carnest desire to be admitted to the Sacrament This I thinke Mr. W. denies I am not certaine look over his words thy selfe Reader and use thine owne judgement to guess what he drives at But this I am certaine of either he denies this or he saith nothing of a contradictory tendency to my argumentation which here he pretends to enervate And if he do deny the foresaid Assumption as I conceive his words import taken together It may be imputed to his hast that he should hold what is so manifestly false viz. That none may be excommunicated for sinfull deeds though never so hainous and notorious if he renounce not Christ in words and professe verbally his earnest desire to communicate §. 2. But because M. W. bids me shew a Reason if I can for the contrary I must prove that the Sun shines at noone day And 1. If this his assertion be true then not professing earnest desire to communicate in the only crime sufficient to cause excommunication But a man may be excommunicated for other wickedness without respect to this 1 Cor. 5.11 A whore monger or drunkard