c. notoriously such may profess his earnest desire to receive and yet that makes him not no whoremonger and no drunkard 2. Then also the Church may look for no further satisfaction in order to restoring of an excommunicate then his verbal profession of earnest desire to receive the Sacrament For that which should prevent their excommunicating of him must be avaylable to restore him But the Church in many ages hath required particular confession of notorious sins and expresse profession of repentance for them and not only profession of earnest desire to receive as antecedently necessary to the absolution of an excommunicate in analogy to that Levit. 5.4 5 6. where he who was to bring his trespass offering for a false oath though through ignorance was to confesse that he had sinned in that thing and then he is allowed to bâ—ing his trespass-offering to the Lord and the Priest shall make an attonement for him concerning his sin So more generally Numb 5.7 on which saith Ainsworth out of Maimonides The Hebrewes set down this duty thus This confession is with words and it s commanded to be done How do they confesse He saith Oh God! for I have sinned I have done perversly I have trespassed before thee and have done thus and thus and loe I repent and am ashamed of my doings and I will never do this thing againe And this is the foundation of confession And who so maketh a large confession and is long in the thing he is to be commended And so the owners of sin-and trespass-offerings when they bring their oblations for their ignorant or presumptuous sins attonement is not made for them by their oblation untill they have made Repentance and confession by word of mouth Likewise all condemned to death by the Magistrates or condemned to stripes no attonement is made for them by their death or by their stripes until they have epented and confessed And so he that hurteth his neighbour â— doth him damage though he pay him whatsoever he owe him illonement is not made for him til he confess and turn away from doing so againe for ever Now it may be Mr. W. could have taught them a more expeite and easie way of satiffactory confession viz. if the offendeiprofess verbally his earnest desire to partake of the Passeove that shall quit all scores §. 3. Mr. W. further addes As for your fully and not fully excommunicate wee look not on them as considerable in this present controversie they are your own miserable shifts c. What 's the conclusion Ergo my fore mentioned Reason is not sound Wonderfull hap he hath if he can draw this inference from such premises This distinction of excommunication hath been proved before at Chap. 3. and I wonder not if he would so faine shift it out of his way if he could it so fully enervates the Reasons of his Champion Mr. Timson and shewes his miscarriage in the very stating of the Question If that third Chap. aforesaid stand good particularly the sixth § that excommunicates are Church-members and are not by excommunication cut off from all ordinances although accidentally that may sometime coincidere and often did fall in in the primitive times The title of his booke is blasted which over each leafe is this to receive the Lords Supper is the actual right of all Church members but in the first page is thus To receive the Lords Supper the actual Right and duty of all Church members of yeares not excommunicate Which is sorrily propounded For 1. here and in his book he confounds Right and duty as if these were of the same latitude as if because its an heathens duty to be baptized or a Christians duty when drunk on the Lords day to sanctifie the Sabbath in publique Ordinances yea or an Excommunicats duty to receive all which are manifestly their duty which they are obliged to that therefore it were the heathens right to be baptized without any more adoe or the drunken Christians to be admitted into the Assembly while drunke or the excommunicate had actual right to the Lord Supper while excommunicate 2. And that all excommuncation turnes our of Church-membership Mr. Humphreys holeth Rejoynd p. 155. where he saith Suspension is null withot dismembership To what purpose then should Mr. Timson hae added not excommunicate but to instruct us in this lessoâ— That to receive the Lords Supper is the actuall right and duty of all Church members at yeares who are not no Church member This is the Warriour whose Herald Mr. W. is pleased to mâ—â—e himselfe and he once and againe provokes me to graple with him But if I have made good this one argument against Mr. W. there 's none I thinke can reasonably thinke there 's any need of answering Mr. Timson in print Mr. W. hath much of his sense and language too where he could bring it in But his distinction of fully and not fully excommunicate I suspect the more angers him because it makes the weapons of his ious brave man unserviceable in this contest with me in this gument But I have shewed there is an excommunication by the Officers of the Church or Minister alone by the people alone though the Officers refuse to joyne and there is an excommunication wherein the Officers and people of the Congregation and neighbourhood too perhaps though that 's not essential do concurre which is a fuller excommunication then either of the former §. 4. 5. In the 5th place Mr. W. answers and confutes as he pretends my Reason by saying As for your Excommunication you give us a very quaint account thereof and in a taunt he saith Schollers may do well to furnish their note bookes with it And in stead of better Answers furor arma ministrat he fits downe in the chaire of the scorners and thus acts his part It should seeme saith he that your full excommunication is a very shrewd thing when you can be at leisure to meet in a full Classis and so have your severe Rabbies of discipline sit in state with the rest of your grave Benchers then the case of a poore sinner is put upon the debale and after that your Elders have well stroaked their beards and nodded in their votes the decree is that the sinner arraigned is to be excommunicated fully and that with full excommunication compleatly The summe whereof is that such a man found and judged guilty of such misdemeanours is declared to be as an heathen Infidel and do such an one to be lookt upon and dealt with by all our Church members i. e. to he counted as an enemie and not to be admonished as a brother Here are learned arguments apodictical demonstrations but be like all in Bocardo Here are formulae oratoriae for the cupping crew who may probably applaud the Author and quaffe his health round for them I 'le confesse they are not to be answered by me Ego poenitere tanti non emam as Demosthenes said to the
should be denied to none who demand it on that account one mans humour being of as much validity as anothers and this will not weigh down the Disswasives from a private celebration before rehearsed And then again a sick mans desiring the Communion should be a sufficient reason for our private administring of the Lords Supper unto him in a private house where the Church hath not free accesse of which there is no footsteps that I know of in the holy Scriptures 3. Nor is the pretence of a custom to have feastings and entertainments which may not fitly be on the Lords day a sufficient reason for private baptism for that custom ought rather to be altered then the ten former inconveniences of private baptism should be admitted And it is altered easily in some places by the Ministers perswasion that they have their feastings on a week day where they are of ability to have them when the baptism is on the Lords day But it 's known experimentally that many invited to such entertainments in Country Villages do not use to come to the Church to be present at the baptism as making this the least part of their businesse at such a time And upon the same pretence last mentioned two or three perhaps more Lords daies or other opportunities for publique baptism are neglected till they be prepared for their dinnerings which I suppose is a fault in the Parents agreeable to what the fore-praised Zepperus in the Chapter mentioned quotes out of Augustine in his Sermon de immolat Isaac Rogo vos fratres ut quicunque filium aut vernaculum suum baptizari desiderat jam nunc Ecclesiae eum offerre non differat that phrase suits best to publique baptism Quia non est justum ut res quae tam magna tam praeclara creditur negligenter aut tardiùs quam expedit requiratur I now proceed to speak positively to the point under consideration by laying down this Rule 11 Private baptism then hath place when the case is such as the expediences thereof for the general good of the Church do over-weigh the fore-mentioned inconvenicies More particularly as 1. In the first gathering of a Church since they who are to be members thereof are to be solemnly made disciples by baptism there may be a necessity that some who are the first fruits of the place must be baptized privately for Church order supposeth a Church existing wherein it should be exercised and observed But where a Church is constituted there this hath no place 2. In times of persecution when there cannot be set solemn Assemblie◠but Christians as they may catch at an opportunity of convening It 's a greater inconvenience to the Church that Baptism should be omitted then that it should be celebrated privatly But I did not need to put in this case unlesse the persecution be raised against this Ordinance rather then preaching for as I have stated the Question baptism is not to be called private which is as publique as the ordinary preaching in the Church is at that time 3. A like case hereunto is that in times of grosse defection and Idolatry in the Church where this ordinance cannot be publiquely administred without superstitious or heretical mixtures as in Popish Countryes 4. There may possibly occurre some Instance wherein an eminent respect to Gods glory propagating the Gospel and the good of the Catholique Church may warrant private baptisme that being to be preferred to the advantages of a particular Congregation in some respects This I suppose was the case of the Eunuch to whom Philip was directed by the extraordinary dictate of the Spirit who being on his journey to his own remote Country was converted and then instantly baptized of whom Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical history lib. 2. c. 1. according to Hanmers translation saith He was the first of the Gentiles which obtained of Philip the holy mysteries by the inspiration of the heavenly word he was made the first fruits of the faithfull throughout the world And as it is reported after his return unto his native soyle he preached the knowledge of the Universal God which giveth life unto men and the coming of our Saviour whereby the prophecy was fulfilled which said Aethiopia shall stretch her hand before unto God so he And so this instance falls also under the first case for private baptism That example of the Jaylors baptism and his houshold comes under the first and second case that being a time of persecution and Paul and Silas then imprisoned and knew not when they might hope to be released much lesse when they should have an opportunity of assembling the Church in that neighbourhood And it s not altogether improbable that many other Christian prisoners might be there and then there might be a solemn assembly agreeable to the allowance of those troublesome times What other cases there may be of like exigence as to private baptisme I refer to the disquisition of better judgements 12 None of these singular cases wherein baptisme was privately administred do for any thing I know occur in the present times among us If there be conceived to be some analogical or proportionate to these as to this matter it concernes them who think so to name them and to prove the same the three fore pretended ones I have already shewed not to be such And I know none else pretended except 1 the gratifying Separatists some whereof would suffer their children to be baptized at home with a select company of their own only present but separate from our publique Assemblyes as no rightly constituted Churches 2 And very rarely perhaps one convinced of the errour of Antipedobaptisme who hath been tainted therewith before seemes inclinable to have his children baptised at home but is loath to honour God so far as publiquely to appear in the devoting his seed to God in this ordinance But if we comply with the former we wrong our Churches and seem to take upon our selves the disparagement they lay upon us in their unwarrantable separation And the humouring the latter seems to be a wrong to baptisme it selfe the honour whereof had need to be carefully preserved in these times And the Question in this case seems to be whether the real honor of Gods holy ordinance or the imaginary supposed though indeed false honour and credit of these people should be most respected I have now plainly layd down before you my apprehensions in this matter shall add nothing more herein save that upon a review I conceive it may be needful to expresse my selfe more fully in one thing which hath been hinted already viz. What we shall call publique baptisme to which I have answered that such a place convention of Christians as is judged meet for the ordinary exercise of ministerial publique preaching is a place and society to administer baptisme in if we would have it to be publique baptisme According to which rule more particularly I say 1. Baptisme in a private
house is not publique though many be there present because this would not in times of freedome be counted a fit place for ordinary conventions of the Church for preaching 2. Baptisme on the week day at the place of publique assembly where there is not so considerable a number present as it would be counted expedient for a publique Sermon to be made to is yet but private baptisme 3. I suppose it also requisite that the Congregation on the Lords day before have notice of the time of a baptisme intended there the week following unless there be some known lecture or exercise there at that time or at least we may probably expect a considerable number of Christians then that they may freely repair unto the Word and Sacrament then to be dispenced the usuall signes being given for warning a publique transaction 4. Yet if it be judged unfit frequently to call an assembly of the Church I suppose at such time when we cannot urge a considerable number of our Congregation to attend in publique nor blame their absence we may not appoint a publique ordinance for them to be present at For this seemes little better then a prevaricating with them 5. To conclude Hence it follows that it s not this or that number present which is necessary to the making a baptismal administration publique in the place of publique Church meetings For then we should be at a losse what should be the least number necessary But the administring it at such a time and in such a place where and when the Congregation may freely and is obliged to attend We may in some Parishes or Chappelries suspect somtimes on the Lords dayes and upon other special and important occasions for preaching on other dayes when we call an assembly that few wil be present yet do we then preach publiquely though to never so few because it s not our fault that the Church is so empty But if it were our fault that so few are present by taking inconvenient times either of the dayes of the week when their occasions call them another way or of the houres of the day which are not usuall nor commodious for an assembly or lastly if we should call them to attend preaching so frequently that we could not reasonably expect the attendance of a considerable Congregation I suppose in these cases we should offend in pretending to the exercise of publique preaching before so small a number And the same should I say concerning publique baptisme For this is my maine direction that these ordinances of publique preaching and administring Baptisme ought to go parallel one with another in regard of the publiquenesse of dispencing the same ¶ It remaines now much honoured Sirs only to crave your pardon for this overtedious interpellation of you your courteous acceptance of my unfeined respects to you and your earnest prayers at the throne of grace for me the which I hope you will be more fervent in on my behalfe by your observing of the many weaknesses clogging me in this present service And now it s my humble petition for you who are called to the weighty function of the Ministry that the Father of mercies may ever direct and prosper your precious labours in his vineyard for the honour of his name the edification of his Church and the joyfull refreshment of your own spirits And for you Sir who are honoured to be an Instrument for preserving of natural life in many my hearty request at the throne of grace is that your soul may live the life of grace here in the exercise of godliness in the power of it which you have seene in a precious instance most neerly related to you is the sure and unshaken foundation of unspeakable comforts and peace passing all understanding in life and at death that so you may live the life of glory hereafter In testimony of which my cordiall and uncessant prayers for you all I subscribe my selfe with all readinesse Decemb. 15. 1657. Your assured and affectionate servant in our deare Lord and Saviour SAMUEL LANGLEY To the Reader I Have here in the following discourse endeavoured rightly to state and cleere the doctrine and practice of suspending notoriously prophane and scandalous persons from the Lords Supper and to vindicate the same from Misrepresentations and exceptions made against it And although I could rather have desired to have performed this in my own method yet I was advised in reference to these parts where a book entituled Suspension discussed is spread and taken notice of to accommodate my discourse in way of refutation of that book which pretended to answer a private sheet I had occasionally written Concerning which an Account is given at the latter end of this my defence Yet have I not so confined my selfe thereunto as not to take in other things I apprehended of most importance in this subject especially such as I had seene least spoken to by others who have owned the same Conclusion with me And although I have not particularly and expressly answered all the objections I have found in some Authors against me fearing least the book should swell too big under my hand and perceiving the most of them sufficiciently answered already by others yet I have as I humbly conceive given in those grounds which are fitly applicable for the easie expedite and cleere solution of them as the peaceably judicious I hope will discerne I like Augustines counsell contra lit petil Don. l. 1. at the conclusion Diligite homines interficite errores sine superbiâ de veritate praesumite sine saevitia pro veritate certate orate pro eis quos redarguitis atque convincitis c. And before my Reader judge mee to have transgressed this Rule in the following sheets I must desire him to observe 1. Whether there was any one tart expression in the paper which the Authour of Suspension discussed answereth 2. Whether he doth not uncivilly trample upon me in his answer and not me only but the Reformed Churches with the Reverend Assembly yea and the Parliament which commended the Presbyterial Government to us 3. Whether there is not a meane betwixt a sheepish insensiblenesse whereby further abuses should be invited and a passionate returne of such calumnies and reproachfull revilings on my Antagonist as he hath bestowed on me which I have touched upon Ch. 20. § 4. and Digress 12.17 And then I trust the equal Reader will allow me without condemning my selfe to say to my Answerer what the formentioned Augustine said to Petilian l. 3. Si ego tibi vellem pro maledictis maledicta rependere quid aliud quam duo maledici essemus ut ij qui nos legerent alij detestatos abijcerent sanâ gravitate alij suaviter haurirent malevolâ voluntate And because the Gentleman I stand on my defence against hath told me that he favoured me sufficiently in concealing my name in his booke setting L for it I shall not be wanting in retaliation of the like
SUSPENSION REVIEWED STATED CLEERED AND SETLED UPON PLAIN Scripture-Proof Agreeable to the former and late Constitutions of the Protestant Church of England AND OTHER REFORMED CHURCHES Wherein Defending a private sheet occasionally written by the Authour upon this subject against a publique pretended Refutation of the same by Mr W. in his book entituled Suspension discussed Many important points are handled sundry whereof are shortly mentioned in the following Page Together with a Discourse concerning private Baptisme inserted in the Epistle Dedicatory By SAMUEL LANGLEY R. S. in the County Palatine of Chester LONDON Printed by J. Hayes for Thomas Underhill at the Anchor and Bible in Pauls Church-yard 1658. The following Discourse containeth these things among others HOw far Prudentialls are to be admitted in Church-Government Ch 2. § 2. A strict consideration of the Scripture Texts whence the doctrine of Excommunication is to be gathered and deductions therefrom Ch 3. § 1 2 3 4 5. Excommunication cuts not off Chruch-membership Ch 3. § 6. Degrees of Excommunication greater and lesser manifested by Scripture light Ch 3. § 7 8 9 10 11. How far the Presbyterian suspension is sutable to the Rules appointed under the late Episcopal Government Ch 4. § 3 4 5 6. Ch 14. § 1. Digress 3. The distinction of negative and positive Beleevers considered and how far it s of use in this Controversie Ch 5. § 3 4 5 6. A justified Beleever as easily discovered to and known by others as a dogmatical Beleever Ch 5. § 5. The maïne conclusion viz. that the Lords Supper ought not to be administred to unbeleevers who are such in respect of actual notorious disobedience to the Gospel Ch 5. § 2. Proved from Mr. W. his concession § 7. From the suspension of some from the Passeover not ceremonially uncleane § 8. From parallel Cases § 9. From the forme of administring Eate this in remembrance Christ dyed for thee § 10 11 12. From the consideration of the qualifications required in the adult as necessary conditions of their admission to Baptisme Ch 6. throughout The maine conclusion aforesaid cautioned Ch 7. wherein especially is shewed how an habituall sincere beleever may be unpardoned and so lyable to condemnation for actual wickednesse not yet repented of § 2. The great and strongest objection against the foresaid Conclusion taken from the supposed general admission to the Passeover considered and answered Ch 8. § 4 5. Ch 9. Ch 10. Particular scruples and objections answered and mistakes removed Ch 11. Rom. 4.11 strictly considered Ch 12. § 6. c. Where is proved that the Sacraments are seales of the mutual Covenant i. e. on Gods part and mans part also Exceptions answered in the following Chapters Notorious wickednesse visibly continued in without repentance is and ought to be taken in the judgement of the Governing Church or where there is no Governing Church in the judgement of the Minister officiating as equivalent to word-rejecting of Christ and therefore equally renders a person uncapable of having the Lords Supper administred to him Ch. 18 19 20 21 22. By immediate though notoriously ungodly suspended or excommunicate parents a right may be conveighed for the Baptisme of their Infants Ch 19. § 4 5 6 7. A discourse about Examination or taking an account of persons confession of the faith before their first admission to the Lords Supper Digress 3. An observation concerning the name Antichrist Digress 12. The right meane betwixt unwarrantable separation from and undue admission to the Sacrament Digress 14. Rom. 3.19 opened and vindicated Digress 19 20. An Argument from Act. 15. proving that select Brethren not Ministers may authoritatively act in Ecclesiasticall Government Digress 22. TO THE REVEREND LEARNED GODLY Dispencers of the Mysteries of God and more especially those of the Classicall Association in the Eastern parts of the County Palatine of Chester Together with the Reverend and most endeared Mr Simeon Ash Minister in the City of LONDON As also To the truly judicious and experienced Physitian his highly honoured Friend Mr WILLIAM BENTLEY The Authour wisheth all grace and peace to be multiplied WORTHY SIRS IT 's no intent of mine in prefixing your Names to the ensuing Treatise to engage you in the patronage thereof Let it stand or fall at the bar of right Reason What the Learned Wotton in his Epistle before his accurate book de Reconcil peccat saith to Kings Colledge that do I mean to you in this thing Reum apud vos agere viri ornatissimi non clientem vos mihi non patronos qui pro me dicant comparandos sed qui de me sententiam ferant judices constituendos esse decrevi Nor do I thinke so low of you or so highly of my discourse as to judge it deserving of this joynt dedication But considering I am not likely to appeare againe in print I judged it honest to divide these my goods though never so small among you rather then to appropriate them to any of you singly having cogent Reasons for this Address to you all in this businesse To you the Renowned Aesculapius of our County that I might hereby publiquely testifie the engagements of my selfe and family to you both as a Friend and Physitian more especially that I might signifie a grateful sense and remembrance of your long continued succesfull and carefull though unfeed Advice for the health of him whom I was endebted to for my being and wel-being And your urging mee to this service had no small influence upon mee so that you may rightfully challenge a share in the fruit of my paines therein And you deare Sir a bright Star of the first magnitude in the Metropolitan firmament may not be excluded hence For when I call to minde your former Respects to mee in both Universities the precious precepts and fervent prayers you favoured me with at and in mine Ordination And the most endeared cordial long continued intimacy which you had with my Father of blessed memory who ever bore you upon his heart with the greatest tendernesse and who before he was taken from us in commending the service of this booke to mee forcibly commanded me the same These things I say considered not to mention other I finde my selfe deeply engaged as the heire of your most loving Friend as well as upon my own account otherwayes to testifie here my singular gratitude to you with submission of these my studies to your grave quick and judicious yet most candid Censure And yee my Bosome Friends and Brethren of that Classical Association wherein my lot is fallen at present to make up a number are not only concerned in my cause but injuries also Would it be beleeved if I should tell you the Gentleman I have to deale with intends you the contemptuous language he bestows on me Yet such is his brow that he hath taken up a conceipt ask me not whence I am not of Councill with him who taught him it That my Associated Brethren were accessory
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
courtesie and therefore that double letter he hath made the character of himselfe in his dealing with mee shall still stand for his name in the discourse following And now Reader thou mayst next peruse a true Copy of my paper which he gave thee depraved with his pretended refutation thereof and then my defence which is Christianly submitted to thy impartial judgement I shall not in the least go about to court my Reader into a complyance with me I wish him not to take one step to accompany me in an errour appearing so to be nor will it be for his advantage to refuse any complyance which the light here offered may rationally require from him I leave the whole intirely before him desiring the Father of lights by his holy Spirit to guide him into and preserve him in the wayes or rather way of peace and truth Suspension Reviewed CLEARED SETLED upon plain Scripture-Proof THe Argument Mr W. impugneth was thus managed in my Manuscript It is said by some that no unregenerate or ignorant and scandalous members in the Church being baptized and of years not excommunicate may be debarred the Lords Supper they expressing their desires to receive and proferring themselves These words Timpson hath in his Answer to Collins p. 2. For the better understanding of this position according to the mind of the Assertors thereof it may be noted That 1. The Question which is at present under consideration reacheth to any course which is effectual for debarring of the foresaid persons whether it be by disswading them from coming or by forcing them in a way of Ecclesiastical censure to keep back Those who defend the forementioned Thesis hold it unlawfull to advice the forementioned persons to forbear as well as to hinder them by juridicall suspension I hold the lawfulness of debarring both waies and the proving of either overthrows the foresaid position according to the minde of them who assert the same 2. Supposing it to be an act of power whereby they are debarr'd yet then the Question is not at present concerning the subject of that power whether it belong to the Eldership and that whether Congregationall or Classical c or to the community of a particular Congregation or to one single person whether a Diocesan Bishop or a Minister 3. Nor yet is the Question what kinde of power that is whereby they may be suspended whether it may be done by vertue of the power of order inherent in a Minister as such or by the power of jurisdiction c. But the Question is only concerning the lawfulnes of the act of suspending the foresaid persons by any person or persons whatsoever in whatsoever capacity they are or by whatsoever kind of power it may be exerted by them or any of them 4. Those who hold the forementioned position do understand the excommunication which they speak of to contain in the essence of it an exclusion from all or divers other publique Ordinances in the Church as well as from the Sacrament So that to them one not excommunicate and one not excluded from or warned to depart the publique Ordinances of hearing and praying and singing in the Church are of equal importance Whence it manifestly follows that if I prove some persons scandalously wicked who are not kept from all other publique Ordinances may be suspended from the Lords Supper they must acknowledge their assertion fully overthrown 5. They also intend by excommunicat such as are fully and compleatly with solemnity excommunicate For they cannot be ignorant that our Divines who hold suspension when it is a censure take it to be a degree of excommunication and therefore call it excommunicatio minor And it is exclusio sive suspensio vel abstinentia a coenâ Domini quâ interdicitur peccator ad tempus coenae participatione as Trelcatius Trelca Instit l. 2. Bucan loc com 44. qu. 10. 16. Polan Syntag. Theol. l. 7. c. 18. To the like sense speaks Amesius med Theol. l. 1. c. 37 de conscientiâ l. 4. c. 29. Bucanus Polanus and others express it Neither doth Aretius deny this for ought I can finde I know in his common places he saith Excommunication is larger then Suspension from the Communion of the Lords Supper according to the Scriptures But I suppose he saith not any where there I am sure he doth not nor I think in his Commentaries that its unlawfull to inflict the censure of excommunication by degrees Unless therefore our Admissionists do take excommunicate for fully excommunicate they trifle egregiously For then the meaning of their Assertion would be no wicked Church members not excommunicate may be excommunicated and that because they are not excommunicate But rather they deny all gradual proceedings in excommunication and so reject the distinction of major and minor If therefore I prove that it is lawfull to begin excommunication in suspension for a time and to stay there some time before there be a proceeding to a more solemne curting off in the face of the publique Congregation and with their consent I suppose my Antagonists will acknowledge this a lawfull manner of combat against their free admission pleaded for 6. That passage in Amesius I judge very remarkable in this Question which he hath in his de conscientiâ lib. 4. c. 29. Suspensio ab usu coenae similibus ecclesiae privilegijs nihil aliud est quam gradus excommunicationis ideo vocari solct A Multis excommunicatio minor quamvis non ex singulari Christi instiruto ex aequitate tamen et rei ipsius naturâ praecedere debet aliquandiu continuari ubi scandali ratio ferre potest moram I wish some who have written for suspension had observed this passage and if they had attended to it I thinke they would have defended their Province never a jot the worse then they have done 7. It is not necessary in opposition to my Antagonists Assertion that I should say all unregenerate ignorant or scandalous members baptized c. may be debarred or suspended the Lords Supper But it is sufficient to overthrow their opinion if I prove that some may For their tenent in reference to baptized persons of years not excommunicate is an universall negative that none such may be debarr'd Now one particular affirmative destroys a universall negative It belongs not to the present disquisition for what or how many sins or in how many and what cases any person qualified as aforesaid may be debarred but whether in any case for any sin he may be debarred For if in any case it may be lawfull to suspend a person not fully excommunicate and that is according to the sense of my Antagonists here excluded from all publique service in the Church then that cannot be freed from untruth which they assert viz. that there is no such ordinance of suspension in the Church approved by Christ This caution is not more plaine in it selfe and what can be plainer then it is
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
regeneration I feare is not capable of that meaning But this point hath no influence considerable that I can discerne upon our Controversie therefore I shall not launch out into it The other things Mr. W. here hath in these pages will occurre more then once beneath §. 5. In my second note numb 5. I secluded from the present Question the consideration of the subject of the power of suspension and Mr. W. in answer hereto supposeth there is no need to enquire after the subject thereof p. 13. Why might we not then here have agreed But even in this place he will fetch in though by head and shoulders the mentioning of illegal usurpation flat Brownisme Rebaptization c. What is the secluding the consideration of the subject of suspension from our present question is this usurpation flat Brownisme Rebaptization If not how come these in here But such termes as these serve for general Arguments to them who are so silly as to be moved with them and so will thrust in any where as being indifferently calculated to fit every turne §. 6. My third note or limitation of the Question number 6. secluded also from our present question the consideration of the kinde of power whether of order or jurisdiction requisite for suspension To this Mr. W. answers p. 14. They he meanes my Antagonists hold there is no such kinde of suspending power as you stand for prescribed in the word of God for refusing to submit to your examination It is your usurped kind of suspension they except against as you your selfe might have scene had you read their workes through as you snatch at a piece 1. See now how nimble our learned Gentleman is to evade the question if he could Is our question Whether persons may be suspended for resusing to submit to examination not that I refuse to speake to that in its due place but first we enquire whether in any case for any crime the persons before mentioned may be debarred and that was Mr. Timsons position before rehearsed viz. No unregenerate or ignorant and scandalous members in the Church being baptized and of years not excommunicate may be debarred the Lords Supper c. It was not none may be debarred for ignorance or refusing to submit to examination But none though never so scandalous members in the Church may be debarred And this I opposed which Mr. W. should have defended as he took upon him 2. Is not this a pretty stating the question Mr. W. here teacheth and informes me in viz. Whether is an usurped kinde of suspension lawfull This is even like to the question Quot sunt quinque praedicabilia But what are we the better for agreeing in that question when as it presently occurres whether there is any suspension not usurped 3. But indeed I see no Antagonist who is so silly as to state the question on that fashion though Mr. W. say if I had read their works through I might have seene it is our usurped kind of suspension that they except against Alas good man how industrious is he to make the world believe I am a man of no reading I will not goe about to perswade them of the contrary Yet I must needs say I had read through divers Authors against suspension and particularly Mr. Timpsons bookes before I drew up those lines which Mr. W. hath assaulted I would not have told this but that I apprehend it will be no matter of glory and commendation to me and it affords an argument somewhat probable in mine opinion to evince that Mr. W. is not infallible who insinuates elswhere as well as in this place my not reading Timsons works through but snatching at a piece I hope he will not be offended at our catching the piece of the Psalme following for our solace a while PSAL. 119. PART 1. A. 1 ALL such are blest who perfect are whose fect Gods wayes do pace 2 About his Lawes they take most care with whole hearts seeke his face 3 Also they do nothing unjust But Gods good pathes frequent 4 As thou Lord bid'st strictly we must keep thy Commandement 5 Ah! that sound guidance might me teach to keep thy statutes high 6 And then foul shame shall ne're me reach who all thy Lawes do eye 7 A right heart in me shall thee praise taught in thy judgments just 8 And I will keep thy statute-wayes O leave me not poor dust CHAP. II. §. 1. IN my fourth note at number 7 8 9. I said that my Antagonists by excommunicate understand them who are debar'd from all publick Ordinances in the Church as hearing praying c. And therefore if I prove the person spoken of in the question not debar'd from these may yet be debar'd the Sacrament it cannot be denied I shal rightly conclude against their assertion wherein I do not declare any thing of my own judgment concerning Excommunication but speak onely ad hominem And here though Mr. W. hath not a word against the Contents of this Note he carries it as if he would seem to confute it by 1. rendring extra communionem ejectio an ejection out of the common union as if there were not degrees of communion and so not of an ejection out of communion 2. by rambling about the Jus Divinum without any occasion at all ministred by any thing I had spoken here in this note for his mentioning the same 3. By concluding thus But for your full overthrowing of our assertion we shall believe it when we see it We believe you cannot I am sure you do not What needed this vapour here The man is prodigall of them being sufficientiy stockt for the largest expence of them I boasted not of a full overthrow of their assertion but said That if I prove a person baptized adult intelligent and not debarred the publick Ordinances of hearing praying c. in the Church I shall then fully overthrow their assertion which holds none baptized adult intelligent and not excommunicated may be debarred The which Mr. W. doth not deny yea he grants it in several passages of his Book expressy or by consequence But the former particular about Divine right he is often upon and he so often as disturb'd if not intoxicated with passion reels into discourses concerning prudentials and Jus Divinum charging me for excluding all prudentials from Church-government that his importunity wil force me to trouble the Reader with some short account of my apprehensions concerning these things he so pitifully raves upon throughout his Book § 2. 1. The Lawes of Christianity are given to men supposed not altogether destitute of right Reason some beams of the Image of God some remains of that signature imprinted on man at his first creation still continuing upon him And men are not called to lay aside any of their natural right Reason in their becoming Christians but rather by Christian helps to attain to an higher improvement to a more noble elevation and use thereof And therefore whatsoever
any other communion So he And in the same chapter speaking of suspension he saith The lesser excommunication excludeth onely from the Sacramentall pledges and assurances of Gods love which when it is pronounced against them that stubbornly stand out and will not yeeld themselves to the Churches direction and disposition is properly named Excommunication I have the rather insisted on this because of two consequences which wil naturally and easily flow from this doctrine viz. 1. That the scruple hinted by Mr. W. p. 133. and insisted on by others in opposition to our abstension or suspension is manifestly frivolous and groundless They say if a parent turn not his children out of doores he will not deny them bread and apply their simile that in like manner those who are not excommunicated or not cast out of the Church should not be denyed the Sacramentall bread in the Lords Supper 2. That Church-membership taken at large doth not give right to persons of years to the Lords Supper For then they who are cut off by any excommunication should be admitted they being still parts of the Church of God as Field calls them §. 7. 3. Since excommunication is a withdrawing or rejecting of one from communion hence it follows that as communion is more or lesse so this withdrawing and therefore excommunication is capable of degrees to be more or less And some more notable degree may be denominated by one name and another by another Thus it was among the Jewes the common nature of whose excommunication was a withdrawing from some communion as ours is Many of the learned have described theirs in the three speciall degrees of it as Schindler pentaglot in voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gerrard harm Evang. c. 178. gives a summary account of them out of several Authors The first was truly a separation or withdrawing But the second was more solemnly such Quâ quis solenniter in totius Ecclesiae conspectu exclusus est The word solenniter some such man as Mr. W. would catch and cavill at as he doth p. 18. against such a passage in my papers What saith he is your Suspension such an Apocryphall business that it deserves no solemnity in the managing thereof Unto such inconsiderable flirts I shall not trouble my self nor the Reader with any answer But I insist not in describing wherein the severall sorts of their excommunication did consist there being much difference among the learned in that See Dr. Hammond on 1 Cor. 5. But that there were severall sorts and in those that one was a severer degree of exclusion or separation and withdrawing from then another The four degrees or steps in the censure of excommunication among the Greeks formerly are mentioned by most who have written on this controversie The stantes succumbentes audientes and plorantes But the Gentlemen who oppose us alledge that those were steps in readmission of the excommunicate not steps or degrees in excommunication But though I confess this is an ingenuous answer yet methinks we may rationally inferre the lawfulness of proceeding by steps in excommunication from that supposed lawfulness of admitting severall steps of delivering out of excommunication Sure I am there is as much ground in Scripture and reason too as I apprehend for the former as there is for the later And that conceit of excommunication under the notion of a dismembring and turning out or cutting off from Church-membership being I conceive sufficiently and clearly refelled in the fore-going Section this inference will appear much more evident and convincing But I shall offer here these two considerations for the further confirming of gradual excommunication or putting out of Ecclesiasticall communion 1. If there be nothing in the nature of excommunication it self which is against a graduall procedure in excommunication nor any Scripture prohibition of it and if it be not contrary to the generall Rule of doing all things in the Church orderly and to edification then it is lawfull But the former is true therefore the later also That there is nothing in the nature of excommunication against it hath been shewed in that withdrawing communion which expresseth the nature of all excommunication is capable of degrees That there is no Scripture prohibition hereof is to be reckoned upon till some Scripture prohibition be produced which I could never yet see nor hear so much as pretended by any Nor is it contrary to the Rule of orderly and edifying transaction of affairs in the Church since courses of mildness and gentleness are most likely to edifie when they thwart not Justice and Right as those do not which are not contrary to the Word the Rule of Right and Justice 2. Again if a person may have no right to yea ought to be debarred the Sacrament who yet ought not to be turned out of all that private Christian communion which some excomunication deprives of then there may be degrees of excommunication or putting one out of Ecclesiasticall communion and particularly one degree of abstension or suspension preceding for some time the withdrawing of private Christian communion But the former is true therefore the later The Consequence I suspect not the deniall of the Antecedent stands firmly upon these two pillars viz. 1. That no Christian notoriously under gross and scandalous wickedness hath any right to the Sacrament nor hath the Minister any rightfull commission from the Donor or author of the Covenant and Seals thereof to administer or give the Sacrament unto him As suppose in point of faith a notorious Heretique who denies a fundamentall of the Christian Creed or in point of manners suppose one hath committed whoredome and it is notoriously known both these remaining visibly impenitent are uncapable of having the Lords Supper lawfully given unto them And yet 2. an offender though so notorious as in the forementioned cases ought not forthwith to be rejected and turned out of all that Christian private communion which some excommunication deprives of For the proof of the former of these two propositions I must crave the Readers patience and God willing in the following discourse he shall find it I hope clearly and convincingly confirmed The later of them I know none that deny And there is Scripture-evidence for it The heretick Titus 3.10 is not to be rejected and cast out of all that private Christian communion which some excommunication deprives of till after the first and second admonition which are not to be given together and at one time as all acknowledge but at some distance And a person is not thus to be rejected till obstinate Now obstinacy in wickedness referring to faith or manners cannot be suddenly manifested but requires several admonitions being to be rejected by an offender before he can be declared obstinate §. 8. 4 There are sundry sorts of persons in sundry capacities concerned and exercised in withdrawing from a scandalous brother 1. The Ministers the Stewards of the Mysteries of God 2 The people 3. The whole Church of Officers
me Reproath and shame For I have kept thy way 23 Crown'd Princes ' gainst me sate and spake But on thy Lawes I thought 24 Certaine delight in these I take And from them counsell sought CHAP. IV. §. 1. TO my first syllogisme at numb 21. of the Copy of my M S. he answers p. 33. 1 by quarrelling with my conclusion and that in two respects Besides his exception against the phrase fully excommunicate which hath been reselled above 1 that there 's left out of it They expressing their desire to receive and offering themselves But how vaine is this cavill expressing the desire he hath to receive any evasion that offers it selfe For 1. will he grant we may suspend them who do not profess their desire to receive and do not offer themselves If so then Church-membership alone doth not give right to the adult for the Sacrament and so his cause is marr'd And he a little before and in his Epistle puts in the limitation of intelligent persons at yeares who only with him are admittable so that if they are not intelligent they are to be debarred though they express their desire to receive and offer themselves Now let Mr. W. shew what Scripture debarrs these from the Sacrament and not from the prayers and other publique ordinances of the Church But that he attempts not to doe If he had it were ten to one the same proofes would bring in more limitations as well as that But it s sufficient for him for his part to cavill against others 2 Againe my argument proceeds concerning the law of Christ debarring a visible prophane person and then who sees not that it concludes against him whether he desire and offer himselfe to be admitted or no And yet with these shifts it seemes he non-plust my paper when he and it were together and tells it he could stop its course here and since it brisled not againe he is heartned to let the world know how brave acts he could do if he would 2 The other quarrell he hath against my conclusion is That its a Tautology and that is meanes that some baptized persons at yeares suspended may be suspended For saith he by not fully excommunicate we understand your meaning to be suspended Suspending may either denote the sentence of debarring or the execution of that sentence To say some persons censured with abstension or suspension may be suspended that is have the Lords Supper denyd to them is no Tautology no more then to say a person censured with full excommunication may be debarrd all publique Church ordinances according to their sense of it But the pofition I undertooke after stating the Question was this viz. That its lawfull to debar some persons the Lords Supper who are baptized and not warned to depart or kept from other publique ordinances of hearing praying singing in the publique Congregations of the Church And immediately after this I began my argument the conclusion whereof was Some baptized persons at yeares not fully excommunicated may be suspended from the Lords Supper Whereby its manifest that by not fully excommunicate I meant not kept from all publique ordinances in the Church which is their sense of excommunication And is this a Tautology some baptized persons not kept from all publique ordinances may be suspended from the Lords Supper My own judgement concerning full excommunication hath been shewed before in the last Chapter But what a pittifull business is this that Mr. W. so much quarrels at the state of the Question and sometimes saith I say what he holds himselfe in it and yet he would never rectifie the same in a line or two though desired as I am informed so to do if it pleased him not that we might have been agreed on that before we proceeded to dispute upon it But he seemes to imitate the crafty Gunner who would alwayes say he aimed at that which he hit but would never agree before he shot what should be the mark he would shoot at Thus much concerning the conclusion of my Syllogisme Now he comes to the premisses §. 2. The major he saith p. 35. he grants with my elucidation thereof in such general termes as they stand Yet after he bethinks himselfe and will as he seemes to me grant it upon condition that the granting of it may do no hurt to his own opinion Whether this be not the sense of his p. 36 37 38. let the Reader judge who will peruse the same The proof of my Minor which the Reader may receive if he please to turn back to the Copie of my paper M S. at numb 24. Mr W. sets down in his p. 39. and gives us words upon it p. 40 41 42 43. without distinguishing upon or denying any proposition therein He talkes much of Accademicall disputings Be it known to him I am not ignorant of the method of Disputation used in both our Universities But if the Respondent as he here makes himselfe should in stead of giving a short answer as he ought by denying or distinguishing upon the terms of either proposition run out into such extravagancies as he here doth he would and that most deservedly be hist out of the Schools He raps again at the distinction of greater and lesser fully and not fully excommunicate but impotently without any proof offered against the same And then lest the practice of the Church of England formerly used should give any countenance to the distinction he endeavours to clear the Church of England who manifestly used that distinction But the great fault is that it is now used by us what in them he excuseth in us Presbyterians is a crime he can hardly find terms of aggravation and disgrace bad enough to put upon it §. 3. Let us then first see what was the practice of the Church of England herein And then how Mr W. takes us off from pleading that and I shall give my reply thereto And first let us observe what was required by the Church of England formerly in reference to the manifestation of the knowleledge of such as were to be admitted to the communion and their understanding owning of the Christian faith In the order for Confirmation it 's thought good that none be confirmed but such as can say the Articles of the Creed the Lords Prayer ten Commandements and can answer to such questions of the Catechisme as the Bishop or such as he shall appoint shall by his discretion appose them in And this order is most convenient to be observed for divers considerations First because that when children come to years of discretion and have learned what their God-fathers and God-mothers promised for them in baptisme they may then themselves with their own mouth and with their own conseat openly before the Church ratifie and confirm the same And also promise that by the grace of God they will evermore endeavour faithfully to observe and keep such things as they by their mouth and confession have assented unto c.
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
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
actuall remission of sin and are so designed by the ministrators thereof It is true where we require actuall faith habituall is supposed but habituall is not sufficient though we could be assured thereof being not sufficient in its kind as a condition for the obtaining of pardon of sins And this leads us to the second Caution which is this §. 7. 2. That a person is not judged by the Church or Minister to be destitute of grace no not visibly and apparenter necessarily upon the account of their debarring him from the Sacrament but onely that he doth not live in the visible actuall exercise of faith but walketh in wayes inconsistent therewith And which therefore bring him under guilt at present so that his sins are retained in heaven that is unpardoned as well as on earth in the Church As by the preaching of the word they are retained in soro interno or poenitentiali so by the Church-censures in foro externo juridicali Matth. 16.19 18.18 As in preaching I say the threatnings or comforts mens conditions are manifested to their own consciences so in Church-censures inflicted on offenders and in Ecclesiasticall restoring of them there is a solemn application of the threats or promises of comforts to particular persons upon credible evidence of their states being such as may require the same respectively either the one or the other Now a godly man may have need of having the threatnings applied to him supposing his fall into any gross sin not particularly repented of And so may have his sins retained by the Church not onely he who hath the habit of saving faith inwardly and undiscernably as to others but also he of whose habituall justifying or sincere faith the Church or Ministers have probable hopes at that very time As suppose in Davids case one who had long known his former upright life might by that have had more probable grounds whereupon to judge and esteem him habitually holy then from his present crimes to judge or esteem him destitute of true holiness The like is the case of some few of the Quakers and such notorious heretickes in our dayes who upon the account of their former holy conversation a long time are hoped to have a seed of grace in them which will in due time through Gods mercy exert it selfe for their conversion from their present blasphemies as it hath done in some Yet what sober person can doubt that at present they are in such wayes of actuall infidelity and wickedness as to be rejected as they are by our Churches §. 8. The third Caution that must be here remembred which was hinted before viz. That it belongs primarily to the governing Church to judge what persons are so unbelievers in respect of their notorious disobedience to the Gospel as that the Lords Supper may not be administred to them this being confessed by all to be one instance of Ecclesiastical punishment or rather castigation viz. in exclusion from the Sacrament And then where the Church is in such a capacity to judge I humbly conceive the Minister while he is their Minister is to administer according to their judgement yea although their publick judgement thwart his own opinion For in such a case the question is not whether unbelievers by notorious disobedience to the Gospel should be admitted that he cannot recede from to gratifie any but whether this or that person be such an unbleliever which is regularly in a Church under Ecclesiasticall government to be determined by a publick judgement wherein particular persons are and an Officer considered as a single person is concluded so as it may not be resisted by him alone though he hath the liberty of appeal as opportunity is offered As when a Judge acquits one upon the verdict of the Jury whom he thinkes ought not to be acquitted The question there is not whether the guilty should be acquitted that may not be done by him upon any terms but whether that person is guilty and here without any injustice he submits his own opinion to the publick judgement of them whom the Law makes Judges in some sort of the fact in such cases I said while the Minister continueth to be their Minister he is obliged thus to comply but in some gross and palpable male-administrations it is thought the Minister and so the Judge in the former instance should leave his place rather then continue to execute the wicked determinations of the publick judgement aforesaid As Hooker in the Preface to his Ecclesiasticall Polity sayes Calvin did in such a case preaching his farewell Sermon upon such a wrong judgement passed by the Consistory of Geneva for the admission of a notorious offender to the Sacrament §. 9. 4. But when the Church is not in that capacity there being not a governing Church nor can be procured I suppose it is devolved to the diseretion and prudence of the Minister for suspending his own act of delivering the Sacrament to such as are openly wicked and profane and as it were ipso jure excommunicate For the proving hereof or what is tantamount that reverend Divine Mr. Blake hath given us his ren reasons in his Covenant sealed ch 7. § 16. well worthy of consideration and answered objections made by Mr. Jeanes against the same To which if it would not be counted too much presumption I would add There is no one I think doubts but a Minister if cast among heathens to whom he preacheth the Gospel and they tender themselves to baptisin might make use of his prudence and judgement of discretion to direct him in administring or not administring baptism to those he discerns capable or incapable who are fit Catechumens and who not who seem to professe the Christian faith seriously and who saying the same words do yet manifestly scorn what in words they profess And where he hath no governing Church to whose publick judgment he should have recourse I see not but the case as to this is of the same exigence either he is to administer to all that come or he must discern and judge who are to be refused and who embraced Now there is no publick judgement for him to be guided by But none sure will say the former The Minister is greatly concerned to do his endeavour in keeping the manifestly uncapable from participating even where there is a governing Church much more where there is not and so agreater burden is cast upon him Cyprian in his 54. Epistle Cornelio fratri after advising him to admit the penitent to the communion saith Si autem quod Dominus avertat à fratribus nostris aliquis lapsorum fefellerit ut pacem subdole petat impendentis praelii tempore communicationem non praeliaturus accipiat seipsum fallit ac decipit qui aliud corde occultat aliud voce pronunciat Nos in quantum nobis videre judicare conceditur faciem singulorum videmus cor scrutari mentem perspicere non possumus De
should have been of some who are Saints and no Saints to have fitted beleevers and unbeleevers the denomination is taken from the prevailing or predominant part §. 3. Then for the thing it selfe First he describes positively beleevers such who are soederally and professedly of the Christian perswasion Well and are not all the excommunicate or most of them so have not they a dogmatical faith And 2. are they not foederally positively engaged no time nor condition can take off or free them from their baptismal engagements Well but in his explanation of his unbeleevers negatively he addes more to the description of his positively beleevers as namely 1. Visible submission to the outward meanes of faith and reformation not as aliens but of the houshold of faith 2. Not justifying their miscarriages 3. But coming to our solemnities 4. Professedly hoping in Christ for salvation and 5. in no other Saviour And p. 57. he further describes them thus The baptized among us that frequent our Assemblies heare our doctrine with reverence and attention joyne with us in our solemnities give us visible testimony of their assent to our doctrine to such we are to administer as beleevers c. Now 1. I would know what Reason Mr. W. can produce for putting in these qualifications into the description of his positively beleever rather than that he should in generall walk according to his profession which makes a visible Saint or justified beleever 2. If all these be necessary to make up his positive beleever who must have the Sacrament then if these or any of these be wanting visibly in a baptized person adult and not excommunicate he is not or not enough a positive beleever and so must not be admitted to the Sacrament It should seeme then it s Mr. W. his doctrine that if a person baptized and adult either will not be reproved is a desperate swearer who as the dog turns againe to rent him that though never so prudently and meekly casts the pearles of admonition before him or if he frequent not come not above twice or thrice a yeare to any publique religious solemnities or if he do justifie and plead for his miscarriages or if he know not whether Christ be God or no whom he saith he hopes in or whether Christ be man too and dyed yea or if he do not heare the word with reverence and attention and give us visible testimony of his assent thereunto In any of these cases much more where all concurre suspension is allowed of and I presume Mr. W. would not have this person for any one of these offences excommunicated in his sense viz. excluded all publique Ordinances And yet whiles he grants all this he pretends to justifie the position I opposed viz. that no ignorant or scandalous baptized adult and not excommunicated person should be debared the Sacrament our Gentleman who is so impatient of being contradicted by me can calmly and contentedly contradict himselfe and that in so many instances altogether 3. I would demand where God hath promised to him that beleeves dogmatically only and professeth so and that he is willing to receive c. that he shall have the Sacrament either the bare signes or the thing signified thereby If he will forbeare to answer these scriblings as his severity calls my writings till he have some cleere proofe for that I thinke we shall be no more honoured with his publique assaults But I may not impose such hard conditions on him his tongue and pen are his own 4. But if his positive beleever do truly profess the whole Christian perswasion that is to assent to the doctrine of the Gospel understandingly for a man cannot be perswaded of what he understands not and that he hopes in Christ that is in Christs way he is a justified beleever If he do but credibly profess the same no one doubts of his admission to the Sacrament But then the Question will be whether this word profession is credible when his deeds do notoriously contradict the same of which we must speake beneath §. 4. Mr. W. addes p. 51. And we read not of any debarring this had people the Israelites from the solemnity of the Passeover There were no such imperious Masters of Reformation in those dayes which gathered proselytes of the better sort into a faction and excluded all the rest from Church fellowship as the world aliens unbeleevers and no Church members Likewise the Apostle saith We are Jewes by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles so our people are Christians by nature and birth and not sinners of the Pagans positively by the proper Rules of their very profession This latter assertion of our being Christians by birth as the Jewes were Church members borne I deny not But that 's no medium to prove the general admission he pleads for The former words of his are argumentative after a fashion The argument is gathered from comparing the Sacrament of the Lords Supper with the Passeover among the Jewes and our Ministers with the Jewish Governours then And here first we have the flowers of his argument Imperious Masters of Reformation faction He should remember he was to dispute not revile now But some mens mouthes do so abound with the distillation of reproachfull termes that they can hardly speake vehemently without spitting abusively 2. We have his false intimations that we gather proselytes into a faction excluding all the rest c. This falshood runs almost through his book that we gather new Churches and disclaime the old constitution as null lay another in examination notorious untruths I shall say no more to them now but demand whether the Constitutions and Cannons ecclesiasticall primo Jacobi which Can. 27. enjoyned that all should kneel at the Communion and that the Minister should not deliver it to any if they did not kneele were intended by the Imposers thereof or did it amount in the nature of the thing it selfe to a new constitution of the Church Did they gather the kneelers into a faction as their proselytes Mr. W. I thinke will hereby cross his affection to the Prelatical Government hinted in his p. 73. so as to say that was a factious designe And then all excluding some-from the Communion in our Churches without excommunicating them from all Ordinances yea though upon unscriptural grounds for I am of opinion their kneeling was not jure divino no more than bowing at the name of Jesus is not a demolishing of the former constitution of the Church and erecting a new one in a faction And I might ask whether every time the people of the Jewes were by their godly Magistrates called to renew their Covenant with God and sometimes so strictly enjoyned hereunto that he that refused should be severely punished yea separated from the Congregation 2 Chron. 15.9 12 13. 34.29 31 32. Ezra 10.3 5 7 8.11 12.19 Whether I say then they pulled down the old constitution of their Church and made a new one in a faction But
words of the Covenant which are written in this book And v. 32 33. he causet◠all present in Jerusalem and Judah all the people v. 30. to stand to it And the Inhabitants of Jerusalem did according to the Covenant of God the God of their Fathers And Josiah took away all the abominations out of the Countryes that pertained to the children of Israel and made all that were present in Israel to serve even to serve the Lord their God And all his dayes they departed not from following the Lord the God of their Fathers And now having thus prepared the people in this same 18th yeare of his reigne 2 King 23.23 2 Chron. 35.19 he commanded the people to keepe the Passeover there recorded What footsteps are there here of any visible prophane persons partaking of the Passeover There is only one more example in the old Testament story'd Ezra 6. It pleased God after a long captivity for the humbling Judah to stir up Cyrus to proclaime liberty of their returne to build the Temple he encouraging and assisting them therein Those of them whose spirit God raysed to goe Ezra 1.5 Closed with the designe attempted it and pursued it with a visible frame of great humility feare of the Lord zeale for his service and to the utmost layd out themselves in the same Chap. 1.5 Chap. 2.68 69. the whole third Chap. Chap. 5 5-11 1 Esdras 5.44 45 53 61 63 65. Ezra 6.14 15 16 17 c. And then is related their keeping the Passeover v. 19. viz. as is shewed v. 21. The children of Israel which were come againe out of captivity and all such as had separated themselves from the filthiness of the heathen of the Land to sock the Lord God of Israel did eat and kept the feast of unleavened bread seven dayes with joy c. The Syriack version hath it thus And the Israelites eat it who came up from the Babylonian Captivity viz. all those who were separated from the filthiness of the Land And so it is also in 1 Esdras 7.13 making that separation to be the preparative qualification of all who did partake of the Passeover But if we take it as referring to the Proselytes it supposeth the children of Israel to whom the Proselytes were so joyned were in like manner separated from the filthiness of the nations Upon a strict view of all these examples It appeares not that any did partake under a visible prophanenesse inconsistent with visible actual faith and obedience but the contrary §. 6. 5 Let me adde That when the people generally did keep the Passeover although some might be notoriously wicked at home it is not easie to conceive how those who admitted their paschal Lambs and offered part thereof for them and who had the charge of the holy things could know their particular scandalous sins so as thereupon to debar them How could they know who was ceremonially uncleane by touch of a dead body or who had not circumcised his males and so was morally uncapable in that state Yea though many thus obnoxious might be knowne so to be at home yet it being not manifest to those Governours they could take no notice thereof And yet hence it follows not that they who thus thrust in themselves had a proper right to actual present participation of the Passeover as elswhere is shewed by us But the case is otherwise now as to the Lords Supper when Christian people are gathered into particular Churches under the Inspection of Guides and Officers in a special manner appropriated and designed to watch over them in the Lord. However this seemes evident that on the same Reason whereby they did gather the exclusion of those otherwise ceremonially uncleane from the particular expresse prohibition of the uncleane by a dead body they might also inferre the rightfull exclusion or abstension of all notoriously prophane and breakers of Gods Covenant from the particular expresse prohibition of him who circumcised not his males Exod. 12.48 49. §. 7. 6 To conclude at last this pont The general command for celebration of the Passeover is no larger then for circumcision now as this supposed the Covenant to be visibly entred into with understanding as Ainsworth shews on Gen. 17. So that must suppose their continuance in that Covenant as necessary to enright them in a sacramental partaking of the Passeover But it s high time for me to crave the Readers pardon for so long detaining him upon and hindering his Transitus from this argument of the Passeover But if he thinke as I doe that its the strongest objection and that answering it will enervate divers others as that fetcht from 1 Cor. 10. concerning the Manna and rock though indeed it s much more easie to answer those and they have been cleerly answered by others and therefore I pass them If my Reader I say consider the importance of this argument I trust he shal not complaine I have provoked his patience or abused his leasure herein If any will needs be passionate I have Davids remedy for an ill spirit PSALM 119. part 10. K. 73 Kned was I by thy hands and made Learne me thy statutes just 74 Knowing mee shall thy people glad For in thy Word I trust 75 Known are thy Judgements right to mee In truth thou smit'st mee Lord 76 Kindely me comfort I pray thee According to thy Word 77 Keep me alive by grace from thee In thy Lawes joy I finde 78 Knowing no cause the Proud wrong'd mee Shame them thy Word I minde 79 Knit may they be to mee in love Who thee feare thy Lawes know 80 Keep my heart sound 'i th truth to prove Least shame mee overthrow CHAP. XI §. 1. THe great quarrell he hath about Examination is cast in my way p. 54. and often elswhere But though it justles uncivilly and as a bold intruder absurdly presseth in when we are busie about other matters I am resolved it shall stay for its answer till its turne come among the Digressions and then I shall deal candidly with it At p. 58. Mr. W. brings in this syllogisme as if it contained my sense and were some part of my argument viz. Such as by Scripture characters are to be judged and taken to be unbeleevers are unbeleevers But all men baptized adult and of the Christian perswasion if irregular in their conversations are by Scripture characters to be judged and taken to be unbeleevers Ergo all men baptized and adult and of the Christian perswasion if irregular in their conversations are unbeleevers He quarreld ere while with my inserting parenthesis in a syllogisme but if I had put in such a parenthesis as he here hath in his minor and conclusion which being taken out the sense is destroyed in both propositions I might have well deserved his censure which yet I list not to returne upon himselfe here But to the matter I answer Did ever any one say that any irregularities in conversation were Scripture characters whereby we might
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
to whom the Lords Supper ought not to be administred This assumption I thus confirmed numb 27. hecause to profess to renounce Christ is to profess not to believe now he who seems seriously to professe his not believing that is his renouncing Christianity cannot be by any rightly judged and taken to be a believer that is such a believer as aforesaid I here gave an instance of one uncapable of rightfull admission to the Sacrament and therefore not to be admitted though he be baptized adult and on whom the sentence of the Church may not perhaps have passed for excommunication The Instance was of one who doth in words renounce Christianity I added seriously not in opposition to madness or distraction as Mr W. trifles p. 63. For then the Instance would not have fitted the Question Mr. W. himselfe excludes the unintelligent p. 34. but in opposition to both 1. Ironicall uttering of words which then signifie not what otherwise they would as those words are usually interpreted Gen. 3.22 Behold he is become like one of us And 2. a questioning or doubting uttering of words which though in forme assertive yet are otherwayes manifest to be intended not as assertive but probational So Josephs speech is fairely interpreted Gen. 42.9 16. By the life of Pharaoh yee are all spyes So Psal 73.13 Verily I have cleansed my heart in vaine but after he cleeres his meaning was only a questioning or doubting of it v. 15. If I should say thus I should offend against the generation of the just Now such an one as thus in words significative of a renouncing of Christianity where the circumstances of uttering them declare the meaning of the speaker is not ironical nor probational only doth profess to renounce Christianity I said is not in a capacity of rightful admission to the Sacrament And by this one Affirmative I overthrew their universal negative they say none adult baptized not put off from other ordinances may be suspended or debarr'd the Sacrament I say such an one as we have mentioned may therefore their universal negative proposition is false except further limited §. 2. I thinke now there are few who understand any thing concerning disputation but would expect Mr. W. should have answered either by affirming that this word renouncer of Christianity should be admitted to the Sacrament if he tender himselfe to partake or els by distinction have put some limitation on the universal negative I assault whereby it might have appeared that such an instance as this was not comprehended in it But to admiration he can answer and doubts not to refute mee without denying or distinguishing as followes 1. He saith The whole depends upon a meere supposition It is rather a thing imagined than a cause likely to happen in the Church This exception I made my selfe and answered it which answer of mine Mr. W. endeavours to take off beneath where I shall make my reply 2. He saith But if such a case should fall out viz. That a man in the Church should professedly renounce Christianity then he renounceth the Lords Supper too And so your suspension in this case would be needlesse There is no need of suspending or excommunicating such a wilfull renouncer of Christianity I answer by distinguishing 1. Betwixt renouncing of all the essential parts and some essential part of Christianity 2. Between his renouncing the Lords Supper in particular as to his using it for the end and use Christ hath appointed it for and renouncing it altogether upon all accounts whatsoever And 2. now I say 1. To renounce an essential part of Christianity is to renounce Christianity though a man profess not to renounce all the essential parts of Christianity It is essential to Christianity that Christ be accepted embraced and submitted to as Lord and Saviour to save us from sin Math. 1.21 as well as from punishment therefore to reject Christ as Lord is to reject Christianity He that saith I beleeve Christ dyed for me to redeeme me from hell c. But I will not obey him he shall not reigne over me I neither will nor can spare my lusts at least not yet c. doth renounce an essential part of Christianity and so by Consequence Christianity it selfe For any essential parr of a thing being removed the thing it selfe is removed I may say of our accepting Christ as King and Saviour as the Epigrammatist spake of his two poysons Dividat haec si quis faciunt discreta venenum Antidotum sumet qui sociata bibet 2. He who thus renounceth Christianity renounceth also expresly or by consequence the Lords Supper as to a maine end and use Christ hath appointed it viz. for the engaging the soul neerer to Christ and resigning it up in grateful and holy obedience to him who is the author of salvation to them who obey him But yet he may not renounce it as to all other respects he would do as others do in the outward work c. And therefore there is need yea a necessity of suspending or excommunicating such a wilful renouncer of Christianity §. 3. 3. Mr. W. tells us this supposed renouncing Christianity cannot abolish his positive estate which stands on the free grace of God by Baptisme and so he is a beleever for his positive estate in point of Religion by vertue of his consecration unto the Christian faith in Baptisme and God will judge him as a Christian if he continue in his revolt till death not as a Pagan Infidel p. 63 64 65. Ans 1. Who ever said his wickedness disobliged him from his baptismall engagements 2. Mr. W. confesseth that this renouncer of Christianity is a Christian and beleever by vertue of his Baptisme at the day of Judgement when condemned And doth he thinke such a Christianity as is in hell gives right to the Sacraments here Who then can be excluded A damned Christian is a baptized person consecrated to Christian duties and not wholly disobliged from the same 3. And yet Mr. W. saith p. 63. I should judge of him rather by his continuance or non-continuance in this supposed abrenunciation What would he judge of him to be a Pagan Infidelâ—e So he is not when damned therefore cannot so be judged of by his foresaid abrenunciation here and continuance therein or will he judge him to be an unbeleever as destitute of habitual saving grace that belongs not to us to judge of but to God alone who knows the heart or must he be judged an unbeleever as lying under notorious wickedness inconsistent with the exercise of faith that indeed we may judge of But then to what purpose doth he thus judge of him in reference to his sacramental claime If to allow it and admit him then its all one as to this as if he were not so judged of If to exclude him then I have what I contend for unless there be no judging of a man till he be dead and then no man can be excommunicated for any crime
whatsoever For I am of opinion there is no need of excommunicating or suspending a man after he is dead nor of judging of him in order thereunto §. 4. 4. Mr. W. tells us Papists are Christians But we need not suspend them from the Lords Supper their phansie of transubstantiation and other heretical Mormoes save us the labour I know not why Papists may not without destroying their principles tender themselves to receive with us unless the necessity of their obedience to the Popes prohibition hinder them and yet that is not a principle to the French Papists But if a Papist remaining such and owning transubstantiation Popish Indulgencies merit in the Jesuits sense prayers to Saints religious adoration or worshipping of Images c. tender himselfe to receive will Mr. W. admit him why them doth he not plainly say he would as indeed his doctrine leads him to admit him if the Papist be not excommunicated in such sense as I thinke none in England are But those words of his save us the labour I suppose intimate that if they did not withdraw themselves from our Communion but should tender themselves to receive we should be at the labour of suspending them And yet Papists are not forbidden to come to Church nor separated from all other Ordinances in the Church And then the universal negative Mr. W. pretends to defend that no baptized person adult intelligent not excommunicated may be debarred the Lords Supper if he tender himselfe is againe battered by another Instance which his own pen hath afforded May not a Papist be baptized adult intelligent and not excommunicated the publique Congregations if he exclude not himselfe as some others doe And yet I thinke Mr. W. grants he may be kept back from the Lords Supper whiles he professedly remaines a Papist and it s to my admiration that this Gentleman can so confidently defend the said universal negative before mentioned and yet overthrow it by divers such concessions as this in his booke §. 5. 5. Mr. W. tells me I delude men with the contracted notion of saving faith and I may tell him 1. that he doth as much delude men with the contracted notion of doctrinal or dogmatical faith 2. And that it s not the notion of saving faith but the resting in a common verbal profession of Christianity crying Lord Lord which will be found to be the great deluder of men when the day of trying all things shall come And then he informes us that Sacraments are not seales of a personal and inward faith only They are visible scales of the righteousnes of faith i. e. of the doctrine of faith in Christ unto justification in the sight of God without the workes of the Law From whence he inferres And why should not all baptized persons adult and not excommunicated personally testifie their assent to this doctrine by taking the consecrated bread and wine into their hands as the visible similitudes of the body of Christ sacrificed for us c. To which I reply Who hath said that they are seales of a personal faith only But doth not Mr. W. here grant as well he may that they are seales of a personal inward faith though not only Sacraments are considered 1. in respect of the Institutor and Author 2. of the Receiver both wayes they are seales In respect of the Author they seale his tender of the Covenant of grace wherein salvation is freely promised to all that beleeve In respect of the Receivers they are instituted and appointed by God for their solemn sealing or testifying their beleeving and obediential embracing of the Covenant of grace in the blood of Christ And as the Administrator is to attend both so in subserviency to his Master both these are to be designed by him in the celebration of the holy mysteries The seales as is often said are commensurate with the Covenant sealed If a single covenant or meere promise tendered to all who will beleeve that they shall be saved might be sealed with the Sacraments there were nothing in the nature of the Sacraments which should hinder the administring of them to heathens remaining such to whom this Gospel is to be preached Mark 16.15 John 3.16 But it s manifest these seales can be administred only where there is visibly a mutual covenant viz. God promising justification on the condition of faith to the Communicant and the Communicant visibly closing with that condition of beleeving to justification This is manifest in that famous text Mr. W. relates to which is Rom. 4.11 concerning Abraham his receiving Circumcision as a seale of the righteousness of faith §. 6. This text requires our most serious perusall And here I shall observe That though Gods sealing or confirming his promise or single covenant of grace is not excluded yet this text doth very eminently refer to the sealing or confirming of Abrahams personal faith and that not only a dogmatical but justifying and saving faith professed by him in receiving Circumcision The Question Paul disputes in the context is whether a man may be justified without the works of the Mosaical Law as such and he proves our affirmative in the example of Abraham Abraham was a righteous person and justified by faith his faith was imputed to him for righteousness that is God dealt with him and accepted of him through Christ as if he had been perfectly righteous in himselfe having pardoned his sins as the phrase is explicated v. 6 7 8. That this is the cleere and easie importance of the phrase of imputing a thing to another I thinke I first learned from our learned Wotton on John 1.12 a notion much better than fine gold which is demonstrated by two places of this Epistle where the same manner of speech is used Rom. 2.26 If the uncircumcision keep the Law shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is he shall fare no worse than if circumcised so Rom. 9 8. Now that Abraham was thus justified without those Mosaicall works the Apostle proves 1. In that he was justified before the workes of the Law as such were in force For he was justified before he received Circumcision one use whereof afterwards was to engage the receivers thereof to all the Mosaical Law Gal. 5.3 2. In that Circumcision in its designe and intendment and to Abraham effectually was to be a seale of the righteousness of faith before received and hence as well as from other texts Divines so unanimously conclude that the Sacraments are not instituted for the unconverted but converted I say instituted For its vaine to speake of the possibility of conversion in the event by or at the Sacrament as thence to inferre the manifestly prophane and unconverted may be admitted For no one can say of an heathen or excommunicated person if he be sinfully present and partake that he shall not may not be converted at or by that sinfull partaking The spirit bloweth where it listeth The concurrent judgement
severely they were punished and thence concludes against the Jewes for their abusing the Prophets and rejecting Christ himself as they themselves perceived verse 45. The force of such arguments lies not in the existence of the case supposed but in the merits of the cause supposed and in the parallel and likeness betwixt the case supposed and their cases whom he deals with Comparata etiam ficta arguunt fidemque faciunt as P. Ramus rightly observes and gives many examples thereof Dialect l. 1. c. 18. So here whether word-renouncer of Christianity be existent or no if he be to be debarred the Sacrament and the case of one who in deeds rejects Christ be parallel to that as to a visible renouncing of Christ the Argument is valid from the former to the debarring of the later §. 4. 2. Another exception Mr. W. makes against the expression he saith is mine of quotidian and ordinary rejectings of Christ. This expression saith he is somwhat harsh and rigorous p. 96. the like he hath p. 103. But expressions warranted by Scripture are not too harsh nor rigorous but such is this For the Scripture frequently puts this language on the notorious acts of disobedience even amongst Gods people by dedication and verball profession 1 Sam. 8.7 10.19 15.23 26. 2 King 17.15 Jerem. 16.19 8.9 Hosea 4.6 And Christ Jesus makes these two phrases of rejecting him and not receiving his word of equall importance John 12.48 And would to God this were not too ordinary and frequent 3. Mr. W. adds p. 96 97. Perhaps some of your reverend Pastors grave Elders may possibly be involved in the crime It is supposeable nay possible to use your own weapon that such may be word or deed-rejecters of Christ in your sense If such an extraordinary emergent as this appears who then shall suspend the Parish Pope or his Vestry Cardinals They will haply have a privat Mass though none of the Congregation wil joyn with them In this supposable case which possibly may occur though it doth never actually occur what instantaneous Remedy have you Methinks such wise men as you should foresee the evill and be furnished with an instantaneous Remedy against it when such a case shall occur though it never actually doth occur Shall I retort upon you this Counter-buff viz. That God hath placed a power somewhere in his Church for the instantaneous checking of this supposable evil or else must you renounce your principle which upon a close pursuit will cast you on this rock We onely here improve your Argument to such further usefulnesse as you never expected and the improvement is rather good against you than against us because it is your own argument Despising his scornfull language I answer 1. Mr W. doth here manifestly abuse me For in his Counter-buffe as he calls it he puts this Pofition down in a different Character as if it had been mine assertion and words viz. That God hath placed a power somewhere in his Church for the instantaneous checking of this supposable evill The passage of mine he alludes to was in the beginning of the Argument where one proposition in my Syllogisme was Those who are visibly such as the Lord hath in his word declared to be persons to whom he would not have the Lords Supper administred may be suspended from the Lords Supper And this I said is clear because God hath placed a power somewhere in his Church for the managing his Ordinances so as they may not be dispensed to such as he hath declared in his word he would not have them administred unto And I had before limited the Question thus That we are not now enquiring by what power any may be suspended but only concerning the lawfulness of the act of suspending the persons mentioned in the question by any person or persons whatsoever in whatsoever capacity they are or by whatsoever kind of power it may be exerted by them or any of them So that if it were lawfull for a Generall Council to suspend it proved the assertion sufficiently which I undertook You see then 1. that the expression of an Instantaneous remedy he talkes on was not mine but his own 2. Besides we may distinguish of debarring 1. by a Rule for debarring and 2. by the execution of that debarring the Rule appoints In the former sense there 's an Instantaneous remedy as he speakes in the case propounded by him to keep the ordinances from being dispensed to such as have no actuall right thereunto For the word of God so debarres them that they ought not to approach to the seal of the Covenant without their reall and present accepting of the Covenant-terms which they cannot do whiles they lye under notorious wickedness unrepented of In the later sense there may not be ever an instantaneous remedy to execute the Rule effectually But we are not disputing what men do but what they ought to do according to Scripture-Rule He might in the same manner trifle about suspending the unclean from the Passcover and say But what if the Priests and Governours were to keep back the Legally unclean were so unclean themselves who must suspend them and hence argue that they might not debarre others because there was none to debarre them or not instantly when as yet the Rule debarred them as well as others and they sinned in not complying with it themselves as well as in not executing the same for the debarring of others And thus the Reader may perceive our Gentlemans Counter-buffe is but the blind-mans-buff and fitter for an hood-winkt boy than a learned censurer of others Logick But O my soul stop here restrain yea extinguish the rise of a seeming just indignation by attending wholly to the divine and calming meditation of PSALM 119. Part 16. Q. 121 Quietly I do judgement just Save me from Tyranny 122 Quasht let me not be by proud dust For good be my surety 123 Quite fail mine eyes for thy goodness and for thy right'ous word 124 Quickly to me mercy express Teach me thy Statutes Lord. 125 Qualifie me with grace to know thy Testimonies right 126 Quickly Lord work It is time now For men thy Law null quite 127 Questionless therefore I do love Thy Truth above gold best 128 Questionless thy Lawes right I prove and each false way detest CHAP. XVII §. 1. THe consequence in my argumentation at numb 41. If word rejecters of Christianity though baptized adult and not fully excommunicate may be debarred the Sacrament then also some such deed-rejecters of Christianity may be debarred my paper proved at numb 42. as is related by Mr. W. p. 98 99. Which we shall have occasion anon to repeat I shall now gather up the summe of what Mr. W. answers for the enervating thereof and then having compared my argumentations with the pretended solutions he returnes thereunto I shall make my Reply to them severally and then adde more proofe for the confirmation of my Consequence aforesaid 1.
be censured for this my presumption in dissenting from the common interpretation of several Scriptures and asserting some things against the judgement of many or most Divines and godly Christians c. Assault Humphreys and Timson crys Mr. W. p. 48. The men like Ingenuous Worthyes appeare in print c. It s pitty that such a learned and ingenuous Divine as Mr. Humphreys appeares to be should be yoakt so unsutably with Mr. Timson Mr. Humphreys wants not assaulting Mr. Timson as to our controversie will not I thinke deserve an assault untill now in his publique capacity Mr. W. intimates he gaine the repute of lesse arrogance and more learning than his former writings so far as they reach our case have discovered If such a man as Mr Humphreys will pick out that which lookes as considerable in this controversie in Timson it would sooner be answered But I wonder not Mr. W. and Timson so well agree For they are both good at provoking words and it s a jolly Champion whose name Mr. W. hath mentioned 26 times I take it in his booke When I have little els to doe I may perhaps answer him as Mr. W. challengeth mee But I hope to be better imployed And the truth is I agree with him and Mr. Humphreys in so many things they treat of for substance that the service of answering them is not so proper for me as their peculiar Antagonists But see what an answer this is Timson is against Elders Ergo there 's no consequence from the suspension of word rejecters of Christ to the suspension of deed-rejecters of Christ Sampsons new withes will not tye these together This is to dispute at a low rate indeed §. 4. 3. To his third I say 1. Our question was not whether open scandalous and presumptuous offenders in the Church are to be punished by the discipline of the Church I wonder he hath the face to say it was and tell the Reader so who hath the Question stated before him otherwise But whether any of these might be debarred the Sacrament though not fully excommunicated Therefore Mr. W. his debate here is not only impertinent to the present argumentation he pretends to answer to but also to the whole controversie in hand 2. His odious Insinuations of every Parish Priest after his own humour using partiality with the rest of that riff raff have been answered before 3. But that which ad ravim usque he talkes on is suspending for non-submission to Examination and that of persons otherwise judicious and of good example Our Question was whether for any cause any might be suspended not for what causes Yet this Digression I intend to say somewhat to when it comes among the Digressions at the latter end to which I refer it 4. If it were not fit the correcting discipline should lye in the hands he excepts against because of their cohabitation with them who should be corrected which may cause partiality then the Corinthian Officers should not have had in their hands the correcting discipline wherewith to censure the Incestuous person because forsooth he was among them and they might if Mr. W. had been their prompter have evaded the Apostles objurgation for neglect of disciplining him and have said It was not fit for us who live with him to censure him some body els more remote who might be presumed more impartial should have taken him in hand And belike the same Reason would as well perswade Justices of peace that it s not fit for them to take cognizance of offences among their neighbours they are fit to minister Justice to those who are remote from them not to them who cohabite with them in the same Hundred or Parish And yet though Mr. W. talkes thus consideratly as he saith himselfe p. 103. yet a while agoe he seemed to have a better mind to exercise discipline among his neighbours if the State would enough assist him therein For said he p. 90. we have ordinary cases enough in being for the full exercise of Ecclesiastical discipline had we power from the Christian Magistrate to convent offenders before us authoritatively and to inflict punishments upon them after their legal conviction according to the quality of their crimes and should not rather be a ludibrium to bold offenders then any way reform them To the former part whereof I answer Did he never see the Ordinance of Lords and Commons of March 29 1648. entituled The Form of Church Government to be used in the Church of England and Ireland agreed upon by the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament after advice had with the Assembly of Divines Is that but a toleration or was it ever repealed But some Ministers and others pretend ignorance of such an Ordinance and wonder when it s shewed them and well they may that they should no more regard the affaires of the Church Others have pretended It was but an Ordinance and therefore not valid after the dissolution of the Parliament who made it and yet in the meane time have sued for their tithes upon an Ordinance built upon the same Authority To the latter part I returne Cyprians answer Epist. 55. ad Cornelium Quod si ita res est frater charissime ut nequissimorum timeatur audacia quod mali jure atque aequitate non possunt temeritate ac desperatione perficiant actum est de Episcopatus vigore de ecclesiae gubernandae sublimi ac divinâ potestate nec Christiani ultrâ aut durare aut esse jam possumus si ad hoc ventum est ut perditorum minas atque infidias pertimescamus And after Non id circo frater charissime relinquenda est ecclesiastica disciplina aut sacerdotalis solvenda censura quoniam convitijs infestamu◠aut terroribus quatimur c. §. 5. To his fourth I answer It s most of it answered in what was lately mentioned whereby it appeares if Ministers were not the greatest hinderers of Church Order they might see that presbyterated Churches have power from the State authoritatively to send for offenders yea to give Oath if need require But as long as the Magistrate doth not compel them to do their duty herein by depriving them of their maintenance for neglect hereof as well as for total neglect of preaching they cannot see sufficient authority for their acting herein That Question Mr. W. here propounds whether Parochial suspension with Classical power in being by toleration civil be an universal remedy against all the evils that belong to Ecclesiastical cognizance Lanswer negatively Who said it was But doth Mr. W. thence evince the consequence of my fore-recited argument to be invalid Good Reader Respice titulum Look to what Mr W. is answering to all along and then judge whether it was handsome he of many should have told the world how he feares my braines are almost marred as he doth p. 89. I am beholding to him for his care of me But I cannot desire he should be fo
sollicitous about mine as so pittifully in the interim to neglect his owne §. 6. His fifth Answer or Reason against my foresaid consequence is a meere fiction the product I thinke of an extravagant phansie and too fruitfull an invention ratified and excited by a passionate heat I never said that former acts of wickednesse though amounting to a rejecting of an essential of Christianity nor yet word-rejecting of Christ when retracted by a visible repentance should debar any from the Sacrament They are then cancelld and blotted out when repented of and are no more to be mentioned against the offender As Cyprian saith Epist 55. Cornelio fratri Primus foelicitatis gradus est non delinquere secundus delicta cognoscere Illic currit innocentia integra illibata quae servet hic succedit medela quae sanet But as in the beginning of the argument I spake all along of a word-rejecting Christ which a person is found in when he tenders himselfe to communicate so here the deed rejecting of Christ was such as he was then visibly still guilty of which he is not when he hath seriously retracted it by repentance and promise of Reformation And yet where this Gentleman is most amisse he is usually most confident and if I may use Cheshire language threapes me down thus p. 104. You cannot say I misconceive your meaning no by no meanes If he say white is black he must not be contradicted no not when he pretends to know my thoughts so infallible is he the seven Hills aspire not to this Elevation I trow Marsilius Ficinus who interprets Plato saith Platonis quidam familiaris vir doctus edidit librum cujus inscriptio fuit Contradicendum non esse eidem de eo Platonem consulenti respondit Plato Cur me consulis si tibi prohibes contradici I shall leave him in his confidence and returne to the Ark of my trust PSALM 119. part 17. R. 129 Right wondrous are thy statutes bright My soul keepes them therefore 130 Receiving of thy words give light Th'simple with knowledge store 131 Restlesse I cal'd and pant for I Longing thy precepts crave 132 Regard me with that rich mercy Which doth thy lovers save 133 Regulate my steps in thy Word Let no sin rule o're mee 134 Rescue mee from mans wrongfull sword So I 'le thy Lawes keep free 135 Rayes from thy face shine on me now Teach me thy word to awe 136 Rivers of teares from mine eyes slow Because men breake thy Law CHAP. XVIII §. 1. ANd now having answered Mr. W. his Reasons as he cal'd them The Reader may discerne how my argumentation concerning deed-rejecters of Christ their suspension remaines untouched by him much more unwounded and safe But because the point is of great influence into the present controversie I shall adde somewhat more hereunto to prove that notorious gross wickednesse continued in without visible repentance of it is and ought to be taken in the judgement of the governing Church or where there is no governing Church in the judgement of the Minister officiating as equivalent to word-Rejecting of Christ and therefore equally renders a person uncapable of having the Lords Supper administred unto him The argument I before propounded at numb 44 45 was to this purpose If words are no otherwise testimonies then as they signifie the mind of the speaker then words of profession for owning Christianity are not significative of the mind in that profession when there are some such deeds at present owned which do more probably signifie the mind to the contrary This consequence is cleere because the use of words is to be signes of things when they manifestly are not so they cease to have the use of signifying the mind in the thing spoken of Verba quid audio facta cum videam Cyprian de unitate ecclesiae catholicae saith Credere se in Christum quomodo dicit qui non facit quod Christus sacere praecipit The Antecedent also is manifest For §. 2. 1. In other matters some deeds practiced and continued in render words to the contrary incredible and there is the same reason of them and this case as to the thing wherein I now compare them The command is to Give to him that needeth but every one who saith he needeth is not to be taken for a needy person when as the contrary other wise appeares to us by his abundance visibly under his hand and his large and unnecessary expences So he that repents is to be forgiven but he that says he repents is not to be beleeved when actually and visibly he continues in the wickednesse he saith he repents of Non remittitur peccatum nisi restituatur ablatum and that before God or men If a theefe rob me of my purse and then say he is sorry for my loss and that he hath so injur'd me yet will not restore my purse to mee Is his saying I repent a probable indication of his mind Is that a credible profession St John shewes 1 John 3.17 compared with Chap. 4.20 If a man say he love God or his neighbour and yet so manifest his hatred that he will not relieve his brother in distresse he is a lyar and therefore so must be judged of by that manifestation of his deeds contrary to his words Was not the enmity of the Jewes Adversaries as to building the Temple signified by their practising against the same more then their friendship was by their good words Ezra 4.2 Let us build with you for we seeke your God as ye doe c. So Jer. 8.8 9. How do ye say ye are wise they have rejected the word of the Lord and what wisdome is in them 1 John 2.4 He that saith I know him and keepeth not his Commandments is a lyar and the truth is not in him 1 John 1.6 If we say we have fellowship with him and walke in darknesse we lye and doe not the truth Now sure a lye manifested to be so is not credible nor a significative testimony of what in words is asserted When the Pythonisse maide Act. 16.16 17 18. gave testimony to Paul and Sylas verbally saying These men are the servants of the most high God which shew unto us the way of salvation Was that a credible profession or testimony Augustine libro de Mendacio ad Consentium saith Ille mentitur qui aliud habet in animo aliud verbis vel quibuslibet significationibus ennnciat §. 3. 2. Words are more apt to be counterfeit then some deeds therefore some deeds may be more credible testimonies of the mind then words contrary thereunto When Saul said to Samuel 1 Samuel 15.13 14. Blessed be thou of the Lord I have performed the Commandment of the Lord. Samuel said But what meaneth this bleating of the sheep in my cares and the lowing of the oxen which I heare And Sauls disobedient deeds of sparing Agag and the best of the Amalekitish flock though pretended for sacrifice was a more credible
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
before delivered we distinguish with Mr. W. and say 1. Some persons are and are called Christians beleevers c. only upon the account of their being positively and solemnly engaged to Christianity and the Christian faith And 2. some are and are called Christians and beleevers not only on the account of their being so engaged as aforesaid but of their visible conformity to those Christian engagements All who are Christians in the former respect are Church-members whiles alive and within in the Apostles sense 1 Cor. 5.12 that phrase of us Mr. W. inserts too if it referre to 1 John 2.19 is difficult to be understood and its a great question whether it be equipollent to the within 1 Cor. 5.12 so I shall omit it here A disciple or servant is sometimes denominated from his being entred into a School having covenanted with his Master to serve him and therefore these are lyable to Ecclesiastical Censures And yet they may be no Christians nor beleevers visibly upon the account of the latter respect and therefore cannot claime the priviledges belonging to disciples who learne and servants who obey their Masters whiles they notoriously refuse to learne and obey Christ And this mindes me of the second thing Mr. W. hath in the fore-mentioned pages which seemes to need an answer here It s page 139. where he saith A man undeniably without and utterly uncapable of the Lords Supper may have the Scripture characters of faith in your sense i. e. he may be instructed in the Christian faith be able to give an account yea a true account of his faith submit unto your Church order of examination and be of Christian behaviour without exception in his private carriage and yet be such a visible unbeleever to us as the Lord in his word would not have the Lords Supper administred unto viz. because not baptized c. yea though as he before said he may be regenerated 1. Sometimes Mr. W. makes to be within and to be a Christian or beleever of equal latitude as in his last exception I have answered Here he acknowledgeth one not within to be a true and reall beleever and therefore I should conclude a true Christian though not so solemnly For I am of opinion none can expect to be saved but true Christians and these Mr. W. saith may be truly regenerate and goe to heaven 2. But whereas he tells us this catechumen or heathen Proselyte may be without exception of Christian behaviour in his private carriage and yet not be capable of the Lords Supper I utterly deny this For if he were of Christian behaviour without exception he would submit to Baptisme the contempt whereof all acknowledge to be a damning sin and then in the same day and houre for ought I know he might communicate And if he have opportunity to desire the Communion he hath opportunity to be baptized and therefore cannot be excused in the neglect of it nor then be accounted in that neglect a beleever in respect of visible complyance with and obedience to the Gospel Who only hath a visible right to the Lords Supper And now Sir saith Mr. W. p. 145. to your Allegation out of Tertullian viz. Nemo illic Christianus c. This also was quoted by mee for the same purpose as the passages of Salvian were viz. that the name or word profession of Christianity is no argument nor testimony he is a Christian whose deeds do notoriously contradict the same And my paper they expressed it at numb 50. Agreeable whereunto is what I finde quoted from Tertullian Apolog. cap. 44. speaking of the Heathens prisons Nemo illic Christianus nisi planè tantum Christianus aut si aliud jam non Christianus Now Mr. W. hath left out the word prisons in the copy he hath printed as mine and when he hath so done takes paines from the context in Tertullian to informe mee that the Father speakes of the Christians sufferings in prisons as if I had not understood it before Is not this a brave confutation to be boasted of He excuseth his Transcriber of my paper p. 115. And whether he must take this non-sense to himselfe he hath printed as mine or on whom else he will lay it I know not I list not to upbraid him with frauds imposture and cheating c. which yet he usually puts on mee so wonderful civil and well manner'd is hee 2. Mr. W. addes But why shall I trouble you with these things seeing you are so ingenuous as to acknowledge that you act herein but by vertue of another mans Quotation He had before said to mee p. 60. I finde no ingenuous dealing in all your paper And here to do me a spite he will contradict himselfe like as elswhere he complaines of the obscurity of my paper p. 80 82 88. as if he could not know what I would have and yet begins his Postscript with these words Sir after all this I returne you thankes for this plaine declaration of your minde in this peice of yours But by his favour he is too hasty in concluding I had not perused Tertullian my selfe and the same may be said of his censuring my childishnesse for referring to divers Authors as mentioned by Zepperus because I said I finde Tertullian thus quoted there being other causes of such references viz. 1. When we have perused Authors not now with us and so the reference at second hand helps us only to the place where that is which we would quote And 2. When the reference to such later learned Writers who have quoted those Authors for the same intents as we would make use of them doth adde weight to the quotation by affording a probable proofe that the passages quoted are rightly understood and interpreted to the true and genuine sense of the original Authors 3. After his telling us of his favour in mentioning another passage of Tertullian for our advantage and his favours are not so ordinary and common that I should reject any of them though it shall appeare beneath I act not by vertue of his quotation He falls foul on Tertullian and as scoldes when one in any thing displeaseth them rake in all old fores and reckon-up all the faults they can really or upon uncharitable suspition charge him with so because Tertullian hath the hard hap to cross Mr. W. as himselfe conceives and to favour mee the world shall now be told what failings he had or he was thought by some to have had other wayes But what if there were some called Tertullianists accounted heretiques when yet the name heretique was very rife who denied second marriages and said that the souls of wicked men became Divels after their departure out of this life and that the soule is continued by going from one into another as much as to say by carnal descent and succession as Doctor Meredith Hanmer in his Ecclesiastical Chronographie reckons up their tenents out of Augustine What are any of these to the present controversie
of the Church I am informed by a Manuscript Copy I have of the Resolves of a Provincial Synod held at Preston in Lancashire Novemb. 14. 1648. that the said Synod among other things resolved in their sixt particular That there is not only one way prescribed or warranted by the word of god for the Elderships satisfying themselves of the sufficiency in point of knowledge of persons that are members of their Congregations respectively that they may be admitted to the Lords Supper 7. That it is not lawfull for the Elderships to tye themselves to one way as aforesaid suppose it be examination before them when that one attaines not the end and another may probably doe it So they In the businesse of Marriage its necessary the consent of the parties should be expressed before competent witnesses but the Christian Magistrate may determine who shall be competent witnesses whether a Justice of peace or a Minister shall be present to take and record the signification of their consent Yet no sober man cryes out Why are unscriptural conditions put upon persons to be marryed The like may be said concerning the present point Yet in this case methinkes that should sway most for our direction herein at present which is commended to us by both Houses of Parliament after their removal of the Common prayer book with the advice of the Reverend Assembly Form of Church Government to be used in the Church of England and Ireland of Aug. 29. 1648. p. 30. But if people in some Congregations will not be gotten to comply with that direction in the letter of it I know not but there may be some variation without offence as the Minister or Elderships of particular Churches with advice of their Classis if extant may judge expedient for the satisfaction and edification of the Church See Mr Blake Covenant sealed Ch. 7. § 14. p. 230 231 232 233. and § 16 p. 272 273. I am afraid I have been too long on this Digression The urgency and misrepresentations of the thing here handled must be my excuse I humbly submit it to the judicious peaceable Reader who will consider how to shew a cleerer way before he censure this And I shall easily neglect discontented furious uncivil Wranglers whose businesse is to carp at others but build nothing consistently of their own in this matter 4 Your pretended Church order saith Mr. W. p. 4. requires an account of mens saith auricularly And p. 28. You deny the Lords Supper to such as will not give an auricular account to you or your Elders c. Auricular confession is a phrase used to denote that which is required among the Papists 1 viz. that every one do confesse all his sins though private to the Priest alone whispering the same into his eare Now what a shameful slander is that Mr. W. puts on us in the application hereof to the profession of faith required among us cannot but be manifest to every observer 1. We require no confession of private sins but abhorre it unfeinedly 2. Who knows not the great quarrel many have against the Presbyterial Government is because it allowes not the Minister alone of his own head to seclude the other Officers chosen by the people from joyning with him in receiving this confession of faith required But let the Reader here see what cause he hath on this occasion to accompany me in a serious lamentation that envious animosities should so farre prevaile upon any as to hurry them on to such calumnies as malice it selfe could not devise more impudent 5 Mr. W. addes p. 4. Which very auricular account is the basis of your new model or pretended Church constitution And p. 9. Those you refuse to canonize by your ghostly approbation though baptized them you look upon as the world c. The like he hath over and over p. 11 21 22. Such are no Church-members with you p. 60 61 88 113 c. To name these things is to confute them I have spoken of their untruth in the Treatise Ch. 8. § 4. Ch. 21. § 1. and need to adde no more in so palpable a falshood 6 But he addes to this sad heap of falshoods when he saith p. 124. Let men be suspended by you do what they will afterwards let them be Atheists or of what sect they will afterwards you regard not The like he hath p. 122. And woe be to us if this be truly charged on us But I defye him and the Accuser of the Brethren to boot to prove the charge 7 And the language of envy powres out it selfe further p. 123. When they are suspended you look after them no longer unless it be for your Tithes and Church dues It may be the man who affected to date his Epistle from his poor house at Leek grudgeth others their Tithes His neighbours may do well to consider his complaint But a man should carry himselfe honestly though in a poor house and then he would forbeare these criminations which our course of personal instruction may manifest to be false even to a proverb 8 He tells me p. 124. Debarring from the Lords Supper with you is the comprehensive of all Discipline and that power to debar being granted you are content And who told Mr. W. this tale perhaps he is not so ill provided as to be destitute of some body or other to father it upon no more then he was for that story he tells the world in his Apology about his Antagonists designe to obstruct the impression of his book which I could never learne any thing of to this day But we are for admonition before suspension and for a further excommunication or withdrawing Communion after suspension as opportunity may be offered and the case require see Form of Church Government p. 18 39 40. Let Mr. W. tell what figments he please to the contrary Certainly he is no child but he doth what children doe when he is so busie in raising bubbles made of his own froth and then shouting aloud tosseth them about with that breath which first raised them 9 In the same page last mentioned he further gives his word against us You saith he make your Brethren your slaves 10 And by your uncontroulable power of suspension you assume to your selves more authority over the people then ever did the most domineering Prelate among us in making poor people sland to your courtesie for the Lords Supper To both these joyntly I answer 1. How is that an uncontroulable power to make our Brethren slaves with or at our courtesie 1 which is limited by the Ordinance of Parliament so that we may not adde of our own heads to the enumeration of the meritorious causes of suspension Form of Church Government p. 30 31 34 35. c. And 2 when any may appeale from a Congregational Eldership to higher Judicatories in case of wrong done them according to the constitution of the Presbyterian Government Form of Church Government p. 15. 2. How do