Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	day_n	speak_v	time_n	11,715	5	3.7591	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A84062	The nullity of church-censures: or A dispute written by that illustrious philosopher, expert physician, and pious divine Dr Thomas Erastus, publick professor in the University of Heidelbertge, and Basil. Wherein is proved by the holy Scriptures, and sound reason; that excommunication, and church-senates or members, exercising the same, are not of divine institution; but a meere humane invention.	Erastus, Thomas, 1542-1583.	1659 (1659)	Wing E3217; Thomason E1783_2; ESTC R209663	63,863	128

by Moses to eate the Paschall without Leaven which St Paul interprets to be without corruptness of life 1 Gor. 5. It must then seem unto any man very agreeable That the Lords Supper which succeded unto the Paschall should be celebrated so that the wicked should be excluded XVII I answer first That indeed it is very unlikely that God should command any thing in clear words and yet at the same time should again forbid the same figuratively He commandeth clearly in a mandate sometimes repeated that every Male except these that were unclean and were on the way should celebrate the Passover He would not then by the figure of Leaven affright any others therefrom There were then enough of evill Men present that it was not needfull they should be figured by Leaven Neither did the wicked Men less appear to the senses then Leaven it self Wherefore seeing figures are not propos'd of those things that are present and that as fully represented themselves to the senses chiefly if the things figured be more known and frequent them the figures themselves a figure here is sought after in vain Again Moses doth not command him to be debarr'd the eating of the Paschall that had eate Leaven but commandeth him to be killed Wherefore wicked men are not to be debarr'd from the Supper but are to be put to death which consequence I shall not unfreely admit and I heartily wish it may be done for I desire nothing more then that a most severe Discipline concerning manners may be observed in the Church but I would wish it such as God hath appointed and not Man fained Thirdly It was lawfull for the Jews to eat Leaven all the year over except on these seaven daies of Unleavened-Bread which they begin with eating of the Passover If you do apply this unto the Lords Supper you must concede that men may live impurely all the year long only they must abstaine from wickedness in the time of celebration of the Lords Supper Fourthly Moses speaketh here only of the Paschall not of the other Sacraments Then wicked men should be debarred only from the Lords Supper but not from Baptism Fifthly The Apostle doth not compare the Feast of the Jews with the Supper of the Lord but with our whole life He saith we are Unleavened as being men which are throwly purged from all Leaven by the Blood of Christ Therefore he saith it is fitting that we should live in the Unleaven of truth and sincerity and not in the Leaven of malice There is a vast difference betwixt Leaven simply so termed and the Leaven of malice or verity for Leaven being so put or taken is known by all to be figuratively taken The Analogick or figurative sense as the School-Men affirm is not Argumentative Certainly whatsoever we shall understand by Leaven yet Excommunication cannot hence be held up and established against the clear command of God XVIII Nevertheless some may say that Paul maketh mention here of the Passover But what doth this concern our business as if indeed this word Passover were put in the new Testament for the Lords Supper Christ saith the Apostle is our Paschall Sacrificed for us not his Supper The meaning is That as the Jews beginning their Feast of Unleavened-Bread by the eating of the Lambe did after that thorow the whole Week eat Unleavened-Bread So likewise you which have begun to believe in Christ and who are purged and unleavened by His Blood you ought purely and chastely to spend all the rest of the Week that is all the rest of your life XIX Now that not any thing diverse to this is to be found in any other of the Volumes of the old Testament is clear from this alone that the Posterity were to live according to Moses's Laws and Constitutions And it was not lawfull to ordain any thing opposite to them concerning the worship of God Indeed the holy Judges Priests Prophets and Kings debarr'd none from the Sacrifices and Sacraments But rather by all meanes indeavoured to invite all men to the same The History of the holy King Josiah is known 2 Chron. 30. who did convocate all the Israelites which he knew newly had offered incense to strange Gods or Devils or besides them all those which by reason of the shortness of time could not be purified to the celebration of the Paschall From which place it is moreover cleared That the Sacraments are incitements or invitements to Piety And that men become better rather by their frequent use then by their privation If together with them they be fully and faithfully instructed XX. Wherefore excommunication cannot be defended out of the 1. of Isaiah Psalm 50. and many other such places in which it is said that God willeth not the Sacrifices and Oblations of the wicked for in all such places God reprehendeth that abuse that they thought they had most clearly satisfied the will of God if they did these externall things howsoever their hearts were affected Again He doth not command the Prophet or any other person by him to keep back the wicked from the Sacrifices or Ceremonies But declareth he will not hear them unless they amend their lives also The reason of the externall policie of the Church is other from that of the will of God towards us approving or disapproving of our actions Lastly From the same places after the same precise manner it shall be demonstrate that it is not lawfull for any wicked man to call on the name of the Lord yea neither to praise nor thanke him because the Ministers and Elders ought to interdict the sinfull of all these for God doth likewise turn his countenance from these in the wicked as is clear from the cited and all other like places Wherefore if this be absurd the other must be absurd likewise XXI Neither doth that make against us which we read in the 1. of Esdras and 10. Chapter for that matter was publick and belonged not to the Sacraments For the Magistrate not the Priest Esdras alone who nevertheless was one of the Magistracies for as Josephus witnesseth they were govern'd by States though they had a Chiestaine sent forth that decree that under pain of confiscation of their good and exclusion not from the Sacraments and Sacrifices but from the people which were returned from captivity all men within three daies should present themselves at Jerusalem We do not question in this place whither the Magistrate hath right to punish this or that way but whither the Priests could remove dissolute and filthy livers from the Sacrifices Esdras could not do this which was against the command of God Adde That Moses did not command Deut. 7. this punishment to wit to be removed from the Sacraments to be inflicted on them that had Married strange Wives And how Esdras was to punish the transgressours of the Law is set down in the 7. Chapter of the same Book by death banishment punishment of the body confiscating of their goods

and at last even by that most famous and holy forerunner of Christ John the Baptist himself XIV And indeed the Sacraments of the Antients and ours are the same in respect of the thing signified as Paul cleareth in the 1 Cor. 10. wherefore except it appear that the Law of Moses is either abolish'd or chang'd in this point it is not lawfull for any man to bring in the contrary XXV For as we use rightly against the Anabaptists this firme Argument because circumcision hath succeded to Baptisme and Christ hath not in any place forbid Infants Baptism therefore it is not less lawfull for us to Baptise our Infants then it was for the Jews to circumcise theirs So here likewise we can no less soundly reason after this manner The Lords Supper succeeded to the eating of the Passover But vices were not punish'd by the deniall of the Passover neither were any for these debarr'd it but rather all especially the Male were invited by the Law to the celebration thereof which seeing in no place we read to be antiquate and abolish'd neither are they indeed to be punish'd by the deniall of the Lords Supper nor upon this account ought any to be rejected We have said enough concerning the old Testament now it is convenient that we descend to Christ and his Apostles that is to the new Testament XXVI After the same manner we do not read that our Lord and Saviour Christ did forbid any the use of the Sacraments Yea moreover we do not find that his Apostles in any place commanded that such a thing should be done For Christ came not into this world to destroy the Law but to fulfill and perfit the same Wherefore seeing the Law commanded all except the unclean to celebrate the Passover he would not forbid any XXVII 'T is likewise apparent that Christ never reprehended any because they used the Sacraments and were frequently present in the Temple and at the Sacrifices But only admonish'd them that they should use them aright according to the will and Law of God He entred alwaies into the same Temple with the Pharisees Sadduces Publicans with all other evill together and with good persons he was present with them at the same Sacrifices and together with the whole people used the same Sacraments And he was Baptis'd likewise with the same Baptism of John wherewith those wicked persons now named were Baptized XXVIII For this same cause he did not keep back from the eating of the last Paschall Lamb his betrayer Judas but he did sit down together with the other eleven Disciples And albeit there are some who go about to prove that Judas was not present at the institution of the new Supper which will be very hard that I may not say impossible to shew clearly out of the holy Scriptures but that he went away before it was institute by Christ Notwithstandinging I believe none dare deny but that according to the Law he was admitted to the eating of the Passover Which being granted our Argument remaineth unmoved For whither he went out before the institution of the other Supper or went not out which is more probable and alwaies beleeved by more men This is ever clear that he was present at the first and was not commanded openly to abstaine from the second Yea moreover we do not read in any place that he was commanded by Christ to go out that he might not be present at the new Supper Wherefore if he went out he went out of himself neither went he out for that cause But we inquire what Christ did do not what Judas did It sufficeth us that Christ did not command him to abstain from his last Supper XXIX 'T is frivolous and light that is brought for excuse That the fault was not publick and that therefore he ought not to be removed For he had then agreed upon a price with the Pharisees And in the time of Supper it self Christ did open it up to his Disciples and had made it publick whereby the rather an example should have been made thereof Lastly That this be but something yet at least he was noted before that time for a Thief And although he was such nevertheless our Lord committed the Ministry to him and did honour him with the power of casting out Divels of healing the Sick and of working other miracles and to conclude all the years he was with Christ he admitted him together with the rest to the celebration of the Passover Is not this Argument enough that Christ would not that wicked men should be punish'd by the deniall of the Sacrament Certainly it is a greater matter to admit a wicked man into the Ministry then to admit any such an one to the Supper We see that Christ let both these fall to Judas XXX That is also to be observ'd that the Disciples at the first Supper begun to contend amongst themselves about the eminency and dignity nevertheless none of them were removed for that cause But moreover he commanded and willed that all should drinke of the Cup in relation to this matter the reason of the Cup and Bread is the same witness Matth. 26. which Marke doth testifie was done what other thing can be believ'd Christ willed by these words then to confirm those things which God had of old commanded by Moses viz. that no Baptiz'd Person should be excluded from that publick and solemne Thanksgiving who desire to be present thereat By which it appeareth that not any ought to be remov'd from the Table of the Lord which embraceth the Doctrine of Christ and suffereth himself to be taught of Christ XXXI Christ will not have his Kingdome I speak of the externall on this earth Circumscrib'd within narrower boundings amongst Christians then in old times he would have it contain'd and defin'd amongst the Jews Therefore as God commanded all the circumcis'd externally to be partakers of the same Sacraments and Ceremonies and commanded Offenders to be coerc'd and punish'd with the Sword and other punishments So here Christ will have all them that are Baptiz'd or are Christians and have right and true belief concerning Religion to use the same externall Ceremonies and Sacraments But will have those that are flagitious to be chastis'd by the Magistrate with death banishment imprisonment and other punishments hitherto as it seemeth belongeth these Parables of the net marriage and of the tares XXXII In the Apostles especially in the Apostle Paul we find no fewer and no less plain and pithy Arguments The first is this That the Apostles are not found any where either to have taught or exercis'd the Excommunication Which Argument seeming in itself invalide become unanswerable if we consider that they were even unto their deaths most strict keepers of Moses's Laws which Christ had not abolish'd as every man may know even by the 21. and last Chapter of the Acts. Wherefore they never tried or would try to repell any man which profess'd himself a Christian

A Humane Invention The I. Position THe word Excommunication seemeth to be taken out of the tenth Chapter of the 1 Corinthians And to signifie a removall from that Commiunion which in that place is called the Body of Christ And indeed at this time Excommunication is defined by almost all to be An exclusion from the fellowship and Communion of Believers II. There is a twofold fellowship of Believers The one is internall and spirituall The other externall or visible and politick The third sort of which some of the late Romish-Catholicks do mention is neither fitly feigned nor belongeth at all to our present purpose III. And the difference betwixt these two is so great that he which is comprehended within either of them is not likewise necessarily included in the other For as that man may be a Member of Christ that is unjustly thrust out of a visible Congregation or is compelled to live and lurke amongst Infidels So all they that are of a visible Congregation are not also the lively Members of Christ whence it follows that these matters may be different which tye us to the one and not to the other and which divide us from the one and not from the other IV. And indeed we are made Members of Christ that is we are joyned to the internall and spirituall society of Christ and of the faithfull by Faith alone which worketh in Charity and we fall from this fellowship only by Infidelity Therefore none can ingraff us in or loppe us off from this except only he that can give us living Faith and can take again the same from us V. But we are made Consorts of the externall and visible Church by the profession of the same Faith by the consent we give to the same Doctrine and by the using of the same Sacraments In whatsomever Person these three are found he is so long as they are found in him accompted for a Member of the externall Congregation of Believers although he never attaine to the inward Communion of the spirit and mind VI. Therefore he that is thrown out of the externall Communion of the Church that is He that is excommunicated Is debarr'd either of all these three or of two of them or only of one But not any ought to be debar'd of the two former that is from professing of the Faith and approving the Doctrine under which the hearing of the Word or Doctrine is comprehended of Christians but rather all men are to be invited and by all meanes possible are to be induced thereto Wherefore it remaineth That he that is Excommunicated is debar'd from the sole of the foresaid three participation of the Sacrament we will consider afterwards whither the deniall of private converse doth inseperably adhere unto this or may be seperate therefro But this is certain that not any other punishment belongeth to the essence of Excommunication for the same may be inflicted upon Persons that are not excommunicate and may not be inflicted upon the Excommunicate VII Therefore Roman Catholicks have not rightly besides this Excommunication which they call the lesser and have most properly defined it to be only a deniall of the Sacrnments added moreover an other which they term the greater Excommunication and Anathema And have against the clear sense of Scripture defined it to be an interdiction of Churches private Commerce and all other lawfull converse because the Apostle in the 1 Corinth 14. openly sheweth that neither the Heathen nor any other Persons whatsomever were forbidden from the hearing of the Divine Word from the Readings Thanksgivings and Prayers of the Christians VIII It appeareth from what hath been said that Excommunication is nothing else then a solemne and publick interdiction of the Sacraments and chiefly of the Lords Supper which the Apostle especially calleth a Communion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as was said in the beginning The Elders taking notice and voycing the same before whereby they that sin may repent and again be admitted to the Sacraments IX Here then ariseth a Question Whither any man for committing of a sin or living in filthiness should be removed from the use and participation of the Sacraments he being desirous to receive the same with other Christians The Question here is moved concerning him that professeth the same Faith with us that hath entred the same Church by Baptism and doth not dissent therefrom in Doctrine as we laid it down in the fifth but erreth only in life and manners This then is demanded Whither in the holy Scriptures there is extant either any Precept or example whereby it is commanded or taught that such should be removed from the Sacraments X. Our Answer is that there is not any such extant But rather that contrary both Examples and Precepts are to be found every where in the Bible For we find it written by Moses Exod. 12.23 24. Numb 9. Deut. 16. That every Circumcis'd Male should appear thrice every year before the Lord To wit in the Feast of unleavened Bread in the Feast of Weeks and that of Tabernacles For that Law commandeth strangers also if they be Circumcis'd to celebrate the Passover together with the Jews And likewise it is commanded that the unclean and they that are travelling should upon the same day of the second Moneth and after the same manner eate the Passover with the Jews And it is moreover added that he shall be put to death that shall neglect the Celebration of the Passover viz. he that neither travelleth nor is unclean Wherefore God hath willed and commanded all the Circumcis'd to Celebrate the Passover Neither hath he excluded any from this Sacrament or from other Rites Ceremonies or Sacrifices except uncleane Persons XI In Leviticus there are diverse Sacrifices commanded for diverse sins whither they be committed by ignorance or error or willingly and wilfully by which these sins should be expiate by them that have committed them Likewise God commandeth Deut. 14. That all without excepting of the wicked should at Jerusalem eate their Tenths before the Lord and he addeth the cause that so they might learn to fear their Lord Jehovah all the daies of their lives Therefore the Sacraments were Incitements to Piety and therefore none were debarr'd therefrom but all so much the more invited thereto XII Verily we do not read that any Person at any time amongst the Jews was for the foresaid cause forbid by the Priests Levites Prophets Scribes or Pharisees to come to the Sacrifices Ceremonies or Sacraments The High-Priests and Pharisees esteemed Christ and his Apostles to be most wicked Persons But we do not find during Christs Life or after his death that ever they went about to debarre them of the Sacraments and Sacrifices instituted of God yea neither did they chase any Publican Jew or any other Circumcis'd Person that liv'd impurely from the Temple or Ceremonies for they were not ignorant that the Law permitted them not to do it They reprehended indeed Christ Mat. 9. that he did

and to believe rightly concerning that Doctrine from our Sacraments which only differed from them of old in the signs and time signified For they did not in any place either do or teach any thing against Moses's commands which were not abolish'd by Christ But they observ'd the Law no less diligently afterwards then they did before the death of Christ As the chief of the Apostles in the Place newly cited do witness For they only suffered the Nations to live without the Law of Moses and not the converted Jews which is diligently to be observed here because of the things that follow And as farre as concerns the substance of the Doctrine they taught nothing which was different from Moses and the Prophets For if they had taught otherwise their Doctrine had not been judged by them of Beroea to be consonant to the Scriptures Acts 17. XXXIII I will say somewhat more for the sentence of Moses which is much the very same which we hold That there are no reasons found in the Apostle Paul for the contrary opinion For in the 1 to the Corinthians and 8. Chapter he excluded not those which as yet believ'd Idols to be some thing Neither those elevate and proud swelling Gnosticks who did openly with profane and ungodly worshippers of Idols eat things offered to Idols in their very Chappels at their solemn and publick Banquets That which God by Moses had clearly forbidden Exod. 34. and by the Apostles Acts 15. and lastly by John 2. Revelation this was no less weighty sin than if any this day should dare to be present at the Mass of the Roman-Church which may readily be gathered by any man out of the tenth Chapter of the same Epistle Because in this place the Apostle Paul proveth that such men do declare by this their deed that they are no less fellows and commonners of the Devill Then by the receiving of the Lords Supper they testifie themselves to be members of Christs mysticall Body XXXIV Next in the tenth Chapter Paul reasoneth thus As in old times the Lord did not spare those that coveted evill things nor Idolaters nor whoremongers nor tempters and murmurers against Christ although they were Baptis'd with the same Baptisme with all the rest and did eat the same spirituall food and drinke the same spirituall drink So neither will he spare any of you whatsomever which are defiled with the same sins although you eat all of the same Bread and drinke all of the same Cup with all the Saints By these it is perceived First That our Sacraments and those of the Antients were the same in respect of the thing internall and Heavenly otherwise the Argument of the Apostle would be of no effect Next it is clear That many corrupt persons and that publickly known to be such were admitted Thirdly This is likewise certain That not any was commanded to forbeare as Excommunicate persons are commanded The Apostle doth not say that such are to be kept back But he foretelleth that they would be punish'd by God so as the Antients were punish'd For Moses together with the Levites did kill a part of them 32. and the Lord did consume another part with fire Serpents with the Sword and with the opening up of the earth which also happened unto the Corinthians for he affirmeth that many of them then were sick and many of them dead XXXV In the following Chapter he commandeth neither the contentious persons and Sectaries neither them that were made drunke in the very celebration of the Supper it self nor them that were polluted with other sins to be kept back from the use thereof indeed he doth not mention so much as in one word this interdiction when as he correcteth farre less faults as that every one should eat at home How could he in this place not have mentioned this matter if he had approv'd thereof or thought it necessary in the Church The Apostle knew the Law commanded otherwise and that there was another use of the Sacraments in the Church then that by their deniall corruptness in life should be punished Therefore he commandeth that every one should examine himself but he doth not command that they should examine and approve of one another he moreover exhorteth them all that they should strive to eat worthily least any should eat judgment to themselves he doth not command them that eat unworthily to be kept back therefrom but he threatneth them with the Lords chastisement He divideth the generall sort of eaters into two kinds by their opposite differences to wit in them that eat worthily and them that eate unworthily he commandeth neither of them not to eat but he desireth that all should eat worthily XXXVI Afterwards in the second Epistle Chapter 12 and 13. he doth not threaten them which after his admonition had not repented them of the impurity lust and licentiousness which they had committed with a removall from the Lords Table but by the authority and power which was given him of God he sheweth that he would severely and rigorously punish them which in his own writeings he doth verifie oft but he no where telleth them of the debarring from the Sacraments which is the Question in hand neither doth he command the Elders or any others to do this But if he would have had the wicked punished after this manner he should have commanded them to be removed from the Sacraments till they amend Chiefly seeing he had appointed Elders in the same Church before 1 Cor. 6. Chap. and had amended the celebration of the Supper But we will perchance speake more of this matter hereafter XXXVII Even as in the celebration of the Sacraments we see no mention to be made of Excommunication so neither do we find any such thing in their Institution Yea the Scripture hath not made mention of it where it explains the end and use of the same But if they were given to this end to the Church that they might be a kind of punishment to the wicked and wickedness without doubt in one of the places there would have some mention been made thereof The ends of the Lords Supper for which it was instituted are these That we should solemnly celebrate the death of our Lord and give publick thanks to him for our delivery That we should by our presence teach and testifie that we have no other meat and drink of life but Christ Crucified and his Blood shed for us That we should declare we repented of our forespent life thinke of a better imbrace the Christian Doctrine to belong to his Church in which we should desire afterwards to live holily and godly and dye therein Hath the Scripture in any place forbid any man to do these things But some you will say do oft return to their own Byass and are made no better I answer That he who in the present thinks so as I have said by the motion of the holy Ghost is not repelled by the Scriptures but God knoweth

private Tables men discourse of any thing whatsomever neither is he not only corrected that hath sineed if he thinke that he is also dear unto all after his sin as before but likewise others are more easily corrupted But if he see himself to be avoided and fled he cannot but think for what that is done and resolve to live a new life lest he should be desparaged by those who loved him before Therefore as the deniall of private commerce doth fright us from uncleanness and vices so familiar living together doth cherish and nurse the same in us But the receiving and denying of the Sacraments is a thing of a far different nature from this for the frequent receiving of them doth not at all so confirme and nurse vice as private familiarity for in the Temples where they are administred there is no conferences of private and vain things but the Word of the Lord is Preached Therefore when men hear that Christ hath died for them and that he requireth for that benefit publick thanksgiving and that he is not a worthy guest that hath not tried himself rightly but that they all have judgment to themselves that unworthily eat thereof Then he that hath resolved with himself to come unto the Lords Table whatsomever a man he was before will be compeld to thinke with himself what God would have done and how afterwards he may so lead his life that it may be acceptable unto God He that is deprived of this invitation becomes alwaies worse but never becomes better for which cause nevertheless it seems that God appointed and commanded so many Sacrifices Ceremonies and Oblations Truly the Apostle never commanded those men to be debard of the Sacraments with whom good men were not suffered to live familiarly And when in another place he desireth that such men should be signified to him by an Epistle he doth not lay this upon the Elders that they should Excommunicate them or keep them back from the Sacraments all which do manifestly prove that they are in a grosse mistake that do think the Apostle doth either appoint or approve of Excommunication in this place LXVII But nevertheless say they the Church ought not to be polluted with communion of evill men therefore it is needfull that good men should be without dissimulation separate from evill men Ianswer this That evill men cannot defile good men in the use of these Ceremonies that are appointed by God so long as they do not follow their nature and manners For neither the Prophets nor the holy Kings and Judges nor John the Baptist nor Christ himself nor his Apostles afterwards were defiled when in the Temple they were present at the same Sacrifices with men of most wicked lives and did receive with them the same Sacraments That generation of Vipers did not defile Christ when together with them he was Baptized with the same Baptisme by John and Judas presence at the last Supper did not defile either Christ or his Apostles albeit he was both a Thief and thinking how to betray Christ and had received money therefore The Apostle Paul doth not command us that the celebration and usurpation of the Sacraments we should one examine another and that we should look about if there be any there present that can defile us but he commandeth thus that every man should examine himself and not others LXVIII Hitherto it hath been proved by me effectually and truly that no Circumcised Person before Christ were forbidden to come to the Ceremonies and Sacraments instituted of God by Moses for the offences of the life and manners and together with this I shew that it was not lawfull for any even to do the same Afterwards it was demonstrate by reasons and the evident Testimonies of the holy Scriptures that neither Christ nor his Apostles did teach or do any otherwise Moreover I thought this also that what was brought by these of another judgment could not at all patronize their opinion wherefore now I see nothing that can further hinder me that I should not rightly and truly conclude that this Excommunication which debarreth Christians from the Sacraments only because of the uncleanness of their lives was not commanded by God but was invented and feigned by men For it is so far from truth that it can be shewn that it is founded in the Holy Scriptures that rather the contrary of it can be proved LXIX Therefore some men will say Will you then condemn so many holy Bishops which immediately after the Apostles times began to Excommunicate vile persons I answer It is one thing to improve the Doctrine and another thing to improve the man Many learned and godly men of our age have pondred and confuted the Catholick errors as I may call them of the Ancients as limbum patrum in Hell the fire of Purgatory the intercession of Saints Exorcisme and Baptism the single life of Priests unction in Baptism and death Prayers for the dead and in this present cause satisfactions Notwithstanding I do not remember that any of them have been accused therefore because they condemn the Ancients If they would have had this Excommunication thrust upon the Churches as a Law published by God I do not praise it Albeit I do much praise and approve of their study and good will in the mean while For by this meanes they studied seeing they could meet with no other better meanes hereby to bridle the wantonness of wicked men And most part also as we see to be done even this day did follow that publick custome received by all neither came it ever in their mind to inquire whither it was a thing agreeing to Scriptures or no. LXX Concerning the originall of this Excommunication I can bring nothing now that is certain except the 200. years after Christ that I find some such thing first to have been asseyed and done for more then 100 and 50. years I find not any to have been excluded from the Sacraments for the uncleanness of their life These that are versed in reading of the Fathers and in History perchance can affirme something more certain He that will attentively read those things which are left written by Socrates in the 5. Book and 19. Chapter of this Ecclesiastick History will I believe suffer themselves easily to be perswaded that this custome of Excommunication was introduced into the Church about Novatus time Notwithstanding Sozomenus in his 7. Book and 16. Chap. relateth another cause of the institution hereof But we also read that Victor Bishop of Rome about the 200. year of our Lord forbid them the use of the Supper that would not forgive injuries I have observed that before this time the communion was denied only to Hereticks and to such as was averse from Religion but however this be yet that is certainly known that excommunication was therefore brought into the Church that there might be in it some bridle to and punishment of vice Afterwards when the Church now had gotten