Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
reason_n	church_n	true_a	visible_a	5,618	5	9.6083	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91314	A vindication of foure serious questions of grand importance, concerning excommunication and suspention from the sacrament of the Lords Supper, from some misprisions and unjust exceptions lately taken against them; both in the pulpit, by a reverend brother of Scotland, in a sermon at Margarets Church in Westminster, before the Honourable House of Commons, at a publike fast there held for Scotland, on the 5th of September last: and in the presse, by three new-printed pamphlets, by way of answer to, and censure of them. Wherein some scripture texts, (commonly reproduced for excommunication, and bare suspention from the Lords Supper onely,) are cleared from false glosses, inferences, conclusions wrested from them; ... / By William Prynne of Lincolns Inne, Esquire.	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1645 (1645)	Wing P4124; Thomason E265_5; ESTC R212424	79,558	71

So ●re his Word ●●d Sacraments too accidentally set by reason of me●● corruptions and ●●worthy ●●profitable particip●tio● of them for the fall and ruine as well as the salvation of 〈◊〉 Fiftly that God onely i●fallibly knows the he●●ts and present state of all men not any Minister or Presbytery 2 Chron. 6. 30. Acts 1. 24. 2 Tim. 2. 19. 1 Sam. 16. 5. to 14. Matth. 26. 21 22. Iohn 2 24 25. That he can convert and change ●●●s hearts and lives in a m●ment and make them meet Co●●nicants though●● cannot discerne them to be such Acts 3. 9. to 28. chap. 2. 37 38. c. Rom. 11. 3 4 5 He can sodainly give th●m a white ston● with a new name written in it which NO MAN KNOWETH SAVING HE THAT RECEIVETH IT Revel● 2. 17. And therefore if we see any desirous to receive the Sacrament to be penitent in outward shew and profession we ought in the judgement of ch●●ity to esteem them such since we cannot infallibly discern● and search their hearts 1 ●or 13. 5. 7. Phil. 2. 3. Heb 6. 9. Mat. 7. 1. Rom. 14 4. to 15. Sixthly that no Ministers private judgement or conscience ought to be the rule of his admitting any to or suspending them from the Sacrament For first there is no Text nor cla●se of S●ri●tu●e that makes his private judgement or conscience such a rule Secondly if a Minister should have power to deny the sacrament under pain of sin ye● punishmentt as some men ●each ●o every Communicant he deems unmeet or unworthy before actuall convictio● of his unworthinesse in the Presbytery then it would rest in the power of every particular Minister how justly or unjustly soever to admit or se●l●de from the sacrament whom ever his cōscience or judgment should think fit which would introduce the most exorbitant arbitrary Papall jurisdiction usurpation over the consciences priviledges of christians Ordinances of Christ that was ever yet heard of or exer●ised in the christian world make every Minister more thē a Pope every member of a congregation worse then a slave and give greater authority to every ordinary Pastor then ever Christ or ●is Apostles exercised or the Pope or Prelats hitherto claimed Thirdly then it would inevitably follow that in case the whole Presbytery Classis or Synod should deem a man upon any appe●l unto them against his Ministers unjust suspension worthy and fit to receive the sacrament yet if his Ministers judgement and conscience be not satisfied but he deems him still ●nworthy he may will and must still refuse to administer the Sacrament to him notwithstanding their resolution else he should offend against his owne judgement and conscience So on the other side if the Presbytery Classis Synod should vote any man unworthy and unfit to communicate yet if the Minister think him fit he may wil and must admit him to the sacrament if he r●quire it lest he should sin against his conscience And then to what end serve Presbyteries Classes Synods or Appeales unto them in such ●ases since upon my Opposites objected princi●les if they will adhere unto them not their resolutions but every particular Ministers private j●dgment conscience is and ought to be the sole canon and Directory which he will must and ought to follow And then to what a miserable slavery shall we be re●●●ed if every Minister may have snch authority to Lord it over the Lords inheritances and Ordinances too let all prudent men determine These six conclusions premised which have utterly overt●rned the very foundations o● this strange Objection and laid the Opposites on their backs I answer directly That a Minister in delivering the sacrament to a scandalous unexcomm●nicated person who ●fter admonition of the danger doth earnestly desire to receive it as conceiving himselfe in his owne heart and conscience meet to participate of it becomes no way guilty of his si●ne or punishment in case he eat and drink judgement by his ●nworthy receiving of it My reasons are th●se First because this receiver being not excommunicated hath a true ●ight to this sacrament as a vi●●ble member of the visible Church as well as to Baptisme and other Ordinan●●s therefore the Ministers cannot in point of conscience debarr● hi● fro● it Secondly be●●use he hath no commission from Christ to keep bac● such a person nor yet any such power from the Church or state Thirdly because every Communicant is to examine himselfe and his owne conscience between God him whether he be fit to receive the sacrament or not and to be the judge of his owne heart which no other can so truly discerne as himselfe 1 Cor. 11. 28. 31. 2 Cor. 13. 6. Gal. 6. 4. 5. Jer. 17. 9. 1 Cor. 2. 11. And if he judge himselfe fitly prepared joynes with others in the publike confession of his sinnes and promiseth newnesse of life the Minister ought in point of charity to deem him so and hath no commission from Christ to exclude him When Christ himselfe instituted and administred this sacrament we read not of any examination made by him of his Disciples fitnesse or preparednesse to receive it nor yet of Paul or any other Apostle or Minister in the new Testament that made any such particular scrutiny into other Communicants consciences to try their fitnesse or unfitnesse as some now magisterially take upon them to make by way of jurisdiction not advice derived originally from Popish tyranny and their exploded practice of Auricular confession to a Priest before the receiving of the sacrament All the power they claimed or exercised in this kind was onely by way of Councell Let a man therefore examine himselfe not others or others him say all old and new Expositors on the Text And if they may not examine then much lesse judge or seclude him as unworthy without examination or knowledge of his heart which God onely knowes and searcheth and himself Fourthly because he administers the sacrament to him as to a person outwardly fitted and prepared the inward preparation of whose heart for ought he knowes may be sincere towards God really changed from what it was before Fifthly because the administration of the sacrament is an holy lawfull action and Gods Ordinan●ce in the Minister who delivers it onely as Gods Ordinance in obedi●nce to his command with a good intention to benefit all and hurt none by it Sixthly because such a persons unworthy receiving is onely contingent and casuall no Minister or creature being able infallibly to judge whether God at this instant out of his abundant mercy may not by the omnipotent working of his spirit in the preparatory examinations prayers exhortations before the act of receiving in the very receiving it selfe the sacrament being as well a meanes to beget as confirme grace change both his heart and life and make him eat and drink salvation instead of damnation to himselfe Seventhly because all our Opposites accord that Ministers may and ought to admister the

previous publike admonitions reprehensions rebukes contemned or neglected and full conviction of their scandall and impenitency may and ought to be excommunicated suspended not onely from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper but from all other publike divine Ordinances whatsoever and the society of the faithfull till publike satisfaction given for the scandall and open profession of amendment of life accompanied with externall symptomes of repentance And they contest with me for a suspension of such sc●ndalous persons onely from the Lords Supper without any totall excommunication from the Church and all other publike Ordinances for which I must profess● I can see no ground at all in Scripture or reason but Scripture and rationall grounds enough against it and quite subverts excommunication Secondly I affi●m that no visible member of a visible Church professing sorrow for his sins able to examine himself and desirous to receive the Sacrament may or ought of right to be suspended from it but such onely who are actually excommunicated from all other Ordinances or at least notoriously guilty and convicted of some publike horrid crime of which all the Congregation or Presbytery have legally taken notice and are ripe for a sentence of excommunication then ready to be pronounced against them so farre as to suspend them from all publike Ordinances In such a case as this where the fact is notorious the proofs pregnant the sentence of excommunication ready to be pronounced against them as persons impenitently scandalous and incorrigible perchance the Presbytery or Classis may order a suspension from the Sacrament or any other Ordinances before the sentence of excommunication solemnly denounced if they see just cause but not where there is a bare accusa●ion without any notoriousnnesse of the fact or witnesses examined to prove the scandall for thus to suspend a man upon a meere accusation or surmise before witnesses produced were to pre-judge him as guilty before hearing of his cause or probat of the offence or accusation which may be false a● well as true for ought appeares to the Presbytery This was all I meant by this new addition to the second Impression of the four Quares or judicially accused pendente lite wherein the third Answerer to these Quaeres so much triumphs as if he had wo●ne the field by this short addition saying that our Ministers and the Assembly desire no more power then this which I shall readily grant them with the precedent limitations which will take off all his flourishes on it and so we are both accorded provided that this power be claimed by no divine Right but only by Parliamentary authority and humane institution To close up this discourse I shall onely propound these four New Quares to all my Antagonists and leave the further consideration of them to the saddest debates both of the honourable Houses of Parliament and Veverable Assembly who perchance may seriously advise upon them First Whether a bare excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament or other Ordinances if not backed with the authority of the civill Magistrate when these censures are slighted or contemned be not likely to prove an impotent invalid ineffectuall meanes to reclaime impenitent obstinate sinners especially if they once grow common triviall and inflicted upon many together which made it so contemptible under the Pope and Prelates Whether it be not farre better safer profi●abler for Christians in point of conscience and Christian prudence to admit such scandalous persons to the Sacrament not actually excommunicated who earnestly desire to receive it and externally profesle repentance and amendment of their lives though they thereby eat and drink judgement to themselves and become guilty of Christs body and blood then under colour of keeping back such to deprive them or any sincere true hearted Christians of the benefit and comfort of it to whom really it belongs t● the very breaking of their hearts and wounding of their spirits which hath been the ca●e of some and may be of more if Christian moderation compassion charity prudence be not most predominant in every Presbytery Doubtlesse better it were a thousand reprobates and obdurate sinners who will not be restrained by threats and admonitions should eat unworthily to the damnation of their soules then one worthy Communicant or sincere hearted Christian be deprived of that right and comfort of the Sacrament which belongs unto him Secondly whether the suspending of such persons from the Sacrament being no Ordinance of Christ for ought appeares to me nor expresly warranted by any Scripture president or precept without a totall suspension of them from all christian society other Ordinances will not be ● means to harden prophane obdurate scandalous sinners if it be once made ordinary and generall rather then to reforme convert amend them And whether their admission to the sacrament accompanied with serious previous ad●onitions exhortations to them against unworthy receiving and persevering in their impenitent courses after the Sacrament received and publike serious reprehensions for their former evill courses b● not a farre more probable way and meanes of reclaiming converting them from their evill wayes then any bare suspension from the Sacrament without any concurrent suspension from all other Ordinances and Christian communion can be My reasons for propounding this Question are very considerable First be●ause such obstinate scandalous sinners as experience teach●s make no great conscience at all of receiving the Sacrament from which for the most part they voluntarily suspend themselves for sundry months nay yeers together out of meer prophanesse in case they may be freely admitted to other publike Ordinances It being onely the totall exclusion from the Church and all Christian society not any bare su●pension from the Sacrament which workes both shame and remorse in excomunicate persons as Paul resolves 1 Thes. 3. 14. 1 Cor 5. 13. compared with the 1 Cor. 5. 1. to 11. Secondly because we find this an experimentall verity that the most prophane and scandalous sinners that are when they intend to receive the Sacrament will many of them like loose c Italians in the Lent season for a day or two before at leastwise on the very day they receive it and some dayes after demeane themselves very penitently and devoutly in o●tward appear●nce yea openly and privately promise and vow to become new creatures to give over all their sinfull courses and never to returne to them againe and for the ●eason seem to be reall converts yea no doubt many d●boist persous have been really reclaimed converted even by their accesse and admission to the Sacrament who if actually suspended from not admitted to it would have grown more obstinately impenitent dissolute in their lives and never have entred into any serious examination of their evill wayes courses nor promised such newnesse of life as they doe at time● of receiving by their admission to the Sacrament Thirdly all our Antagonists grant that the Sacrament is a solemne Vow or Covenant which obligeth all

Reformation and oft stiled a THE ADVERSARY of it when as God who b knowes his heart and those men who are acquainted with his person and intentions will acquit him from this calumny and know him to be as great as cordiall an Advancer of Reformation as any of his Accusers Secondly these foure Questions have been conceived and reported to be a grand obstruction to the work of Reformation and settlement of Church-Discipline yea purposely published to obstruct it When as intentionally and really they doe by moderating irreconcilable extreames tend onely to facilitate and expedite this much desired work which he cordially desired might be speedily accomplished to prevent the dangerous encrease of Errours and Scismes which multiply daily in our Church Thirdly they are apprehended to strike at the very root of Excommunication and absolutely to deny it in case of grosse and scandalous sinnes when as it onely tends to remove those sandy foundations whereon some would build it to prevent and regulate all probable abuses of it in its originall establishment and confine it to its due bounds to prevent as farre as possible might be al just scandall and prophanation of holy things in the people and Arbitrary Government Tyranny Oppression and Lording it over Gods Ordinances Heritage and mens consciences in the Ministers and Presbitery as the expresse words thereof demonstrate Fourthly it is conceived that their principall end was to deprive Presbyteri●s of their due jurisdiction conferred on them by divine right when as there is not one sillable in them to that purpose but onely to regulate their power by Gods Word to controle the Arbitrary Tyrannicall usurpations of some Ind●pendent Ministers who take upon them an exorbitant jurisdiction not onely to exclude whom themselves please from the Sacrament without any legall admonition or conviction of ignorance or scandall but likewise refuse publikely to administer the Lords Supper to their Congregations or Parishoners for sundry moneths nay yeers together yea to those against whom they have no just exceptions and who tender themselves to their Examination desiring to be excluded if found ignorant or unworthy for feare of delivering it to some whom they before conviction deeme scandalous or unworthy as they pretend or rather in good truth only because they will not joine with them in their new Independent ways and Covenants Fifthly it hath been suggested that it layes a tax ●pon our Ministers and intended Presbyteries as if they desired Papall Tyrannicall authoriy over mens consciences when as it tends onely to prevent such Papall Episcopall abuses of Excommunications and Su●pensions which may possibly creep into them by degrees if not carefully provided against in the originall settlement of their authority by strict and punctuall Lawes there being no authority so good so necessary in Church or State but by reason of their corruptions who manage it may be abused to tyranny and oppression especially if not bounded And we find by Histo●y and experience that these Church censures have bin as grosly abused as tyrannically managed by rigid Anabaptists and Seperatists as Popes Prelats po●sibly may be so by Presbyteries These prejudices and mis-apprehensions being removed I shall next proceed to the exceptions against the substance or subject matter of them wherein to avoyd mistakes be pleased to observe First that it is confessed yea agreed by the Opposites that Excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament is a matter of grand concernment fit now to be established with as much deliberarion caution circumspection and care as possible may be to prevent prophanation scandall on the one hand and Arbitrary Papall Tyrannicall domineering over mens consciences christian liberties all abuses of this power on the other hand and that it is a matter of very great difficulty thus to settle it it is as readily yeelded on the other side that grosse notorious scandalous obstinate sinners who presumptuously persevere in their iniquities after private and publike admonitions without remorse of conscience or amendment may be justly excommunicated from the Church the society of the faithfull and all publike Ordinances after due proofe and legall conviction of their scandalous lives and that 1 Cor. 5. 13. warrants thus much notwithstanding the various readings and interpretations of that Text So that thus farre there is no dissent on either part Secondly it is accorded on both sides in words at least though not in practice that no Minister may 〈◊〉 can in point of power or conscience refuse to admini●●er the Sacrament to any member of his Church not actually excommunicated after sundry admonitions and publike reprehensions for some grosse scandalous crime who earnestly desires to receive it in case he publikely professeth his sincere repentance for his sinnes past and promise amendment of life for time to come though the ●inister or Presbytery in their owne private opinions may have a hard prejudicate opinion of his unfitnesse or unworthinesse to receive it These Agreements on both sides premised which will in a manner determine the greatest controversie and rectifie the mistakes between us I proceed to the matters in difference which are these First whether there he any precept or president in Scripture for the suspending of any Member of a particular Church or Congregation from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper only who is not at the same time excommunicated and utterly sequestred from the Church the society of the faithfull and all other publike Ordinances there used as Prayer Preaching Fasting Catechizing singing of Psalmes and the like And whether the d Texts of the old or new Testament quoted in the first Question and in the Margin here warrant any such partiall excommunication or suspension from the Lords Table but not from preaching the Word and other publike Ordinances This I positively deny from the pregnancy and words of these Texts of Scripture backed by the judgement and practice of Antiquity in the purest times as I shall prove at large anon Neither hath the Author of the Antidote against four dangerous Questions nor the Reverend Preacher in his Sermon at St. Margarets before the Commons House who undertook to refute them produced one dram of Scripture or solid reason to refute it the latter not so much as taking notice of this Question the onely thing there controverted but utterly mistaking it whiles he charged the Questionist with mistakes Secondly whether Matth. 18. 16 17. If thy brother trespasse against thee c. tell it to the Church c. be properly meant of excommunication of suspension from the Sacrament The Opposites affirme I deny it The only reason they have rendred in Presse or Pulpit why this text should and must be intended of a sentence of excommunication given by the Church is because the text saith let him be to thee as an heathen man and a publican that is as one quite cast out of the Church which must be only by excomunication whereby men are cast out of

it no private christian as they affirme having any authority to esteem his brother as a heathen and publican if the Church hath not first cast him out for then he may esteem one man of the Congregation thus and after that another and so all the Membets of it and at last the whole Church by degrees by his owne authority which to doe say they is a great absurdity sinne and inconvenience But this reason under correction is very infirme inconcludent if not false and absurd For first Heathens were no excommunicate persons being never Members of the Jewish or Christian Church and therefore uncapable of any excomunication out of it Excomunication being peculiar only to Church-members as St. Paul expresly determines 1 Cor. 5 10 11 12. and Aretius in his definition of Excomunication cited in the first Question And as for Publicans if they were not heathens but Jews as e some of them were we never find them excommunicated from any of Gods Ordinan●es as they were Publicans but partakers of them To make then an excommunicate person and an Heathen a Publican Synonimaes is at best an incongruity if not a contradictiō Secōdly the genuine sense of this expression not elswhere used in Scripture and f no forme at all of any excomuni●ation practised by the Jewes Let him be to thee a Heathen and a Publican in the judgment of the best Interpreters is no more but this keepe not any familiar company or have no civill fellowship with him but avoyd his company and fellowship as Paul expresly interprets it elswhere 1 Cor. 5. 10 11 12. 2 Thes. 3. 14. Eph. 5. 11. Rom. 16. 17. or receive him not into thy house neither bid him God speed as St. John renders it 2 John 10. Which phrase was derived from the practice of the Jewes and Pharises in that age who shunned the very company of heathens and publicans not in publike Ordinances or Sacraments in which heathens certainly had no communion or society with them being no Members of their Church but only in civill conversation whereupon they taxed Christ for keeping compauy with publicans and sinners Mat. 9. 10 11. ch. 11. 19. ch. 21. 31. 32. Mark 2. 15 16. Luke 18. 11 12 13. ch. 15. 1 2. though some of them beleevee on and received him when the Scribes and Pharises who disdained their company did reject him Luke 7. 29. ch. 15. 2 2 3. ch. 19. 2. to 12. Mat. 21. 31 32. And as the Jewes then avoyded all civill familiar society with Publicans g whom they generally hated for their covetousnesse and extortion so also with Heathens with whom they might not inter marry nor familiarly converse Deut. 7. 2 4. Josh. 24. 12 13 Neh. 13. 27. to 31. Ezr. ch. 9. 10. Ps. 116. 34 35. Act. 21. 28 29. Whence we read The Jewes had no dealing or conversation with the Samaritans John 4 9 nor they with the Jewes Luke 9. 52 53. If then let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican be no more then keep not civill company fellowship or familiar conversation with him who obstinately trespasseth against thee after private admonition and publike complaint or avoid intimate familiarity with him then every christian hath free power by Gods word to do this without any danger of sin or scandall before any private or publike censure of excommuncation passed against him by the Church as is cleer by 1 Cor. 5. 9. 11. 2 Thes. 3. 14. Rom. 16. 17. Pro. 22. 24 25. Ps. 101. 4 5 7. 2 Tim. 3. 2 3 4 5. 2 John 10. 11. Therefore by the self-same reason may he avoid the company of any other brother or the Members of an whole particular Congregation severally without sin or guilt if he or they continue impenitent in the case of private injuries or trespasses against him after admonition Wherefore this Answer of theirs is both erronious and impertinent Now that this Text of Matthew so mvch insisted on is not meant of excommunication or Church-censures and that the h Church in this text was not any ecclesiastical Consistory but only the i Sa●hedrim or Court of civil justice among the Jews commonly called the Councel in other Texts is apparent to me for these ensuing reasons never yet answerd by the Opposites First because it speaks not at all of any publike scandalous sin against the Church or Congregation the proper Object of Church-censurs but onely of pr●vate civill trespasses betweene man and man as is evident by the words If thy brother trespasse against THEE goe and tell him his fault between him and thee c. which Saint Luke relating without any Die Ecclesi● Luke 17. 3 4. puts out of question if compared with Gen. 52. 31. 1 Sam. 25. 28. Now the puni●hment of such trespasses belonged properly to their temporall Magistrates not to their Ecclesiasticall Consistory as the 1 Sam. 2. 29. Deut. 10. 16 18 19 20. ch. 25. 1 2. 2 Chron. 19. 9. 6. Exod. 21. 6. 22. chap. 22. 8 9. prove Secondly because the following words ver. 16. If he refuse to heare thee take with the● one or two more that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established relate onely to the manner of trying civill capitall crimes as murthers and the like before the civill Magistrates of the Jewes which was by two or three witnesses Num. 25. 30. Deut. 17. 6 7. chap. 19. 5 6. not to any proceedings in Ecclesiastical causes in their Ecclesiastical Cōsistories of which we find no president Thirdly because tell it to the Church the Assembly or Congregation in the 17. verse is not meant of any Presbyteritall or Ecclesiasticall Classis which had Cognizance of private trespasses there being no such among the Jewes but only of the * civill Court of Justice which the Scripture commonly cals the Councell which had power which no meer Ecclesiasticall Consistory can doe to scourge imprison torture and outlaw offenders if not to condemn● put to death but not properly to excommunicate them Matth. 5. 22. chap. 10. 17. c. 5. 26 27 59. 60. chap. 27. 1 2. Marke 13. 9. Acts 4. 3. to 22. chap. 5. 17. to 40. chap. 6. 12 13 14 15. chap. 25. 15. to 29. chap. 24. 20. Fourthly because he addes If he will not heare the Church What then not let the Church excommunicate or suspend him from the Sacrament or put him out of the Sinagogue or cast him out from them or deliver him to Satan or denounce an Anathema Maranatha against him or cut him off from his people the onely phrases in other Texts alleaged for proof of Excommunication but l●t him be as an Heathen man and a P●blican a phrase never used elswhere in Scripture which cannot properly signifie excommunication because Heathen men being never Members of the Church could never be excommunicated or cast out of it being un capable of such a censure As for Publicans those of them who were members of the

Jewes Church though they were execrable to the Jewes by reason of the●r Tax-gathering and Oppressions yet we never read in Scripture that they w●re excommunicated or cast out of their Sinagogues but contrarily that they went up into the Temple to pray as well as the Pharises and were more acceptable to Christ himselfe who never excommunicated but received and conversed with them then the proud Pharises were Luke 18. 11. to 15. ch. 3. 12. chap. 7. 29. chap. 5. 27. 28 29. chap. 15. 1 2. chap. 19. 2 c. Mark 9. 11 12. Matth. 10. 3. Marke 2. 15 16. Therefore these expressions can no wayes warrant or imply any excommnnication or suspension from the Sacrament Fifthly the words runne onely let him be TO THEE as a heathe● man and a Publican not to the whole Church and all others professing Religion which might have intimated something in behalfe of the Opposites and therefore ●o ground excommunication from the Church or suspension from the Sacrament on this Text which the Papists and others have very much abused is to extract water out of a flint and palpably to wrest the Scripture from its genuine sense Object And whereas some object that the n●xt ensuing words verse 18. Verily I say unto you what soever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven c. doe necessarily infer the preceding words to relate to Ecclesiasticall censures and the power of the Keyes as they phrase it Answ. I answer first that these words have no coherence with or dependence on the former but are a distinct sentence of themselves because spoken onely to and of Christs Disciples as is evident by the Parall●l Text of John 20. 23. not of the Jewish Church much lesse of their Councell or Sanhedrim meant onely by the Church in the former verse as is already cleared Secondly the this binding and loosing is not meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament as some would fancy it but onely of binding and loosing mens finnes by preaching the Gospell and denouncing pardon or remission of sinnes and salvation to penitent and beleeving sinners but judgement and damnation to obstinate impenitent sinners as is evident by comparing it with Matth. 16. 19. Marke 16. 16. John 3. 16 17 18 36. chap. 12. 48. Luke 13. 3. 5. Rom. 2. 16. Acts 2. 38. chap. 3. 19. Therefore some clearer Text then this must be produced to found excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament and Ecclesiasticall Discipline upon by those who contend for it Jure divin● Thirdly whether 1 Cor. 5. 5. To deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus and 1 Tim. 1. 20. whom I have delivered unto Satan that they may learn not to blaspheame be properly meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament Some of our Opposites peremptorily affirme it but produce no shadow of proofe for it others speak dubiously of these Texts as needing a large debate and therefore prudently wave them with a rhetoricall preterition as the late Reverend Preacher did I for my part humbly conceive that to deliver to Satan is a thing somewhat different from excommunication and suspension from the Lords Table My reasons are these First if to deliver a man to Satan be the self-same thing with excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament as some affirme then every excommunicated or suspended person should during his excommunication or suspension either in a literall or sprituall sense at least be in their judgement in the actual power of Satan though a true child of God whom e Christ himself hath rescued out of the jawes and pawes of Satan since such a one may be actually excommunicated suspended from the Lords Table for a season not onely injuriously but upon just grounds and yet not inthe Devils actuall power or possession but in Christs John 10. 28 29. Secondly if to deliver unto satan were the same with excommunication then it would have some proportion and coincidency with other Scripture phrases produced for proofe of excommunication as put away from among you that wicked person and the like forecited with which it hath no 〈◊〉 Thirdly our Opposites generally grant f that Excommunication belongs onely to the Presbytery or whole Congregation not to any one particular person be he Bishop Minister or other whereas Paul himselfe deliv●●ed Hymeneus and Phyletus unto Satan as the words whom I have delivered c. import without the concurrence of any other Fourthly many members of the visible Church are spiritually under the g ●ower of satan and taken captives of him at his will though still within the Church and not actually excommunicated therefore to deliver men over thus to satan and no more cannot be properly tearmed excommunication Fifthly nor can it be meant meerly of suspending people from the Sacrament for then children and others debarred from the Sacrament by reason of their nonage or any other naturall dis-abilities should be as much delivered over to Satan as any scandalous persons What this delivering of men over to satan is hath been much controverted among Divines Many who take it to be meant of excommunication and an act of discipline established then in the Church for all future ages interpret it to be not onely a casting of a man out of the Church h wherein Christ reigns into the world of ungodly men among whom satan rules but likewise to give a man over to be guided in his spirit by the word spirit of satan as the Church and those within it are led guided by the word and spirit of God explaining it by Ephes. 2. 2 3. 2 Tim. 2. 26. John 14. 30. John 8. 44 1 John 3. 8. But this exposition seems to me both false and improper First because these scandalous sinners even whiles they were in the Church were i led and acted by the spiret of satan in committing those scandalous sinnes for which they were excommunicated and therefore their excommunication cannot thus deliver them over unto satan who tooke them captive at his will but leaves them in his hands in the same condition as before Secondly such a delivery unto satan as this to be guided acted in their spirits by him and no more tends nothing at all to the destruction of the flesh but rather to the pampering of it much lesse to the reforming of the life or the saving of the spirit in the day of the Lord Jesus but rather to aggravate and encrease mens sinnes Thirdly it 's confessed that a godly man may for some notorious sinnes or scandals be actually excommunicated as well as other wicked persons now such a one God never k gives over to be led and ruled by the unclean spirit of satan but he always leads them by his own holy spirit which ever dwels and rules within their soules and is never dis-possessed by the Devill Fourthly all accord that the end

to scandalous sinners to convert them from their sins but the sacrament of the Lords supper is no converting but onely a sealing and confirming Ordinance instituted not to beget but ●ncrease faith and rep●●tance where they are formerly b●gun and therefore not to be administred to such to whom they can seale no pardon of sinne nor covenant of grace The same distinction hath likewise been used in a Sermon at Wool-chu●ch and is subscribed to by all the three printed Answers to my four Queries To which I answer first that the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is a converting as well as a sealing Ordinance For the better cleering wherof we must distinguish of two sorts of conversion and sealing which our Antagonists to delude the vulgar have ignorantly wilfully or injudiciously confounded First there is an externall conversion of men from Pag●●is●e or Gentilisme to the externall profession of the P●ith of Christ which is ordinarily wrought by the preaching of the Word or extraordinarily by miracles without the Word preached in reference to those without the Church but ordinarily effected by the Sacrament of Baptisme in reference to infants of Christian Parents borne within the Church which Sacrament both admits and makes them members of the visible Church without the preaching of the Word of which infants are not capable Acts 2. 37. to 43. 1 Pet. 3. 20 21. Joh. 3. 5. 1 Cor. 7. 14. Secondly there is a conversion from a meere externall formall profession of the Doctrine and faith of Christ to an inward spirituall embracing and application of Christ with his merits and promises to our soules by the saving grace of faith and to an holy Christian reall change of heart and life In this last conversion the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is not onely a sealing or confirming but likewise a regenerating and converting Ordinance as well as the Word There is likewise a double sealing if we admit this Sacrament or Baptisme to be Seales though never once stiled Seals in any Scripture text 1. A visible externall sealing of the pardon of sin Gods promises in the blood of Christ to our outward sences 2. An internall invisible sealing of them by the Spirit working in by the Word and Sacraments to our soules In the first sense this Sacrament is a seale to all receivers even to those who are scandalous and unworthy who receive only the outward elements In the second sence only to worthy penitent beleeving receivers who receivethe inward invisible grace as wel as the outward signes The first seales all Gods promises and a free pardon of all our sinnes onely conditionally if we truly repent lay hold on Christs passion merits promises and apply them to our soules by a lively saving faith and sincere repentance the second seales them to us absolutely because we have thus embraced and applyed them These distinctions premised we may easily discover the falsity of the Antagonists surmise That this sacrament is no converting but onely a sealing Ordinance and that onely to true beleevers and worthy receivers to whom alone it seals the pardon of sinne and promises of the Gospell for proofe whereof they produce neither reason nor Scripture but their owne bare confident groundlesse assertions which I shall thus refute because it is a very common dangerous error First our Antagonists unanimously grant that the Sacrament belongs to all unscandalous members of the visible Church capable of self-examination and not actually excommunicated to close Hypocrites morall carnal Christians not really regenerated converted yea to scandalous persons unconvicted whom they professe no Minister hath any power to suspend from the Sacrament upon his owne particular private knowledge of their guilt If then the Sacrament be onely a sealing or confirming ordinance of true grace when and where it is already begun then it were altogether impertinent and ineffectuall unto civill carnall Christians Therefore do ubtlesse it is and was intended by Christ for a conv●rting Ordinance to all such as these to turne them from their evill wayes and work saving grace within their hearts since it can have no other proper primary effect in such Certainly God and Christ bestow no Ordinances upon men in vaine therefore their intentions in instituting this Supper even for such visible morall unregenerate Christians as well as reall Saints must necessarily be for their conversion not their confirmation and sealingonely in that sense as they interpret it Secondly all Ordinances of Christ that tend to edification confirmation or encrease of grace are more or lesse conducent to begin or beget grace converting as well as strengthening Ordinances the preaching reading hearing of the Word which comfort strengthen and build up men in grace doe likewise by our Antagonists free confessions convert and beget grace why then should not the Sacrament doe the like ●ince Gods spirit equally breathes and works in all his Ordinances and may and doth regenerate and beget grace in mens souls by what Ordinance he thinks best working in and by every Ordinance as well as by any The rather because Christ instituted this Sacrament to be frequently received when a● Baptisme only is but once administred for this very end that those who often fall into sin through infirmity may likewise by this supper often rise againe be refreshed comforted and get strength against their sinnes and corruptious And is it not then a converting as well as a co●firming Ordinance fit for sinners to resort to The Sacraments are by all Divines whatsoever and the very Directory page 52. ever enumerated among the MEANS OF GRACE and SALVATION why then should they not be meanes of converting and begetting grace as well as strengthning and consirming it as your selves affirme Thirdly the very receiving of the Sacrament even in unregenerate persons is for the most part accompanied with such particulars as are most effectual to convert beget grace in mens hearts As first with a previous externall serious examination of their own hearts and estates between God their owne consciences for which there are divers pious rules and directions published in printed books of devotion which most Communicants ordinarily read and make use of before their resort to the Lords Table Secondly a solemne searching out of all their open or secret sinnes and corruptions past or present accompanied with a serious particular private confession of them a hearty contrition and humiliation for them private prayers to God for pardon of yea power and strength against them secret purposes Vowes and resolutions for ever to relinquish war strive fight against them and avoid all occasions which may ensnare them in them Thirdly sundry pious soul-ravishing meditations both in regard of their sinnes Gods mercy and justice Christs merits death passion the end and use of the Sacraments c. which make deep temporary impressions on their hearts spirits and work an extraordinary change both in their resolutions minds spirits conversations for the present and many times for