also is contained He that is ordained from the lesse to the greater he is advanced Therefore either let the Deacon be ordained from the Presbyter that is let him that is first a Presbyter be afterwards ordained a Deacon that the Presbyter may be proved lesse then the Deacon into whom he encreaseth from a little one or if the Presbyter be ordained from the Deacon let him know that he is lesse in gaines greater in ministery And that we may know that the Apostolicall traditions were taken out of the Old Testament what Aaron and his sonnes and the Levites were in the Temple that let the Bishops and Presbyters and Deacons challenge in the Church Here we have two things confirming the equality of Bishops and Presbyters in the third place an objection is to be answered seeming to favour their inequality The first thing confirming their equality That Presbyter and Bishop are different names of one and the same person in one and the same office as having one and the same ordination and where it is said the Presbyter is contained in the Bishop the meaning is not as the lesse in the greater but as one with him thus he exprest himselfe in the beginning of this Epistle this he hath strongly pleaded all the way thus againe in his Commentary upon 1 Titus as was formerly quoted in these words Some man may think that this is not the sentence of the Scripture but mine owne that a Bishop and Presbyter are one and that one is the name of age the other of office let him read the words of the Apostle Phil. 1.1 c. The second confirmation of their equality that Ordination is from the lesse to the greater and therefore if the Deacon be greater then the Presbyter he must from a Presbyter as a little one grow by Ordination into a Deacon as a great one this rule destroyes the foundation of Hierarchy that the Apostles were towards the end of their dayes and so the Evangelists ordained Bishops of certaine Cities every one having his proper See then from an Apostle or Evangelist as the lesse did he by Ordination increase into a Bishop as the greater but this is too absurd that a Bishop should be greater then an Evangelist nay then an Apostle The Objection to be removed follows in the last words And that we may know that the Apostolicall traditions c. where he cals the superiority of Bishops over Presbyters then obtaining in the Church an Apostolicall tradition Answ 1. There was great difference betwixt the Episcopacy that then was and the Prelacy as we have had it as nothing was done without the Bishop so nor without the rest of the Ministers and People 2. His scope was to prove and clearly he hath proved that according to the Scriptures in the writings of the Apostles there is no inequality at all betwixt Bishop and Presbyter but they are one and the same 3. The rise of their inequality he makes the custome of the Church contra-distinguished to the truth of the Lords order 4. Therefore that he cals it an Apostolicall tradition it can amount only to this that what the Church did here when by schismes occasioned thereto he conceives not contrary to Apostolicall Precept in generall though particularly the equality or identity rather of the Bishop and Presbyter be abundantly held forth in their writings but rather that the Churches Practice here fell under some generall rule as let all things be done to edifying or the like And here was the difference as is observed by the learned betwixt Jerome and Aerius they both agreed that according to divine institution there was no inequality Aerius would have this inviolably observed in the Church Jerome thought the Church had liberty to make a difference and that it was a great expedient against schisme Of the same mind with Ierome for equality by divine institution it is pleaded by some choicely learned amongst our Writers of sacred Controversies Ames and Salmasius confest by a learned Authour among the Papists Medina that Ambrose Austin Sedulius Primasius Chrysostome Theodoret Oecumenius and Theophylact were This instruction then stands good Bishops in office above Presbyters are no Church-Officers of divine institution according as it is pleaded by Jerome I shall conclude this instruction with one question Quest May the Church in any case set up as an expedient an office in the Church which is not of divine institution Answ No in no wise It was appointed that the man of fin should ascend into his chayre thence the Church discerned not the iniquity of those beautifull steps by which he was to ascend what the Church took for an expedient to prevent schisme proved an expedient to promote tyranny His time of falling hath been comming on in this last age is more and more hastening hence this truth making not a little for it passeth clear and current in the Reformed Churches that in the Church no office-Power is to be owned but what is of divine institution An Argument or two to confirme it 1. As among Jewes no order of Priests or Levites but what was expressely appointed of God was to be received so in the Gospel-Churches no other order of Ministeries All by Moses there as a faithfull servant All by Christ here as a faithfull Sonne 2. Christ is the onely Law-giver of his Church the appointing of office is a maine exercise of the Law-givers power as in the kingdomes of men so in the Kingdome of the Mediator 3. All proper and essentiall meanes of worship must be of divine institution 1. Because worship by other meanes is will-worship and will-worship is hatefull unto God 2. Because it is God alone who can sanctifie and blesse the meanes of worship man can put no instrumentall efficacy unto meanes therefore cannot he ordaine them But office or ministery in the Church is a proper and essentiall meanes of worship therefore it must be of no other then divine institution As for that worne Octjection of Timothy and Titus Answ They were Evangelists who as the Apostles are succeeded by Pastors and Teachers above whom there is no Bishop Object The Angel of the Church 2 and 3. of the Revelation is the Bishop of each Church a Pastor of peerlesse power in the Church Answ 1. Suppose by the Angel is meant a singular person and he an eminent Pastor how doth it appear that he had distinct power of Ordination and jurisdiction above the rest Why might it not be in those Churches as in the Church of Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist till Heraclas and Dionysius one in degree and order not in office and distinct power above the rest to whom the Epistle is inscribed 2. Angel in the singular number doth not of necessity infer a singular person it is used in Scripture collectively diverse times as Psal 34.7 The Angel of the Lord pitcheth his tents c. that is the Angels of the Lord pitch their tents round about c. so the Revelation
distinct from and above Presbyters is manifest in this instance of the Church of Alexandria where till Heraclas and Dionysius a Bishop was no other but one of the Presbyters by the choice and consent of the rest set in an higher degree 2. Another pretence from antiquity is the Catalogues of Bishops succeeding each other in such and such Churches Answ How doth it appeare that these Bishops had peculiar Ordination and above Presbyters there is as formall a Catalogue given in of the Bishops of Alexandria as of any other Church succeeding Mark the Evangelist in this order 1. Anianus 2. Abilius 3. Cerdo 4. Primus 5. Justus 6. Eumenes 7. Marcus 8. Celadion 9. Agrippas or Agrippinus 10. Julianus 11. Demetrius 12. Heraclas 13. Dionysius Whereas yet we have it cleare from Ierome that Heraclas was the first who had distinct Ordination and Office above a Presbyter 3. Pretence from antiquity such testimonies as are given to the honour and power of Bishops by the Ancients and here above all Ignatius helps at every turne Answ 1. Forasmuch as five of his Epistles are granted by diverse advocates of Episcopacy to be such as do evidently betray no little forgery who shall assure us that those seven by them avouched in all things genuine are so indeed what more unlikely then that they should escape tampering by the same hands 2. Those seven most stood upon are by very learned men amongst others Salmasius judged in the very testimonies very spurious and that not from blasse but upon good grounds 1. The arrogance of some of them take that for one in his Epistle to the Trallians What is the Bishop but he that is strongly possest of all Principality and Authority beyond all as much as is possible for men to be possest being made an imitatour according to Power of Christ who is God He that can find here an Apostolicall spirit breathing surely hath little acquaintance with the Apostles writings saith Salmasius and indeed how unlike to that of the Apostle is it 1 Cor. 3.5 Who then is Paul and who is Apollo but ministers by whom you beleeved c. This was Pauls way to take up schisme how contrary to this Ignatius here for the Prevention of it 2 Of the falsenesse of some that in the same Epistle Reverence the Bishop as Christ as the blessed Apostles commanded you Where is this command That in his Epistle to the Smyrnians Let that be accounted a firme Eucharist which is by the Bishop administred or by him to whom he shall have committed it it is not lawfull without the Bishop either to baptize or to offer c. Hath not the Holy Ghost committed preaching and baptisme and administration of the Supper joyntly to every Presbyter this sounds ill in every care except of Papist or Prelate the Church of Alexandria had no true baptisme for about two hundred and sixty years if this be true doctrine as for the Reformed Churches they are in the same case 3. The idolatrous strayne of some take that in the same Epistle In the Church is nothing greater then the Bishop consecrate to God for the salvation of the whole world 4. The impertinencie of some take that in his Epistle to the Philadelphians Let the Princes obey the Emperour the Souldiers the Princes the Deacons the Presbyters those High-Priests the Presbyters and the Deacons and the rest of the Clergy and who are they I wonder and what part of the Clergy is the Deacon with all the People and the Souldiers and the Princes and the Emperour let them obey the Bishop Setting aside other flawes what impertinencie is here to enjoyne the Princes and the Emperour to obey the Bishop when there were not at this time nor many years after any Emperour or Princes Christian These are some few gleanings more of the like stamp there to be found that not without reason it is by the learned conjectured that about the beginning or middle of the second Century was this forged Author surreptitiously brought into the Church about which time this kinde of Episcopacy soaring above Presbytery began 3. How little our prelates and their party regard his writings only they plead them to serve their own turne is manifest that we hear so little from them of subjection to the Presbyters and Deacons which Ignatius urgeth so much in his Epistle to the Trallians It is necessary that ye do nothing without the Bishop but that ye be in subjection likewise to the Presbytery as to the Apostles of Jesus Christ And ye ought by all means to please the Deacons being of the mysteries of Jesus Christ The Presbyters are the great Councell of God and the Chain of the Apostles of Jesus Christ In his Epistle to those in Tarsus Let the Presbyter be subject to the Bishop the Deacons to the Presbyters the People to the Presbyters and the Deacons they that keep this good order my soul for theirs Much more to the same purpose up and down in him where Salmasius conjectures this spurious Author was about the midst or towards the beginning of the second century whilst the Presbytery yet retaind much of its authority Now what do our Prelates and their party here For Presbyters they allow them no rule by way of jurisdiction for Deacons they have first changed their office and then ordered it so as it is never long standing being only a degree to Presbytery And indeed here this Ignatius seemes to ascribe that office and power to Deacons which the scripture takes no notice of which hath appointed them to the service of tables not to preach and rule in the Church as Jerome argues and this furthers discovers that this is no true Ignatius 4. Conclude from Jerome that before schisme fell out in the Churches and that long after the Apostles times the Church was governed only by Presbyters that the Bishop above the Presbyters was brought into some Churches sooner into others later according as schisme gave the occasion that it was about 260 years ere this change was made in the Church of Alexandria that wheresoever it was made it stands not upon divine authority but upon Church Custome and this by Scripture strongly proved therefore these testimonies of Ignatius or whatsoever the like so farre as they plead for Episcopacy above Presbytery cannot stand either with the truth of the Scripture or the practice of the first and purest Churches We returne to Jerome his Epistle to Evagrius That which next follows concernes not the matter in hand but is against the superiority of the Bishop of Rome and against a perverse custome in Rome that a Presbyter was ordained upon the testimony of a Deacon that which concernes the present question followes in these words Presbyter and Bishop one is the name of age the other of dignity whence to Titus and Timothy the Apostle speaks of the Ordination of the Bishop and Deacon concerning the Presbyters he is altogether silent because in the Bishop the Presbyter
with Presbyters The denyall of the Proposition he accounts contentious wrangling whence this discourse proceeds clear 3. Argument from the same testimonies The name of Bishop is equally given to all the Elders Phil. 1. All the ministers saluted by that name for what reason can be imagined supposing Bishops and Elders distinct why he should salute only the Bishops and Deacons and leave out all the other ministers Acts 20. the same who are called Elders v. 17. are Bishops v. 28. The same Argument Tit. 1.5 with the seventh 4. Argument from the last testimonie Where the names are used indifferently one for another and the selfe same qualifications for office subjoyned to each name there the selfe same office is set out under each name But so it is here The Apostle enjoyning Titus to appoint Elders if any be blamelesse c. v. 5 He gives the reason v. 7. for a Bishop must be blamelesse c. If Bishop and Presbyter be not one and the same the Apostle had not reasoned at all might it not be replyed it is true a Bishop must be blamelesse c. but every Presbyter is not a Bishop Here we may take notice of the miserable shifts of the Jesuits and with them our Prelates The names say they were then common but the office distinct Answ 1. Because the names were common and that perpetually therefore the father here according to all reason in the world argues the office one and the same 2. Not only the names are common but the qualifications for office are here one and the same under those names The selfe same office is set forth their glosse here doth yet further betray the nakednes of their evasion A Presbyter say they is comprehened in a Bishop for every Bishop is a Presbyter though withal he bemore as every Captaine is a Souldier and therefore the names are common Answ 1. Where Persons different in peculiar Calling or Commission do yet agree in one common denomination it cannot be said they are one and the same No man faith though every Captaine be a Souldier that a Captaine and a Souldier are one and the same but here Jerome expresseth according to the Scripture that Bishop and Presbyter are one and the same 2. In such a difference of Persons the lesse may be affirmed indefinitely or universally of the greater but not the greater of the lesse it is true every Captain is a Souldier but it is not true that every Souldier is a Captaine but here the Bishop is affirmed of the Elder Acts 20.17 with 28. and Tit. 1.5 with v. 7. Their second shift is as miserable for this hold is so weak they are forced to quit it That in the Apostles times the office of Bishop and Presbyter was distinct but both at one time conferred upon the same Persons Answ 1. This is to be wise above what is written no such thing any where hinted 2. The highest operations are ascribed to the Elders as such to feed to labour in the word and doctrine therefore the Bishops office could not be above theirs 3. How miserably then had Jerome argued What folly is this saith he that any man should preferre Deacons before Presbyters speaking of the Presbyters of his time when the custome of the Church had obtained that Bishops were above Presbyters that is before Bishops and thence carries on his dispute that according to divine institution there is no difference Now if this Jesuitical Allegation was true the Answer was ready they had in the Apostles time the office of Presbyter and Bishop both though distinct yet in one Person as now they are distinct in several Persons therefore Presbyters now are not by divine institution equall to them the truth is it is one office which was then in one Person undivided is now divided and so shared into severall Persons 5. Argument From 1 Tim. 4.14 If that which is challenged peculiarly to Bishops belong to the Presbyters as such then their office is not distinct but so it is that which is challenged c. Nothing more peculiarly challenged then Ordination yet is that here by Jerome pleaded for the Presbyters in this very question wherin he is pleading the equality of or identity rather of Bishops and Presbyters The same we may argue from Act. 13.1 c. The separating of Barnabas and Saul to their Ministery among the Gentiles by imposition of hands cannot well be conceived belonging to any other then to those to whom it belongs to set a part by like imposition of hands the ordinary Ministers of the word at least not to any inferiour to those But Paul and Barnabas were separate to their Ministery not by Bishops above Presbyters but by Prophets and Teachers who were Presbyters Object The greater cannot be Ordained by the lesse Paul Ordained Timothy Answ This imposition of hands is of like nature with Ordination at the least the Presbyters concurred with Paul 6. Argument From 1 Pet. 5.1.2 The Greek word saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over-seeing or taking the over-sight is more significant whence the name of a Bishop is drawn The Argument is thus Whatsoever operations belong to the Bishop by his Office the same belong to the Presbyter by his therefore they are not distinct Officers but one and the same The former part is proved thus All that belongs to the Bishops office is comprehended in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to performe the part of a Bishop from whence the very name of Bishop is derived but whatsoever is comprehended in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 belongs to the Presbyters by expresse testimony here they must act the part of Bishops which were they not the same with Bishops would be to usurpe Therefore if not onely Ordination but Jurisdiction belongs to Bishops the same by as authentique Commission belongs to Presbyters or Pastors and Teachers of severall Congregations Hence as formerly for Ordination so for Jurisdiction we may observe that it is to be performed without Bishops distinct from and above Presbyters 1 Cor. 5. per totum there were then no Bishops in Corinth Object The Apostle there excommunicated vers 3. I have judged already c. Answ 1. Some as Beza for one hold excommunication prevented by publique rebuke and repentance thereupon 2 Cor. 2.6 the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rendred punishment signifies rebuke 2. The Apostles judgement was a judgement of doctrinall determination appointing them what to do in case publike rebuke or admonition should not reclaime him not of juridicall execution The Church was to be gathered in the name and with the power of Christ to deliver c. 3. Had not this Church the same power with those Churches Rev. 2 But they were to proceed by the Apostles direction blamed that they had suffered such and such as the Nicolatians Jezabel c. The Apostle himselfe not formally executing 1 Tim. 5.17 All Church rule is distributed among the Elders or Presbyters therefore
which blesseth all the nations of the earth in the seed of Abraham by faith Thus they were holy in their circumcision 2. For other peculiar Ordinances there was a threefold barre to such as were openly wicked 1. Ceremoniall divers cases of Ceremoniall uncleannes which debarred Communion in the peculiar Ordinances and they that were most carelesse of the holy things of God would oftenest be taken in these Ceremoniall snares 2. Judiciall the same Covenant that entitled them to the Church entitled them likewise to that land whence divers sorts of wicked persons were to be cut off from life not only blasphemers but idolaters nor only murthers but adulterers nor only traitors but disobedient to Parents c. hence the whole nation enjoyned as in Asa's time to swear a solemne Covenant for seeking the Lord God of their fathers with all their heart and all their soule and to performe it under penalty of death whether great or small whether man or woman Chron. 2.15 12 13. Now had the judiciall law been executed according to divine rule partly so many wicked ones had been coct off and partly the rest had been so formidably warned that here had been a great prevention of that mixture in their Church-Communion 3. Ecclesiastical Ezek. 22.26 difference to be made by Ecclesiastical power as well betwixt the holy and prophane and those are morall termes as betwixt the clean and unclean which are ceremoniall termes A generall rule for this understood by the learned of Ecclesiasticall cutting off Numb 15.30 31. the stranger there the Proselyte of the Covenant further Testimony to this rule that the openly wicked were ecclesiastically to be cut off is the ordinance of excommunication among them in the three degrees of it Niddui Cherem and Maran-atha A thorow discourse about this for further satisfaction see in Gillaspies Aarons Rod blossoming Thus much for this Objection which is wont much to be stood upon but how sandy a foundation it is fit for so rotten a building as many endeavour to set upon it I hope by this time appears Obiect 2. The Parable of the tares Matth. 13.24 to the 31. and 37 to the 44 verse Answ 1. The field is the world v. 38. the good seed are the children of the Kingdome the tares are the children of the wicked one ibid. these make the visible Church in the world according to the minde of the parable both these are to grow together untill the harvest v. 30. what will hence follow that Persons apparantly wicked must be received into and retained in the visible Church this puts the parable upon the rack and forceth it to speak what it intends not 1. It warrants not the receiving wicked Persons into the Church v. 25. 1. The husbandmmen were not so watchfull as they should have been when the enemy sowed these tares and it is the enemy not the Lord of the field that sowes them 2. Nor the retaining them then should our Saviour here be against himselfe otherwhere where he hath appointed the Ordinance of Church censure for casting out such and that under so great a penalty as formerly we have seene Matth. 18. 1 Corinth 5. Revel 2. c. 1. If then the gathering up these tares desired by the servants v. 28. and forbidden by the master v. 29. be meant of Ecclesiastical casting out these cares must not be the openly wicked but close hypocrites yet by some of the servants of more piercing judgements then others discerned the reason given may seem to favour this v. 29. They were such as were so hardly discerned from the wheat that there was danger of rooting up the wheat if these tares should be gathered up to this purpose Jerome witnesseth that in those countryes there are certain tares so like to wheat in their first springing as hardly to be discerned from it thus Cyprian understands it taxing the insolency of Novatian who would not receive the lapsed againe into the Church though they exprest never so much repentance How great arrogance is this saith he that he should think he can do that which our Saviour granted not to the Apostles that he should discerne the tares from the wheat If he will make himselfe the searcher and the judge of the heart and reins c. Cypr. Epist 52. but in casting out the openly wicked there is no danger of this 2. Some think it not to be meant of Ecclesiasticall casting out and therfore let the tares be granted for the openly wicked this parable gives them no place in the visible Church 1. This gathering up the tares is their rooting up for that expression concludes no lesse lest ye root up also the wheat with them v. 29. and therefore the final destruction of these wicked Persons but Church censure is not for destruction except of the flesh but for salvation of the Person 2. This gathering up desired here by the servants and by the master for the present denied is that which shall be at the end of the world the finall destruction of the wicked v. 40 41 42. they shall not then for the present gather them up that is not knowing of what spirit they are call for fire from heaven against them The like interpretation is made of the drawnet and the separation of the good from the bad gathered together by it v. 47. c. Object 3. Judas received the Supper at least the Passeover which was a Sacrament and the Sacraments belong only to those of the Church Answ 1. If we shall hence conclude that the openly wicked have right to the Sacraments and so are the true matter of the visible Church 1. We must deny any such Ordinance as discipline 2. By the same reason we must affirme that a minister of the Church openly knowne to be such an one as hath his heart set to overthrow the Gospel and betray the Lord for money is to be retained in the ministery nay that such an one so knowne before-hand is to be chosen into the ministery for all this Christ knew of Judas therefore 3. Judas his wickednesse was knowne to Christ as God but not as man but for casting out of the Church the offence must be knowne to the Church in a Church way that is by experience and proof Object 4. The Apostles received such as offered themselves suddenly among the rest Simon Magus Answ But yet upon such evidence as amounted in the judgement of rationall charity to the evidence of regeneration for this 1. Consider upon what ground they offered themselves the Word powerfully preached and mightily by miracles declared the Word of God 2. What was the state of those times 1. They were times wherein according to former Prophecies the spirit was plentifully powred out by the ministery of the Apostles 2. They were times of great Persecution of the Christian faith nothing of outward advantage to move but all to the contrary to preach the Gospel then among the Jewes was as it would be now
to preach the truth among the Papists to preach it then in the other nations was as it would be now to preach it among the Turks If upon the powerfull preaching the truth in the maine points of religion contrary to the maine Popishand Turkish tenets whereof they are most zealous such and such in the midst of the Popish and Turkish dominions should against manifest and great temptations openly embrace and professe the truth such a Profession would amount to another kinde of evidence then is generally pleaded for from those examples among us 3. God for vindicating his name against scandalous Profession put forth his revenging judgements against the deceitfull and hollow as in Ananias and Saphira's case whence many were much deterred from joyning with the Church Acts 5.13 thus for the state of those times Then thirdly consider what a faire profession Simon Magus made and for some time continued in which argues seemingly no small change Acts 8.13 it is said he beleeved he continued with Philip he was taken with admiration c. so Ananias and Saphira made a faire Profession to sell their Possession for reliefe of the Church 4. When Simon discovers his rottennesse then not till then Peter perceived the wickednesse of his heart v. 23. and when he perceives it he professeth he hath no lot among them because his heart is not right v. 21. yet was not Peter without hope but he might repent v. 22 and something hopefull still doth Simon appeare v. 24. And now the answer to this instance may cleare all other of the like nature There is a fifth Object 5. The scandalous mentioned in some of the Epistles as in the Church of Corinth but this hath been answered before in the eighth Argument and these are all the objections I know that have any colour in them or at the least in the answers to these the grounds are laid for answering the rest We come now 2. To peculiar Objections respecting the generality of our people in this kingdome Object 1. We are all of the Church by baptisme already Answ 1. From the beginning it was not so that all should be so promiscuously received therefore it behoves us to returne to the first patterne what right have they to baptisme for their seed themselves having been baptized who had none for themselves were they unbaptized 2. Ishmael and Esau were circumcised yet afterward unchurched so were the Shechemites circumcised Many Heathens in America baptized by the Spaniard yet none of these ever of the Church 3. To receive to baptisme for themselves or seed grosse ignorants who understand not the ground nature and end of that Ordinance is 1. To make the service of God in so maine an Ordinance an unreasonable service 2. To make up the visible Church in her several congregations by an implicit faith 4. To admit the scandalous in like manner for themselves or seed is not to set the Seale to the Covenant but to passe it against the Covenant 5. The Reformed Churches receive not to the Lords Supper and other priviledges of Church-Communion such as were baptized in their infancy but upon tryall of their knowledge and Christian conversation which when approved they solemnely admit them understanding Imposition of hands Heb. 6. to point at the solemne admission of such So Calvin upon the place pleading thence for infant-baptisme Reply But children may have right by former Ancestors Answ 1. Visible administration must have visible grounds it must therefore upon particular evidence appeare to the Church that such Ancestors they had in whose name they may have right 2. How farre may we go back and where must we stop 3. Offer such reasoning to thy Prince will it passe for currant if thou shouldest claime the Armes and Honour of some noble family meerly upon this supposition that it may be some of thine Ancestors were possessed thereof 4. Such as could not finde their register for the line of the Priesthood were as polluted put from their office Ezra 1.62 5. This will prevent the distinction betwixt the Church and the world and keep off for ever the baptisme of growne men 6. As for the children of wicked Parents circumcised among the Jewes this stone hath been removed before they had by Abraham visible right under whom they fell Object 2. But all sorts among us have likewise received the Supper Answ 1. But the greatest part besides the rule as is evident upon the same grounds now pleaded against promiscuous baptisme 2. In the Reformed Churches when any member of one Congregation transplants to another notwithstanding he hath received the Supper formerly in the Church whence he came yet doth the Church to which he is come examine and approve him for knowledge and conversation before they receive him to the Supper 3. How or by what right have the Sacraments been ordinarily administred in diverse of our Congregations where the word hath not been ordinarily preached From the doctrine of the matter of the Church we may lay downe some further Practicall Conclusions 1. The Saints are to separate from the wicked into Church-Communion 1. Otherwise the Church cannot be made up only of its due matter God cannot have his Temple 2. The Command is expresse for it as we have seen in the sixth Argument the Saints as expressely called to this as Abraham out of Caldea as the people of God out of Babylon 3. To this separate Communion belongs far greater blessings then to beleevers in promiscuous standing 2 Cor. 6.17 18. generally whatever blessings belong to the visible Church may be clearlyest expected and are most fully bestowed upon the Church when most truly and purely setled in her Congregations the presence of Christ Rev. 2.1 his Protection and Defence and Comforts Isa 4.5 the power of Christ 1 Cor. 5.4 When we have spoken to the discipline we shall have further evidences of this Conclusion 2. No Person habitually scandalous is to be received to the Sacrament though he humbles himselfe before the Church till some time of tryall He is not true matter of the Church who is not habitually in the Churches eye righteous But the Sacraments are peculiar Church-Ordinances Object He that hears not the Church is to be refused but he that hears her is to be received now he that humbles himself before the Church upon her admonition hears her Answ 1. That rule If he hear not the Church is concerning a brother one within Matth. 18.15 1 Cor. 5.12 but no Person habitually scandalous is a brother as the doctrine of the matter of the Church hath evinced 2. For a brother fallen into some scandalous sinne and humbling himselfe it follows not that he is not to be cast out therefore he is suddenly to be received he is neither to be suddenly cast out nor suddenly received to the Sacrament but to stand under further tryall otherwise 1. Church-admonitions will be turned into a meer mockery execution of censure against the most impudent for ever