religion in some measure namely 1. The union of Christ with the Father 2. The union of the two natures in the person of Christ. 3. The mystical union of the soul with Christ 4. The mysterious exercise of faith in applying the soul to the pronise c. and this is all his proof the which amounts just to as much as his say so as to his quotation 1 Cor. 11.28 enough hath been spoken already to shew the vanity of his high flown conceptions And indeed a most pernicious perplexing tenent to poor doubting weak unsatisfied Christians should it be believed I have alwayes been taught that Sacraments are the lowest condescensions of the love of Christ to his weakest babes they being suted so familiarly to our bodily senses as it were with Thomas his seeing and feeling the body of Christ was more effectual to make him believe then the testimony of their word who preached Christ was risen indeed But the next he saith The Sacrament is the seal of the righteousnesse of faith and hence it seemes incongruous to the ignorant and scandalous that have not faith The question is of the unregenerate in the Church Answ the which may be discernable by these Characters of ignorant and scandalous in part and know that I have nothing to say in behalf of them that hate instruction and that persist in their vile abominable doings after admonition and due conviction unto obstinacy Let such be declined and avoided as unworthy of all Christian Communion and spare not but for those that are yeelding sinners and are ready to condemn themselves upon all occasions if being wisely dealt withall expressing themselves willing and desirous to amend these I think should have the benefit of all the Ordinances as the ordinary means of their salvation But now to his assertion That the Sacrament is the seal of the righteousnesse of faith We know that Sacraments which had their Original from God unto Abraham Gen. 17. were tokens of the everlasting Covenant of grace made with Abraham and his seed God having deputed him to be a father of many Nations And that all the Nations of the earth shall be blessed in him c. Circumcision was appointed to be a token unto Abraham in this comprehensive sense that not only they that were his seed by natural descent but those also that shall embrace the profession of the faith of Abraham shall be blessed with him even they and their natural issue also And the Apostle Rom. 4.4 descants much upon this large Covenant or promise made unto Abraham in the warranty of the Gentiles engrafting into the stock of Abraham by faith the which the Jews stumbled at and fell into prejudices and discontents upon the Gentiles embracing of the Gospel concluding it false because they imbraced it that were always left of God and so abominable to the Church as naturally descended from Abraham and the Prophets c. The Apostle disputes this thing with them and saith Is he a God of the Jews only is he not of the Gentiles also Yes of the Gentiles also chap. 3.29 And he tels them their fleshly priviledges according to the Law will not continue them the people of God without faith in Christ And by faith in Christ the Gentiles are made the people of God unto Justification opposing faith unto works chiefly in point of Justification as in the beginning of the 4. chapter is expressed in that instance of Abraham and David It was not works but faith that was reckoned unto Abraham for righteousnesse in his uncircumcised state and hence he argues Abraham to be a father of the uncircumcision as well as of the circumcision because he received the token of circumcision a seal of the righteousnesse of that faith he had in his uncircumcision that he might be the father of all that believe that righteousnesse might be imputed to them also and a father of the believing circumcision too c. Now then what was the main thing that Abraham is thus commended for and blessed for Why it 's said He believed God and that was imputed unto him for righteousnesse But then we may enquire what was the thing he believed God would be as good as his word to him in Answer It ' was this that God had made him a father of many Nations though he had no child yet he believed against hope c. And this was imputed unto him for righteousnesse We know that Abraham after the flesh was not a father of many Nations that is not the sense but he is so in a spiritual sense by religion and saith and that 's the thing the Apostle drives at to prove him a father of all that come in unto his religion and faith And that all such are of him and blessed with him And doubtlesse Abraham that saw this day of Christ and rejoyced so understood it that all the Nations of the Earth should be blessed in him by faith and this blessednesse to begin in his own natural family and to be extended unto all Nations in time And hence that is true I will be thy God and the God of thy seed in their generations for ever Gen. 17.7 and that he should be the father of many Nations and that they should be blest in him c. This is the everlasting Covenant of Grace that Abraham believed and this is the faith that circumcision was a token of and did confirm the truth of to him and all that are in him by religion for ever even to them and theirs and I doubt not but the Sacrament seals to the same faith still in reference to them that have entered the same Covenant and professe their subjection to the laws and administration thereof but I have not exprest my self in this so fully and clearly as I could wish I shall have occasion to doe more in it hereafter This by the way to give a hint what the Apostle means in calling circumcision a seal of the righteousnesse of that faith that Abraham yet had in uncircunacision it being too ambiguously lest and applyed by Mr. Collins in order unto Church-members unregenerate Mr. Collins hath two or three things more in the 32. pag. but finding nothing in them that doth trouble us about the question in hand I passe them by though it 's true he takes the boldnesse to deny yet he doth not give any ground or reason why but takes all for granted still though I have rationally cleared the contrary in my answer to the query pag. 36 37 38 39. Bar removed I shall now see what he excepts against my 6. proposition pag. 30. 31. I conceive that Sacraments in general and this in particular were instituted for the spiritual good of the Church of Christ comprehensively taken in which every particular member is included First he grants as much pag. 33. and then addes his jus ad rem and then queries how this proves that therefore every particular member ought in his present state come
Mr. Prinne nor Mr. Humphrey my judgement was setled and satisfied in these things long before I heard of these Authors And besides what reason hath Mr. Collins to charge us with this that we are Erastus his scholars when he findes us so point blanck against him in defending the Juridâ—cal censures of the Church I cannot say that ever I read any Author that came up to my opinion or judgement in these things in any measure til now of late I saw Mr. Humfreys Vindication of free Admission So that whether my grounds be new or old I have made but little acquiry in respect of humane authority this I am satisfied in that my grounds are such as accord with the Gospel Covenant and the state of the Visible Church of Christ as it is constituted in Parents and children good and bad called and chosen And I finde that men of different judgements run themselves upon dangerous rocks of Schisms Separations and needlesse divisions in the Church besides their interferings contradictions of themselves and detracting unworthily from Covenant-relation Church-membership Sacraments signs and pleadges of Covenant love to the whole Church in general And therefore I hope though I have endeavoured to remove an unnecessary Bar yet it will appear that I am not guilty of that sin and curse that Mr. Collins intimates in saying Was it our grief formerly that we had no Bar and is it our work now to remove the Bars yea the Lords and the Churches ancient Land-marks But who are most faulty in this they that plead for the Churches Land-marks and rights or they that unjustly defraud the Church thereof laying the Church common with the world judge ye or who are most for Reformation according unto Scripture Canon they that presse to all Scripture obedience or they that exempt Christians from some necessary duties of Worship they that would have all in the Church dealt with as members in a Juridical way to their amendment or they that unchurch them undisciple them and so unduty them and level them with the Pagan World Mr. Collins pretends much zeal in his Epistle prefixed to his Book but I could wish he had more sound judgement and knowledge in these things to abate the inconsiderate noise he makes and the passion which he shews therein First he tels us that it was a burden that lay upon our souls that in the Prelates dayes there was no bar but one which Suâ—peâ—â—on made And then about six lines after he saith the Prelatical party may rise up in judgement against us and say Lord we gave the Minister authority to keep any from the Sacrament for notorious sins c. First he saith there was no Bar and then he saith that there was a Bar and such a one as I thinkâ— might have satisfied men of his perswasion The truth is both Presbyterian and Brownists make such a slender thing of Covenant relation the ground of baptism in the Church that it will not bear up what they should build upon it afterwards for they make it upon the matter but a meer titular or nominal thing restraining the Gospel Covenant to believers only in a strict sense making Sacramental Seals invalid if they doe not so believe conceiving that if persons in the Church by their actual offending discover themselvs to be in an unregenerate state after baptism that then they are out of Covenant and so by consequence have forfeited their actual right to Sacramental seals thereof making no difference between such and the Pagan world But if we hold to the Covenant made to the Church and their seed as it was published and declared to Abraham and all along to the Church of the Jews and look upon the Christian Church as graffed into them and equally children of Abraham by profession of faith and Baptism as the Jew by nature and Circumcsiion presse all to walk up to their profession as Christians according to Gospel observances being bound to observe all things as the Jews were then should we build upon such a foundation of truth that would be immoveable and bear up as much as we now plead for But I have exprest my self more largely in this ensuing discourse and may not now insist upon the largenesse of the Gospel Covenant In short then I conceive that it is a very great mistake to narrow the Gospel Covenant unto this He that believes shall be saved but he that believes not shall be damned I grant 1. That this is a truth as taken in the usual sense but then I deny that it is the whole Covenant of grace made unto the Church and their seed 2. I grant it a conditional proposition used in the first tender of the Gospel unto Infidels to move them to accept of Christ and so to bring them into the visible Church but I deny that this in like manner was or is to be preached unto the visible Church that professe their acceptance of Christ and all observances appointed by him 3. I grant that actual believing and profession of faith was the only thing that fitted a Pagan for Baptism and graffing into the Gospel Church in which the promises of grace and glory belong to the whole indefinitely but yet I deny that there is any promise of grace in those words He that believes shall be saved it is true there is the promise of being saved upon condition of sincere believing but there is no promise in that to give a sinner grace to believe So that this conditional part of the Covenant in a strict sense as it is usually urged alone without the absolute renders unregenerate sinners uncapable of any good news by the Gospel it not being in the power of any of himself so to believe And to make the death of Christ a seal to confirm this conditional part of the Covenant only as being that which the Sacraments hold forth is to make the death of Christ a seal to confirm a Covenant of works in the Church derogatory to the Gospel mercy and grace Therefore we are to conceive of the Covenant as it 's held out to the Church by the Prophets and Apostles the Church being built upon both Gen. 17. Jerem. 31. Ezek. 36. it is largely laid down and applyed by the Apostles to the Church in Gospel times Act 2.39 Heb. 8. Act. 3.25 26. 5.31 Rom. 15.8 9. 2 Cor. 6.16.18 7.1 compared These Scriptures prove that the Apostles did usually apply those old free grace promises with the end of Christ coming into the world to confirm them to the Gospel Church But if any please to enter their exceptions against these my notions about the Covenant I shall be glad both of an occasion and opportunity to insist more largely upon them For I must confesse I think there are not many that are very right about the nature and largenesse of the Gospel Covenant made to the Church and that straitning the Covenant too much occasions very much division and schism in the
Church But Reader I will detain thee no longer in the porch only let me intreat a candid and charitable conceiving of my sense drift and end in what I have written I would provoke none but leave the probability of what I have asserted from Scripture and reason to the consideration of all Only this let me tell thee by the way That Suspension as it 's stated by Mr. Collins I judge to be sufficiently confuted in the latter part of this Book What himself or any other may doe further in stating it and proving it by Scripture or reason deduced thence I know not I think whosoever undertakes it will finde it a hard task to make this good That some Church-members of years and indued with reason shall and ought to be denyed the Communion of the Lords Supper and yet be allowed the liberty of all other Communion in acts of worship as Church members at that present And though I doe not in plain terms prove it an invention of men yet I conceive I have so removed the arguments and reasons it 's pretended to be built upon that it doth not yet appear to be the Ordinance of Christ and so by consequence that it is but a Tradition of men Jesus Christ commands all that are Disciples Church-members to observe all his commands from which none that are baptized can be excluded without equal authority to that of Christ Suspension from the Sacrament only must first be proved an Ordinance of Christ before any may be suspended from it For no authority on earth can disoblige from actual duty but the same that doth oblige to duty I mean no authority can doe it but that of Christ in giving the power of the keys of the Church to binde and loose authoritatively To conclude let none deceive themselves in reading this Book as if it were intended for defence of promiscuous Communion for what I intend therein is to justifie a lawful Communion in the Lords Supper according unto the rules of the Law and Gospel and sure that is the most pure Communion that is most agreeable to rule as the case now stands in our Church Mixt Communion properly is to admit an Infidel Jew or Pagan unbaptized to the Sacrament that denyes or knows not that Christ is come in the flesh or to admit the Excommunicate before they have given satisfaction to the Church by their repentance and amendment of life If I should plead for such a Communion then it would reflect upon me to my reproach shame But I plead not for this but for Church discipline to reform the disorderly in the Church Juridically I would have the Church still to preserve the form of all necessary duties of worship though they cannot bring up all to the power of godlinesse as is desirable Better to keep up Religion though but in the right form then not at all What reason can any have to discourage from any religious form of true worship under this pretence that they come not up to the inward power which is undiscernable for the most part Form and power are inseparable in the true Religion where the Lord gives his blessing That place of Timothy is usually misunderstood in our times for it is clear they had not so much as the external form of true Christian Doctrine and Worship but such a form of godlinesse as Heathens have or may have for it was spoken of false teachers and seducers that usually make pretences of a form of godlinesse of their own devising and deny or be enemies to the form of godlinesse which is according to truth commanded of God for they are such as resist the truth men of corrupt mindes reprobate concerning the doctrine of faith God never blesses false forms of worship with his powerful presence working grace in them that out of strong delusion have invented those forms but forms of his own prescribed worship are the power of God to salvation to whom he will Now I crave pardâ—n of all sober men for this my so bold attempt to clash with so many able solid Divines as I shall be judged to do I reverence all and should patiently wait and without contending submit to all were the Church in a setled state but we having run into such endless divisions and separations it concerns every one to study and indeavour the regaining of the settlement peace and edification of the whole And I could wish that men of â—ober principles who have an eye at the same end would be more serious in weighing the grounds we build upon and the weapons we fight with in managing this controversie I could wish that able and learned men would throughly search and more deeply dive into this controversie for I know that unlesse a great deal more can be said against Free Admission as it is stated then I could as yet ever hear of contrary mindes will be forced either to yeeld or else they will run themselves upon such rocks as will quite break the constitution of our Church But prove all things and impartially incline to own and imbrace that which brings the fullest and nearest evidence of truth and solid reason to thy understanding And the Lord give us at least to see where the truth and the Churches peace lies and establish the same among us which is and shall be the prayer of him that longs to see that day John Timson The most principal things handled in this Controversie are contained in these few questions 1. WHether all Church-members of years not Excommunicate have a true right to the Lords Supper or no. 2. Whether any Church-members may lawfully be denyed the Lords Supper for ignorance and state of unregeneracy according unto Gospel rule 3. Whether Church-members as such in relation to the Covenant be not personally worthy during their abode in the Church and in that sense worthy receivers though otherwise they be actually unworthy 4. Whether it is the duty of all Church-members of years to receive the Lords Supper as to hear pray read sing c. 5. Whether the promises of first grace be not included in the Gospel Covenant which Sacraments seal And the unregenerate in the Church be the only objects of those promises 6. Whether the Church is to judge of her members worthinesse or unworthinesse in order to admitting to the Lords Supper more then to all other acts of publick worship 7. Whether the Sacrament can be denyed to be a converting Ordinance in the Church 8. Whether Juridical Suspension be an Ordinance of Christ or an invention of man ERRATA Reader among many lesser faults which have escaped in the printing by reason of the Authors absence there is one great fault pag. 143. in 12 13 14. The distinction there mentioned is this Hearing of faith preached was and is the ordinary means of the faith of Heathens but the whole work of the Ministry is the ordinary means of sincere believing in the Church And p. 239. l. 10. after probable
were morally unclean in his sense and what doe my principles plead for more in the Christian Church if I plead but for the same now that upon their lives was injoyned then even by the Lord himself I hope he will not charge it upon me that I make God unlike himself but if he will make the New Testament so contrary to the Old as to say the whole Church may not observe the Lords Supper his opinion will hardly be reconciled with the unchangeablenesse of the faithful true and living Lord God Thus I have given you to understand that the legally unclean were not lookt upon as unworthy to eat the Passeover at all And the sense that I have given upon 1 Cor. 11. pleads no otherwise in favour of the morally unclean as he cals them then the Old Testament doth injoyn One hint more let Mr. Collins prove that the legally unclean were expressely forbid the Passeover I am sure Moses knew of no expresse prohibition and therefore was at a stand when the case was brought before him and could not tell what to direct whether the unclean might keep it or forbear untill he had enquired of the Lord what they should doe Besides when the Passeover was rejourned to the last day multitudes did eat it that were not cleansed and were accepted of And the Lord said 2 Chron. 30.15 17 18 19 20. If any man of your posterity shall be unclean by reason of a dead body or be in a journey a far off yet he shall keep the Passeover unto the Lord Numb 9.10 here you see is an expresse command for the unclean man to keep the Passeover He kept the same Passeover at Gods appointed season as well as the rest of the Congregation for God appointing and sanctifying another season for them in special made the service the same in it self and to them And yet for all this what adoe have our late Divines made about this I could wish we might hear no more of it unlesse they can make better use of it then Mr. Collins doth Now I have answered three arguments that made him so hard of digesting this truth That the Corinthians were not punished for personal unworthinesse but for their actual offendings at the time of administration For the further helps of this hard digestion and edification and satisfaction of my Christian friends I she freely speak my heart for the clearing upoâ— this in question according to my measure for I know well enough that our mistake about worthinesse and unworthinesse of person in the Church hath done more hurt is this Church then all the Bishops ever did Our holy Apostle in 1 Cor. 7.14 haâ— clearly and sully exprest himself about habâ—tual worthinesse that if but one of marrias state were a believer the other infidel person was sanctified by the believing party and tels us that if it were not so their children they had between them were unclean but now are holy meaning that upon thâ— faith and entring into the Covenant of thâ— one their children enter covenant with thâ— parent and upon that account are a holy feed and federate with their parents in the priviledges of the Church as it was in the state of the Jews Church Why surely if the branches were holy then the root was holy also Now I say how can it be imagined that the Apostle will have the children holy even of those persons that in chap. 11. he judged personally unworthy Sure if the children were foederally holy then their parents were too for the right of the childe is derived from the believing state of the parents that was sufficient to free them from unworthy eating in respect of their persons And therefore the Apostle concludes that all things are sanctified to the Church by the Word and Prayer To the pure all things are pure but to the unbelieving and impure is nothing pure Here is a clear difference between the professing Church and the infidel world all is clean to the one but nothing clean to the other And therefore the Sacrament could not be polluted by the believing Corinths in respect of their persons It will follow then that it was profaned by their evill actions only The Apostle understood the nature of the Gospel Church better then those I have to deal with in this controversie He understood the right rule and accordingly reduced all unto it He distinguisheth between clean and unclean believer and infidel all was clean to the one and nothing clean to the other that except the Corinths had admitted Infidels unto the body and bloud of Christ to pollute it personal unworthinesse could not be the sin for which they were punished Heathenish uncleannesse the uncircumcised might not eat thereof I tell you this is that which hath undone us of late we make the same difference in the Church that the Apostle made between the Church and the world And all those Scriptures on which this difference is declared by the Apostle our Divines usually apply to the different state of persons in the Church the regenerate and unregenerate and accordingly would be dividing their people anâ— are as fearful many of them to admiâ— an unsound believer to the Sacrament as a uncircumcised Infidel but I hope those exorbitant distempers that some desperately plunge themselves into from the same mistakes will make sober men consider a last I know no such language used in Scripture concerning persons of the Church as thâ— any Church-members should be personally unworthy to use Gods Ordinance and â—serve God in his own appointments Indeeâ— for persons to reject the tenders and invitations of the Gospel to oppose and persecute the messengers that publish lise and salvation by Jesus Christ such are said to be unworthy of eternal life Act. 13.46 the Apostle Paul again tels the unbelieving Jews That it was necessary that the Word of God should have first been spoken unto you but seeing by envy contradiction and blaspheming vers 45. you put it from you and judge your selves unworthy of eternal life loe we turn to the Gentiles for sâ— hath the Lord commanded So our blessed Saviour Matth. 10 11 12 13 14. gave the twelve Commission to Preach that the Kingdome of Heaven is at hand c. they were rather to goe to the lost sheep of the house of Israel then to the Samaritans And when they came either into City Town or Family they were to salute it and preach peace unto them but if they were not worthy their peace should return and to those that would not receive them and hear their words they were to shake off the dust of their feet against them vers 14. with a grievous judgement threatned vers 15. against such people that refuse the Gospel when it is tendered unto them These are said not to be worthy that reject the Gospel wholly as the unbelieving Jews did which implyes those that receive the Gospel and believe the truth thereof and professe their subjection
that rule unto the ignorant that are not scandalous they may doe well to tell us I query what difference they make between a Juridical suspended member and those that keep away out of carelesnesse or dislike of their proceeding in order unto receiving I query again in what relation doth a suspended member stand in reference unto holy Communion in the other parts of Gods worship Has he a Communion with you as a Church-member upon the account of his duty and Church priviledge or as you will allow the presence of a Heathen in order to conversion If you say but as a Heathen whom you will allow the benefit of converting Ordinances in the Church then your suspension is the same with excommunication for you allow an excommunicate person as much benefit of converting Ordinances as a Heathen And if you say hearing and praying c. You allow as a members duty and priviledge then in those acts of worship you hold communion with them as members of the same body with you then how is it that you declare unto such in the name of Christ and the Church that you have no communion with them as Mr. Collins hath stated it If in the third place you say The Church declares she will have no Communion with such in the Sacrament as a member onely limiting her none Communion to that and from no other holy Communion in worship as a member then you will make a disagreement in acts of worship which are all acts of holy Communion and make a renâ— in that which is uniform in it self by Godâ— appointment all acts of worship being of Gods own prescribing and are incumbenâ— unto all that are in Covenant relation with him as all Church-members are untill they be legally dismembred conditionally the Churches censures binding persons under wrath untill they penitently return unto Christian obedience If Church-membership be not a sufficient title to claim the benefit of a Sacrament as I have stated it cleared and proved it we should rather begin the reforming of our Church at membership if we can tell how then at the Sacrament the Sacrament being the undoubted right of every Church-member If suspension put persons out of all Church Communion in acts of holy worship then they are considered as in the state of Heathens which is all one with excommunication And therefore Mr. Collins hath taken a great deal of pains to prove I know not what unlesse it be excommunication under the name of Juridical suspension and then what will become of suspension it will fall of it's own accord without any further disputing Doubtless if there be such a Church censure as suspension distinct from excommunication then we should finde something of it in the Scriptures And in what cases it should be exercised if it be a lesser censure then in reason we should have some hints from Scriptures for what sins or for what want of qualifications prerequisite unto the Sacrament more then any other Ordinance of Worship Now Mr. Collins saith If he can but prove it in any case how ignorant heretical or scandalous soever c. pag. 4. Mr. Botemans challenge will be answered True but that still remains to doe and if Mr. Collins fail in the stating of the question it 's ten to one he is at as great a losse in his proof Therefore I will suppose that that suspension which Mr. Boteman would have proved is this that a Minister with his two Elders have power in the Name of Christ to deny the Sacrament to those that are Church-members and in possession of the Sacrament and allow them the priviledge of all the other Ordinances of Worship and Communion in the Church as members of the same Church And I believe Mr. Boteman and I shall never see nor hear that suspension proved by any whatever from the Scriptures And I think that the thing he endeavours to prove either he means this or else the same with excommunication if he wil allow them no other Communion with the Church then unto Heathens Now I come to examine his proof and his principal examination is this To those whom the Sacrament may not lawfully be given it may lawfully be denyed But there be some baptized persons in the Church to whom it may not lawfully be given Ergo His Major is granted Answ let us see how he can prove his Minor Namely that there are or may be some baptized persons not excommunicate to whom the Sacrament may not lawfully be given His first proof of this is Matth. 7.6 Give not that which is holy unto Dogs neither cast you your pearls before Swine lest they trample them under their feet and turn again and rent you He is a great deal more large upon this proof then he is profitable or pertinent to the businesse I shall endtvour first to give the sense and then to examine the main of his for he is too large for me to transcribe I conceive then That this Text of our blessed Saviour is chiefly spoken by way of counsel and caution unto his Disciples and followers in general respecting all that were then present hearers of him at his Sermon upon the Mount that gave credit unto his Doctrine and acknowledged his Person and whereas he would not have them give that which is holy to the dogs he means private reproofs and admonitions because those were perillous times in regard of the cruel carping In fidel Pharisees and Jews that were such deadly enemies unto him and unto all that should speak on his behalf therefore in reference to the safety of their persons he warrants their silence rather then to put their persons upon such imminent danger of being rent by that untoward generation of malicious enemies of Christ and especially Christ knowing that they were given up to a spirit of blindenesse and hardnesse of heart that they should not repent and therefore whatever Pearls of Divine Truth were cast unto them for their good were to no purpose they would but slight and scorn them and trample them under their feet so that the reason is double why he warrants their filence to such dogs not only the safety of their persons but the unprofitablenesse of their reproofs and holy admonitions they will but trample them under feet c. Good reason had our blessed Saviour thus to caution his Disciples for if I mistake not Christ himself not long before was led by such kind of wretched people unto the brow of a hill thinking to have thrown him down headlong but by a divine power escaped through the midst of them If you compare Matth. 4. with Luke 4. 't is probable that it was before this Sermon 1. That it was meant of private admonition or reproof is clear because it was before the twelve were so much as all called much lesse sent publickly to preach 2. It cannot be meant of publick Ordinances in the Church of Christ because then the old administrations were in form which all were
baptized people to make out their argument and own invented way against such manifest demonstration which cannot otherwise be answered and yet for the zeal of the Churches peace and priviledges we defend in behalf of her members we are counted the greatest enemies to the Church none deserve worse of the Church then we no not Ranters Quakers Antitrinitarians Anabaptists Brownists that destroy all the Church is in possession of through the gift of his grace for there are some amongst all others that deserve bad enough sure but we deserve worse then all these if this good man say true As for looking at a worldly interest he hints at I have as little cause as ever had any man I have what I lookt for before I ingaged to have many tongues and pens against me even of them I esteem my very good friends which thing I have put my self upon with no small reluctancy of spirit what the Lord intends by it for good or hurt I am not certain but content to submit to his pleasure and further guidance in the Controversie being well assured of this that I shall not loose my labour of zeal and love for the Churches peace and edification I shall speak one word more to vindicate my self and friends from this heavy censure The question shall be put to the judgement of the learned and sober in the Church of England Whether Mr. Saunders himself gives approbation of or Mr. Humfry or my self deserves worse of the Church of God If we doe not deserve worse of the Church then the Author himself approves of I hope the judicious Reader will forgive us the wrong and what himself hath published will acquit us And I doubt not but when our principles and theirs are laid together and compared impartially as I have given some discoveries in these followings sheets it will not be very difficult to judge whether they or we deserve worse of the Church of God And so I will leave Mr. Mantons hard censure to himself and others that shall read both to judge between us I should hardly have troubled you with these sheets had not that passage much provoked me nor would I hinder that reverend Gentleman ingaged he may rejoyn more deliberately if he see cause I think I have done enough to caution the Reader of lesse judgement from being taken with this Author with whose smoothnesse of expression and plausible pretences his Reader may quickly be intangled and carryed away with a sound of enticing words that have no truth nor solid reason in them I shall now upon the sudden come to examine the main of his Book And my way will be first to examine what himself relates of their way Secondly I shall examine the state of the question and the proofs urged to defend it answer his arguments queries and motives and then conclude Mr. Saunders tels us what their way is There is a Church formed in one of our Congregations according to the rule of the Word In the choyce of a Pastor Officers and Members other Ministers and people are joyned to this society in which we are like to walk till we can see truth or reason against us pag. 121. To this something may be yeelded Answ 1 as namely that where a people is destitute of a faithful Pastor they may choose one that is qualified for the carrying on the whole work of the Ministery in the Church And the people to submit unto him as ruling over them in the Lord I mean so far as his Office and Function doth authorize him according to rule to admonish warn rebuke and command Then something is to be denyed untill further proof of their practice appear As namely 1. That he that is a Pastor of a particular Congregation and Church or flock unto which he was either lawfully sent and inducted by the Church or came in by the consent of the people over whom he is I say for such a one to joyn himself to another Church as a common member and to hold constant Communion in the Sacrament with that Church and altogether neglect the administring of the Lords Supper to that people he is Pastor of I utterly reject as that which the Scripture doth no where allow but is contrary to reason order peace and edification of his people if it doth not imply a forsaking his Pastoral relation and duties 2. I would gladly see it made out by Scripture that one that is a Pastor of a Church already may be chosen a Pastor again either by the people he is Pastor unto or by others that have lawful Pastors over them already if this practice be permitted in those that are confessed by the Author to be true Churches which they dare not separate from What a deluge of disorder confusion must necessarily follow Can a man be a Pastor of a select company out of several Churches and a Pastor to his own people in general he was first related unto denying the Lords Supper to them that are properly his own flock give it as Pastor to other mens flocks and charge Or can a man be Pastor of a true Church and an Officer of another Or a particular private member in constant Communion with another in acts of worship These things have need of sugred words indeed to make them passe yet this is represented unto all with the common guise of every Sect to be according to the rule of the Word when Mr. Saunders hath given us his proof to make good these paradoxes hinted at and further declared and explained their way we may have occasion more strictly to examine it in all the particulars of it In the mean time I can conceive no lesse of their way but that it makes such a rent in their several Congregations that most properly and justly is called Schism pleading necessity will not help you especially when it 's of your own makeing running upon sundry mistakes and taking principles upon trust for truth that the holy Scriptures no where teach brings most knowing men under these straights overwhelming the Church with distraction division and confusion Besides there is no necessity to sin upon pretence of reforming that Reformation that is begun by sinfull means is not of God nor can never tend to the Churches good Arguments drawn from pretended necessities are of little strength in a sober rational dispute however prevalent they are conceived to be when accompanyed with the sword How can those Ministers think they have done their duty in administring the holy Supper to their respective Congregations by drawing a few of their own members with them to receive it in another mans Congregation They may as well think they have done their duty in preaching to their own Congregation by a constant drawing a few of their people with them to hear another man preach and if the other be their Pastor as to some in the way they are in cannot be denyed why should not such members constantly attend him in all
and which none ever was denyed in the Apostolical Churches during their abode in those Churches And to those that judge ours lawfully baptized and in a true Church cannot rationally refuse to admit them while they are within And again if the examination defended be a necessary duty why not binding unto all Church-members of the same kinde Necessary duties use to be universal How comes this to be restrained only to such as well may be suspected for incompetent knoweldge Sure if it be a necessary duty it is incumbent upon all in the Church or else to none at all if a Minister be at liberty to dispense with some a gift may blind their eyes at length But what Scriptures determine of the just measure of this competent knowledge that the Ignorant are to be examined of without which they must be excluded the Sacrament if no certain rule can be found to satisfie us in this how can men determine of it Then it will follow as in all other doubtful or groundless things so many men so many mindes and will but adde more fewel to our too many hot divisions already And know an unquestionable duty of publick worship should be made void upon such trifling uncertainties that not any are able to determine of seems to me too great a boldnesse in man Thus as briefly as I could I have not only questioned the question but have examined it in particulars thereof by explaining and yeelding something and by denying other things intended by the Author And I think the true question is this Whether it be the duty of all professing the true Religion and admitted into fellowship and Communion of the Church already by holy baptism and constantly attend the publick Worship of God to give an account of their knowledge and faith upon the command and examination of their Minister and Officers and either to be admitted or refused the Lords Supper as these examiners shall approve or not approve of the measure truth and soundnesse of the knowledge of all and whether all that refuse to submit to this duty are justly to be excluded the Sacrament I dare say that 's the proper question as to our case and now I come to examine the Scriptures and reasons laid down by Mr. Saunders to prove the affirmative Namely that all are bound to stand to this tryal before they can lawfully be admitted to the Lords Supper His quotations are many and he is something large upon them therefore I must desire the Readers patience in my answer yet I will promise thee I have laboured to avoid all tedious impertinences Mr. Saunders first proof 1 Cor. 14.40 Let all things be done decently and in order This he saith is a general rule serving till the worlds end to direct the Churches in matters of outward worship whereof this of admission to and exclusion from the Lords Supper is one Who knows not that the Apostle as in the 11. chapter Answ 1 reproves the Church of Cotinth for her divisions and disorders in their publick Assemblies in the very time of administring the Lords Supper and prescribes them rules and orders in special as to the reforming of those profane disorders so in this chapter he takes them up for some other disorders they were guilty of in the like assemblies in the carrying on of some other exercises of Religion amongst themselves as verse 26. doth intimate How is it then brethren when you come together every one of you hath a Psalm hath a doctrine hath a tongue hath a revelation hath an interpretation let all things be done to edifying The fault was this in the exercises of these different gifts by different persons they observed no order but made a confusion all exercising their particular gifts at once that not any could be edified by anothers gift either for his own or because so many spoke together that those that were hearers could not tell which to attend c. Therefore after many particular directions prescribed to particular cases lest the Apostle should omit some other things that might fall out about the ordering of Worship in the Church of God he gives them more general rules that might reach all other the like cases Let all things be done decently and in order The Apostle orders speech and silence in their Assemblies so as all may be edified and comforted but here is not a word of admission to and exclusion from the Sacrament nor any other Ordinance in the Church for they that were received into the Church were bound as Christians to attend upon all Ordinances of publick Worship while they were within this rule was given to direct us about some necessary circumstances in the ordering of necessary worship which other Scriptures inforce upon all in the Church to observe as time and place and external order in all parts of institute worship decent and reverent gesture silence and watchings authorized administrators c. But Mr. Saunders consequence is false for it is not such a general rule as he would have it namely to warrant a Minister to receive of his people to duties of necessary worship whom hee pleases and refuse whom he pleases is this to direct in matters or circumstances of outward worship to exclude Christians from their necessary duties of worship If this will warrant his excluding from one Ordinance of worship then from all at his pleasure if a persons admission and exclusion be but a circumstance of outward worship then our Bishops did well in forbidding preaching and hearing in the afternoon and punishing those that made conscience of their duty otherwise By this Church-members are not left at liberty to doe what Christ commands but what the Church commands we may see how ways of mens own chooseing will warp them If this consequence had been published by a Bishop in their times Christians would have startled at it But he goes on And supposes they had no particular warrant in Gods Word to bear them out yet saith he if our course be holy and orderly it hath warrant from that general rule 1. Answ That course cannot be holy and orderly that tends to a desperate schism in the Church as I have hinted already 2. That tends to their peoples hinderance and exclusion from their necessary duties of worship as Christians 3. That is warranted by no Scripture rule 4. The discovery of the fallacie of your consequence from this general rule makes your supposition nothing for your purpose The Apostle speaks of such a rational prudential decency and order in the Church that may be necessary and yet no where in the Scriptures determined of as to particulars either in commanding or forbidding And would Ministers take up an order under the same notion to instruct ask questions of their people to that end they may better profit by every Ordinance and be incouraged to a more diligent and frequent attendance thereon in hope of a blessing I conceive were nearer the minde of Christ from this
text then what it is urged for Next he assumes something from what is granted by Bishop Abbot but that 's nothing to the text nor proof of his way pag. 131. The Text he saith will yeeld us this argument page 133. Where is no due order in Sacramental administrations Mr. Saund. there Gods Word is not observed But where all are admitted there is no order Therefore in admission of all Gods will is not observed The major may be yeelded the Minor is to be denyed by distinguishing 1. Answ Where all are admitted without distinction of Christian and Heathen baptized or unbaptized a member in Communion and one under Excommunication c. there is no order it 's true as being against many Scriptures But 2. where all are admitted that are of a true Orthodox Church and are baptized professing Christians under the Churches indulgence the children of whom himself accounts holy federally of these the Minor is to be denyed and so the argument fals for pressing of baptized Christians or believers come under the obligation of this part of institute worship in the Church as of any other the precept is commended to the whole Church As oft as you doe this doe it in remembrance of me 1 Cor. 11.24 25. And if a Minister will be faithful to his charge he must teach and incourage al of his flock to observe and doe all that Christ commands Mat. 28.20 And how can they say as St. Paul did that they kept back nothing that was necessary for the Church when they keep back so necessary an Ordinance from their respective flocks The Lord discover unto his servants their great neglects and error Mr. Saunders addes in proof of his Minor thus Where there is mixture and confusion of good and bad fit and unfit there is no order But where all are admitted is this mixture Ergo. What is an evill mixture Answ and against the Word I have explained above and to call this mixture of good and bad as he cals them evill in the Church in reference to external Ordinances and duties of worship and homage is very unsound and doth accuse the wisdome of God of weaknesse in constituting his visible Church so as to consist of good and bad fit and unfit but are not all things sanctified by the warrant of the Word to the whole Church And are not all things clean to them in a federal sense Is there not grace and mercy enough in the Gospel Covenant made to the professing Church to cure the worst Gods blessing concurring with the necessary means used to that end Let not men be dividing where God joyns by his own constitution and merciful gift comprehending the natural children of all parents in the Church with the Church for the gathering of his elect out of them all To call this a mixture in an evil sense as corrupting the Church and Ordinances is a slander and an unjust reproach brought upon the Church by rash and inconsiderate heads care is to be taken for the exercise of true discipline for the amendment of the scandalous as is provided in all my writings But there is nothing can be said otherwise to exclude any in the Church from necessary duties of institute Worship And therefore the vanity of that self flattery is discovered in his 134. pag. wherein he applauds their course and way as tending to advance order and holinesse in the Church which indeed they are guilty of the breach of very great commands of Jesus Christ in setting up this pretended order and holinesse Let them consider better of it and free themselves from what I charge them with if they can tell how or else make good what they promise in returning from their way of schism to their Pastoral duties to their respective flocks His second proof is Jer. 15.19 If thou takest the precious from the vile then shalt thou be as my mouth In short to give a few hints of the true sense before I examine his Answ The people of Judah and Jerusalem were in a most desperate apostasie in the reign of King Zedekiah the time of this holy Prophets prophesying for they had forsaken the Lord and his prescribed worship which but a little before godly Josiah had put them in possession of according to the laws of God left in writing by Moses but his son being wicked turned to Idolatry and all the people with him ran a whoring after strange Gods insomuch that the Lord complains of them according to thy Cities are thy Gods oh Judah for which and many other of their abominable doings the Lord sent his servant Jeremie to denounce Gods judgements against them especially that judgement of their being subdued by the King of Babylon and carryed away captives by him This message did so vexe them that they wholly set themselves in opposition to the Prophet insomuch that the good man was so tired out with their revilings and threats that out of his frailty he grew into a passionate discontent questioning the message that he had received from the mouth of the Lord and staggering at Gods promise of protection made in particular to him chap. 1.8 here he chargeth God rashly as if he had been to him as a lyar and as waters that fail chap. 15.18 this 19. verse is an answer to Jeremiahs rash charge Therefore thus saith the Lord if thou return or repent then will I bring thee again and thou shalt stand before me if thou take away the precious from the vile then shalt thou be as my Word let them return to thee and submit to the truth of that message I have sent by thee But do not thou return to them by reason of their extream unreasonable opposition they raise against thee for I will be as good to thee as ever I promised to be for I will make thee to this people a strong brazen wall and they shall fight against thee but they shall not prevail c. v. 20. Jeremiahs duty was to bear up himself in discharge of the message sent upon with courage constancy faithfulnesse against all discouragements met with whatever he was to denounce the judgements of God against them for their provoking sins to bring them to repentance or leave them without excuse and in so doing his duty the Word of the Lord spoken by him should have an answerable effect upon the spirits of men some should believe it and reform and yeeld themselves voluntarily to the King of Babylon and so live others should be hardened and accuse the Prophet of revolting from his own Nation and holding intelligence with an enemy and discouraging the people from their arms by perswading them to yeild and live and so set themselves against him and reject his word and perish Thus the Word of the Lord made a separation for the saving of some and destruction of others I take it And so the stream of Interpreters runs but to this Mr. Saunders answers If this Text allows only a
The substance of this is much to be doubted of Answ unlesse our common people were more ignorant then the common people in Rome or Italy who are taught that Ignorance is the Mother of Devotion and I think the most of Orthodox Protestants were more grieved about the gesture determined by the Church and those superstitious rails and turning the Table Altarwise and the insufficient administrators then at our free admission of Church-members Suppose all he saith were true is there no way to reform but to remove the foundations of the Churches established doctrine worship and discipline and innovate wayes of our own politick choosing different to all other setled reformed Churches as himself confesses Say our malady in a great part was ignorance could not they begun reformation with a more then ordinary diligence in teaching and instruction and friendly admonition in the carrying on all Gods ordinances in love reverence and unity taking all advantages to promote knowledg in which in time we might have hoped to see some good proficiency in the growing up of the whole together by the goodnesse and blessing of the Lord. For it 's certain that the Scriptures teach not any thing about the censuring of Church-members for ignorance simply and to deprive Church-members of the benefit of Gods Ordinances for causes lesse then the Scriptures do warrant is no reformation but rather an usurpation upon the priviledge and right of a Church-member Say again that loose and scandalous members was another part of our malady is the denying the Sacrament to a multitude of such sinners the only way to reform them What care such for the Sacrament so long as it 's the ordinary case of most and they may have the liberty of all the other Ordinances in the Church as members How is this like to reform their persons when they may be let alone to be loose and profane if they doe but keep away from the Sacraments Such a kinde of reforming that was never read of in holy writ nor in any Orthodox Authors Had it not been better to reform according to Scripture rules and precedents we judging all in the Church adhering to the Protestant Religion Church-members to have prest them unto all Christian observance and to have dealt with them as those that are within and to have proceeded against some unto the like admonitions and excommucation Juridically Gods way is alwayes best and we may groundedly hope to have his way attended with a blessing of successe in the amendment of the worst sinners amongst us It 's a pitiful shift to prevent our strictest professors from running into the Brownists Congregations to practise their principles and so become like them in making admission to the Lords Supper upon a publike profession of faith the only ground to unite and imbody the visible Church into Ecclesiastical Communion and so in gratifying some few in their error require such terms unto actual receiving of necessity that the baptized in the Church of years are no where bound to submit unto nor in a capacity to come unto And yet are under the obligation of actual receiving unlesse in plain tearms you will unchurch them and so unduty them and speak out as the Brownists do But I think enough hath been said already as to this and therefore I shall now take my leave of my Reader having done with the main things in Mr. Collins late Book as it opposes free admission to the Lords Supper And I hope Mr. Collins may seriously conceive himself soberly and rationally answered as to Juridical Suspension distinct from Excommunication as himself hath stated it He hath taken some pains to prove it in the power of a single Minister to suspend from the Supper but I think it needlesse to examine him or answer him in that for I know that Mr. Collins will have work enough to maintain that Suspension from the Lords Supper which he cals Juridical he might first have tryed how he could have come off with this before he had shewed himself so forward to goe about to prove that which is so denyed by all that are Orthodox and sober And I know were there any thing in what he hath said of private Suspension considerable and worthy of a consutation that learned Reverend Gentleman Mr. Joanes whom he attempts to answer would call him to an acount of his forwardnesse of Spirit to Lord it over Gods heritage and to be a Pope in his own Congregation FINIS A BRIEF ANSWER TO THE ANTIDIATRIBE WRITTEN By Mr. Saunders Minister of Hollesworth in Devonshire Wherein his chief Strength in Defence of Separation in a Church and Examination in order to admitting To the LORDS-SVPPER Is Examined and the way he defends proved to be SCHISMATICAL LONDON Printed by E. Cotes for William Tomson at Harborough in Leicestershire 1655. ABRIEF ANSWER To Mr. SAUNDERS ANTIDIATRIBE IN the midst of these unhappy and dividing times in the Church of God I know not how such a worm as I should improve a few hours better after redious lâ—bor in my honest calling then by remembring the happy and ever to be desired Peace and Reformation of renowned Zion As it is my daily prayer so it is a part of my dayly care and study to endeavour that the Churches peace and truth may meet in one And hence it is that I so often appear against those who upon dangerous mistakes destroy and pluck up the main principles and foundations on which the Churches peace and reformation should stand and consist in How sad are our miseries like to be in the end when those that are our professed friends are ever hatching of new unheard of wayes of Separation and Schism Amongst others this unhappy Author doth bear his share by defending such a way that is rarely met withall and yet cryed up to be the way of truth and reformation according unto Gospel rule The way he defends in brief is this some certain Ministers and Christians have agreed to form up a Church in the choyce of a Pastor Officers and members in some one place The tearms agreed on unto admission to and exclusion from the sacred Communion of this Church as to the holy Supper is either a publick profession of faith or submitting to a Church examination in giving an account of their knowledge and faith unto satisfaction c. and so likewise as to practise they require not only a freedome from things scandalous but some real demonstrations of the faith of holinesse unto admittance This way it appears hath been rigorously carryed on against the consent of some able Ministers in those parts And something is excepted against their way by a solid reverend Gentleman I judge with several demands and queries and objections for them to answer and clear in defence of their way and practise Mr. Saunders in behalf of the rest hath taken some pains to give satisfaction unto others professing himself ready to stand or fall as the truth is with him or against
him in their practise It 's an ingenuous resolution I confesse and if he will but stand to it I doubt not of the issue but that it will be worth our labour to dispute it with him according to Scripture and Reason the only Judge of Truth Besides I am the rather inclined to enter the lists with him in this Controversie because he protests against a rigid separation from a true Church and declares himself only for a moderate and lawful separation in the Church not as yet disowning our Churches I take it Unto this I answer That Separation that is proper and lawful in the Church Answ is either made by Orthodox Doctrine Or 2. by wholesome Discipline Juridically exercised Or 3. we may and ought to withdraw all unnecessary friendly and intimate familiarity from scandalous brethren where the necessary duties of our general and particular callings will permit without prejudice to our selves And then the question will be whether the practice defended in respect of separation be no more but so if it be but Doctrinal or putting out of Communion Juridically by Excommunication or declining all unnecessary familiarity with the scandalous though tolerated all will be yeelded on his side But if it be found otherwise I shall deny it as dangerous and warn all Christians to avoid it lest they be infected with Schism a cursed fruit of the flesh and drawn into such needlesse separations as can never be warranted It 's one thing to separate from the sinful courses of scandalous brethren and another thing to separate from the necessary duties of Gods Worship and of our calling where such are tolerated It 's one thing to exclude the scandalous Juridically another thing to exclude the ignorant who desire to be learners of wholesome Doctrine or those that are not satisfied to yeeld unto their tearms as presented under the necessity of duty when upon search their terms are but the bold inventions and opinions of strong fancies and not to be owned upon any such account as is pretended Yet I shall advise to a condescension to the same terms upon a prudential account for the help and incouragement of all in saith and knowledge provided it be used to no such end as to exclude Church-members from that necessary duty of institute worship Doe this in remembrance of me Christians ought not to betray their own and their brethrens liberties to those that have the boldnesse in these exorbitant times to invade them and bring all into division and confusion Why should not all that are within and of the Church enjoy all external helps and means of their amendment untill the Church hath taken the forfeiture of their offending and issued out judgement against them I think I have writ more to this then will be answered in hast Mr. Saunders would be judged a sober moderate man that still owns our Church Ministry and members for true But yet we finde him so inconsistent to himself that upon the matter he unchurches all our Parochial Congregations that he will not allow them to be Churches but in an equivocating sense that is to say in no sense as a â—â—rish in it's Precincts but as a separate Church may be in a Parish as in the world We doe not say saith he that our Assemblies are Churches as Parishes but that they are Churches in Parishes and in that sense Parish Churches pag. 127. and yet he is sharp against rigid separation and pretends but to Surgery not to Butchery but if unchurching of our Parochial Assemblies be not a rigid Butchery let him tell us what is more rigid They of the Independent judgement doe generally acknowledge our Assemblies to be the Churches of Christ though out of order The Anabaptists will confesse a Church may be in a Parish as well as in a City Country and World and in this sense they may say there are Churches in Parishes and so Parish Churches How is our Church beholden to such pretenders that will speak as much in defence of our Parochial Churches as they state them as our adversaries will grant And yet he hath the happinesse to be approved of by a learned Gentleman for his recommending to the Church a well tempered Reformation if love to his person and cause deceive him not Mr. Manton in his approbational Epistle to this Book I confesse if those we plead for be not members of true Churches in Scripture account then all must needs goe against us for it is certain that Heathens the unbaptized or such as have renounced the Christian Religion may not eat thereof our opinion pleads for all Church-members of years baptized and not excommunicated as knowing not any rule against the admitting of such to the Lords Supper produced yet by any And yet Mr. Manton saith peremptorily amongst all others none have deserved worse of the Church of God then those that plead for a loose way as he cals it of receiving all sorts of persons to holy things and by promiscuous administrations prostitute the Ordinance of God to every comer I confesse this passage from so reverend a Minister as he is reputed to be did enter my very heart at first and plunged my soul into a greater perplex of passion then is ordinary Yet not out of any apprehension of guilt though I have alwayes cause to flee unto Gods mercy for acceptance but that so good a man and an eminent Minister of the Gospel should be so inconsiderately rash in his censure of the Churches friends But to answer directly 1. Doth not Mr. Manton receive all sorts of Christians unto Gods Ordinances of Word Prayer singing of Psalms the administration of holy baptism Are not these holy things And is it loosenesse in himself to admit all sorts of persons in the Church to partake of these I hope not and why then not in the other it being a necessary duty to all in the Church of years as the Ordinances before named he might doe well to give some better reason then others doe When he can charge us justly with pleading the admission of the unbaptized Heathens the Excommunicate then let him charge us with that odium of loosenesse or a loose way as being against Gospel-rule but untill then his charge and censure is no other then a rash slander unbecoming such a person It 's strange and to be admired that our pressing unto Christian observance to those that are baptized professing Christians and of the visible Church should have such a hard sense put upon it as to be branded with loosenesse when in all other duties pressing to obedience according to rule is accounted godlinesse and holy strictnesse But doubtlesse that way that is the nearest to Gospel rule is the good way and straight way However it may have the hap upon mistake to be called a loose way Truly to speak freely I little value that perverse disputing in most that oppose us that are forced to uncovenant unchurch undisciple unduty a Christian professing