<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2010-10-28</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Alexis Jakobson</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>*Proofed title page(s).
*Reviewed structure.
*Checked division-marking material at heads and feet of divisions (HEADS, CLOSER, OPENER, ARGUMENT, EPIGRAPH, SIGNED, BYLINE, etc.).
*Added TYPEs to DIVs in order to validate.
*Checked for N=""s.
*Checked ^s.
*Checked placement and completeness of PBs.
*Checked for foreign, damage and missing-page GAPs, #, --.
*Checked for LBs, startqs / endqs, q;s, &abque;s, ABBRs and Qs.
*Checked for FIGUREs and decorated initials.
*Checked proofsheets and made corrections found there.
*Corrected <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">s and <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word">s etc.
*Converted <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">s to GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="[vendor name]".
*Revalidated.</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="A90729">
<STC T="W">P233</STC>
<STC T="T">E302_1</STC>
<BIBNO T="umi">99861079</BIBNO>
<VID>158733</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<P>A FULL ANSVVER TO A Printed Paper, ENTITULED, <HI>Foure &s;erious Que&s;tions concerning</HI> Ex|communication, <HI>and</HI> Su&s;pen&s;ion <HI>from the Sacrament, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>Wherein the &s;everall Arguments and Texts of Scripture produced, are particularly and di&s;tinctly di&s;cu&s;&s;ed: And the Debarring of Igno|rant and Scandalous per&s;ons from the Sacrament, vindicated.</P>
<Q><BIBL><HI>Matth. 7.6.</HI></BIBL>
<P>Give not that which is holy unto dogs, neither ca&s;t yee your pearles before &s;wine.</P></Q>
<Q><BIBL><HI>1 Cor. 11.29.</HI></BIBL>
<P>For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to him&s;elfe, not di&s;cerning the Lords Body.</P></Q>
<Q><BIBL><HI>1 Cor. 5.13.</HI></BIBL>
<P>Therefore put away from among your &s;elves that wic|ked per&s;on.</P></Q>
<P>LONDON, Printed by <HI>Richard Bi&s;hop,</HI> 1645.</P>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="letter">
<PB REF="2">
<PB N="1" REF="2">
<HEAD><HI>A Full ANSVVER To a printed Paper, entituled,</HI> Foure &s;erious Que&s;tions concerning Ex|communication and Suspen&s;ion from the Sacrament, &amp;c.</HEAD>
<OPENER><SALUTE>SIR,</SALUTE></OPENER>
<P>_YOur <HI>Que&s;tions</HI> were, I &s;uppo&s;e, &s;ent abroad in expectation of an <HI>An&s;wer.</HI> Untill you receive a better from &s;ome other hand, you may plea&s;e to make u&s;e of this. If it &s;atisfie not, I neither challenge nor refu&s;e a <HI>Reply.</HI> Our Readers, I hope, will be gainers, if impartiall, whether you or I winne or lo&s;e. Nor will I de&s;paire of gaining you over to that Truth, which as yet you acknowledge not. And if my <HI>An&s;wer</HI> be in part by way of <HI>Que&s;tions,</HI> you will not blame me, your &s;elfe have led the way.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t then, whereas in your <HI>Title</HI> you &s;ay, <HI>Que&s;tions</HI> &amp;c. propounded to the Reverend A&s;&s;embly, and the like afterward in your Preface: I ask, whether you do not know that the Reverend A&s;&s;embly have no power to take notice of any Que&s;tions for debate and determination, unle&s;&s;e ordered &s;o to do by one or both Hou&s;es of Parliament; and therefore not till then in a capacity of returning An&s;wers to &s;uch Quaeres?
<PB N="2" REF="3">A friend to the A&s;&s;embly &s;hould have thought of this before he had &s;pread &s;uch a paper before all the world to their pre|judice.</P>
<P>Next, whether the Titles of <HI>the Reverend A&s;&s;embly,</HI> and <HI>our Venerable A&s;&s;embly</HI> (unle&s;&s;e put upon them in &s;corne, as they have been by others) in a bu&s;ine&s;&s;e which you acknow|ledge to be of <HI>much difficulty,</HI> and requiring <HI>a very circum&s;pect handling,</HI> and upon which accordingly they have &s;pent &s;o much time, and laid &s;o much weight upon their de&s;ires of it, might not ju&s;tly have kept you from publi&s;hing in print, under the gui&s;e of Que&s;tions, your private judgement, and (it may be) &s;udden thoughts, again&s;t them, without ever hearing of them?</P>
<P>Thirdly, it &s;eems &s;trange, that you, profe&s;&s;ing &s;uch circum|&s;pection to be nece&s;&s;ary in handling this point, &s;hould yet &s;o &s;peak of it, as one not &s;ufficiently acquainted either with the <HI>Advice</HI> of the <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> or Re&s;olutions of the <HI>Parliament,</HI> concerning it. For, in two maine things at lea&s;t, you quite mi&s;take: As fir&s;t, you &s;eem to take for granted (and e&s;pe|cially <HI>Qu.</HI> 3.) that it is de&s;ired, the power of Su&s;pen&s;ion &s;hould be in a <HI>&s;ingle Mini&s;ter,</HI> or in <HI>Mini&s;ters alone,</HI> according to their <HI>private judgement:</HI> whereas the advice and de&s;ire of the A&s;|&s;embly is expre&s;ly contrary; they place it in the <HI>whole Elder|&s;hip,</HI> nor may they doe it but upon <HI>due proofe.</HI> Secondly, you &s;eem to bend your &s;trength wholly again&s;t Su&s;pen&s;ion before Excommunication, as granting the latter; but &s;uppo&s;ing that &s;uch an antecedent Su&s;pen&s;ion is the only thing &s;tuck at, and unfit to be e&s;tabli&s;hed; whereas the Parliament hath already agreed on &s;uch a Su&s;pen&s;ion, in the ca&s;e of &s;even &s;innes by name, which I pre&s;ume you have heard of; &s;o that you have be&s;towed Arguments, not only again&s;t the humble advice and de&s;ires of the A&s;&s;embly, but the Votes of both Hou&s;es of Par|liament, which I hope you will hereafter forbeare.</P>
<P>Fourthly, whereas you &s;eem to load that advice of the A&s;|&s;embly with many reproachfull In&s;inuations, of an <HI>Arbitrary, &V;nlimited, Tyrannicall, Papall domineering over the Con&s;cien|ces and the spirituall priviledges of Chri&s;tians;</HI> I de&s;ire to
<PB N="3" REF="3">know, Fir&s;t, whether much of this was not wont to bee &s;aid of the con&s;cientious and zealous preaching of Practicall truths, and charging &s;inne upon men and women, in Books, for things in which they had a minde to be free, as <HI>Stage-playes, Love|locks, drinking Healths,</HI> and &s;uch like? Secondly, why a ge|nerall power of binding Con&s;ciences by <HI>Cen&s;ures</HI> (purely Ec|cle&s;ia&s;ticall, as Su&s;pen&s;ion que&s;tionle&s;&s;e is) &s;hould be more reproached for Arbitrary, &amp;c. then a generall power of <HI>binding Con&s;cience by preaching,</HI> wherein certainly every Mini&s;ter hath his Commi&s;&s;ion from Chri&s;t, without any limitation, but to keep within the bounds of the Word; and the <HI>wills of men</HI> have nothing to do to re&s;train him? Thirdly, whether it be not be true way of preventing Tyranny, not to <HI>deny</HI> the Power Chri&s;t hath left to his Mini&s;ters and Elders, but to u&s;e it in Cla&s;&s;es and Synods, in cen&s;uring any that exerci&s;e Tyranny, and if need be the Parliament may put to their help to repre&s;&s;e Tyranny in this kinde as well as in any other. Fourthly, as for <HI>Papall or Prelaticall Domineering,</HI> and <HI>claim|ing &s;uch a Power as our very Lordly Prelates never dur&s;t to claime,</HI> 1. Why, I pray, do you borrow this curteous language from the <HI>Independents,</HI> with which they mo&s;t familiarly grace the <HI>Pre&s;byteriall Government?</HI> Sure you are not Independent I think, or if you were, you might have forborn this reproach, &s;ince in this de&s;ire there was a full Harmony in the A&s;&s;embly between them and the Presbyterians, as became brethren that de&s;ired to &s;ee the <HI>fir&s;t and maine Foundation</HI> of the Refor|mation &s;urely laid; which is not done till this be done which is de&s;ired. 2. Papall or Prelaticall Domineering over Con|&s;ciences, is power, ^1 engro&s;&s;ed into one hand, ^2 to command things, and ^3 forbid things without Chri&s;ts Word, or ^4 even again&s;t it; whereas there is not here the lea&s;t &s;hadow of any &s;uch thing pleaded for; but only a Power in a <HI>Commu|nity</HI> (the Elder&s;hip, entru&s;ted by Chri&s;t with Church-Go|vernment) to <HI>binde the Con&s;ciences</HI> of &s;inners by <HI>Cen&s;ures,</HI> who are fir&s;t bound by the <HI>Word.</HI> This the Prelates did not care for further then to get money, or vex Con&s;ciences of men; which they had power enough for by one way or other,
<PB N="4" REF="4">if not full out as much Power for all &s;candals. Fifthly, If <HI>all Chri&s;tians may claime,</HI> as one of their &s;pirituall priviledges to <HI>come to the Sacrament till they are excommunicated,</HI> or to be on no pretence <HI>kept from it if they doe de&s;ire it;</HI> Then how &s;hall the Parliament be ju&s;tified, as <HI>not wronging Drunkards or Adulterers</HI> (and the re&s;t of the &s;inners upon whom their Votes are already pa&s;t) <HI>in their spirituall priviledges?</HI> I am confident they mu&s;t either recall tho&s;e Votes, as not warranted by Scripture, and leave <HI>all to come when they li&s;t;</HI> or the &s;ame Scriptures that prove <HI>tho&s;e &s;even &s;innes</HI> to be matter of Su&s;|pen&s;ion, will prove <HI>altogether as much</HI> as the A&s;&s;embly ever did advi&s;e or de&s;ire.</P>
<P>Fifthly, you de&s;ire this matter &s;hould be <HI>&s;etled with cau|tion and moderation, certainly as little as po&s;&s;ible therein left to any mans Di&s;cretion.</HI> Some of this you would have &s;pared, I &s;uppo&s;e, if you had &s;een the &s;undry Rules which the A&s;&s;em|bly hath advi&s;ed to be ob&s;erved about this power; which they think none will deny but to &s;avour of much <HI>Moderation and Caution.</HI> Withall you may remember (for &s;ure you know it) that in all <HI>Courts of Equity</HI> or <HI>Con&s;cience</HI> (as they are called) much is, and nece&s;&s;arily mu&s;t be left to the <HI>di&s;cretion of the Iudge:</HI> which is in &s;ome Courts with le&s;&s;e <HI>certainty,</HI> and le&s;&s;e <HI>remedy</HI> al&s;o (of Appeale in ca&s;e of wrong or Tyrannie) then could be in Elder&s;hips, if the power de&s;ired were &s;ettled in them.</P>
<P>Sixthly, you advi&s;e the <HI>Avoyding of Extremes,</HI> and the &s;eeming <HI>Affectation of a greater Lording power over the Con|rciences and Priviledges of Chri&s;tians and Brethren, then of right belongs to them.</HI> I an&s;wer, 1. Surely <HI>no Lording power at all</HI> over Con&s;ciences and Priviledges of right belongs to any in the Church of Chri&s;t; But a <HI>Mini&s;teriall</HI> Power of judging and cen&s;uring &s;candalous &s;inners belongs to Church-Officers, according to the Word; as your &s;elfe cannot but grant, if you grant Excommunication at all: And if you do not grant Ex|communication at all, why do you &s;o &s;edulou&s;ly bring in the mention of that in three of your Que&s;tions? and lay &s;o much weight upon it, as you plainly do? 2. Do not you your &s;elf
<PB N="5" REF="4">know, even by experience, that no man can &s;hew zeal again&s;t &s;candalous &s;innes but by &s;ome, and even too many, he will &s;eem to runne into <HI>Extremes,</HI> and to affect a <HI>Lording over mens Con|&s;ciences?</HI></P>
<P>Finally, to end the&s;e preparatory Animadver&s;ions and An&s;wers to your Title, Preface, and other circum&s;tantiall Pa&s;&s;ages of your Paper; you will be plea&s;ed &s;adly and &s;eriou&s;ly to con&s;ider, that <HI>all this reproach</HI> obliquely ca&s;t upon the A&s;&s;embly in the forementio|ned Infinuations and others in this Paper, do in like fort <HI>asper&s;e all the Reformed Churches of Chri&s;t, that have any Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Di&s;|cipline,</HI> who all practi&s;e what the A&s;&s;embly hath de&s;ired: And yet further, di&s;graces all the <HI>Di&s;cipline of the Primitive Church in her purest times,</HI> which was rather more &s;trict then le&s;&s;e: as hath been in part already manife&s;ted to the Parliament, and may be more fully, if they &s;hall require it.</P>
<P>And now I come to your four <HI>Grand Que&s;tions</HI> in their order, whereof the fir&s;t is this, [<HI>Whether Matth.</HI> 18.16, 17. <HI>or</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.5.11. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1.20. <HI>be meant properly of Excommunication, or Suspen&s;ion from the Sacrament only?</HI>] I an&s;wer, fir&s;t, This, under your favour, is a very impertinent Que&s;tion to your propounded &s;cope of <HI>avoyding Arbitrary, Tyrannicall domineering over Con|&s;ciences and Priviledges.</HI> For if they prove <HI>Excommunication pro|perly,</HI> which is a <HI>greater cen&s;ure</HI> then Su&s;pen&s;ion; then either a <HI>greater power</HI> proved by the Word, mu&s;t be reproached with <HI>Ty|ranny and Arbitrary unlimitedne&s;&s;e</HI> &amp;c. or el&s;e that load was un|ju&s;tly ca&s;t upon a <HI>le&s;&s;er Power</HI> (a power of a le&s;&s;e cen&s;ure;) for &s;ure you will not &s;ay, that it is <HI>Tyranny</HI> and an <HI>Arbitrary</HI> unli|mited <HI>Domineering,</HI> to deny a Childa <HI>meales meat</HI> when it would hurt him, and none to turn him quite out of doores, whereby he may be in danger <HI>to &s;tarve.</HI> So that if there be any u&s;e of this Que&s;tion in this di&s;pute, it &s;eems to me to be only to perplex the Reader, and entangle the bu&s;ine&s;&s;e. And &s;o I might di&s;mi&s;&s;e it.</P>
<P>But I &s;hall an&s;wer di&s;tinctly to your Texts. Fir&s;t, <HI>Matth.</HI> 18. &s;peaks properly (as I &s;uppo&s;e) of <HI>Excommunication,</HI> as your Quaere intimates. Meane while your Glo&s;&s;e you give in a Paren|the&s;is will not hinder it to be meant of either. For fir&s;t, though the words are, <HI>Let him be to thee;</HI> yet this is not <HI>Exclu&s;ive</HI> (to thee and no other) but <HI>Re&s;pective,</HI> to thee who ha&s;t been &s;can|dalized.
<PB N="6" REF="5">And from thence the Argument will be &s;trong. 1. If <HI>to thee</HI> for re&s;u&s;ing to heare the Church, then <HI>to all others</HI> who know that he hath refu&s;ed to heare them; for that makes it as much a &s;candall to them, as before it was to thee, when thou only knew&s;t it. 2. Al&s;o <HI>binding on earth,</HI> and <HI>binding in heaven,</HI> when known by the publication of the Churches &s;entence; and thy holding him thereupon as a <HI>Heathen</HI> and <HI>Publican,</HI> will reach to make him &s;o to others as well as to thee the Complainant. Se|condly, though the words be, <HI>If thy brother tre&s;pa&s;&s;e again&s;t thee;</HI> yet neither is this exclu&s;ive, (nor yet <HI>Luke</HI> 17.) &s;o as that this Rule &s;hould extend only to <HI>pe&s;onall private tre&s;pa&s;&s;es between man and man;</HI> But contrarily, here al&s;o the Argument is &s;trong <HI>(&agrave; minori ad majus)</HI> If thou mai&s;t complaine for a <HI>private per|&s;onall trespa&s;&s;e,</HI> and finally repute him a Heathen and Publican for impenitent ob&s;tinacy, and not hearing the Church; then much more is this to be done in <HI>publike &s;candalous &s;ins</HI> again&s;t the Con|gregation: or el&s;e the <HI>publikene&s;&s;e</HI> and <HI>&s;candalou&s;ne&s;&s;e</HI> of the &s;in, which are fearfull <HI>Aggravations,</HI> &s;hall obtaine an Impunity and Immunity from that complaint and cen&s;ure which belongs to a le&s;&s;er and more private offence; which is ab&s;urd to imagine. But, &s;uppo&s;ing it to be as you contend, <HI>Let him be to thee,</HI> not <HI>to the Church;</HI> and that it is for a <HI>private tre&s;pa&s;&s;e,</HI> not a <HI>publike &s;can|da;</HI> yet how doth this tend to prove, that the place is meant properly of <HI>Excommunication,</HI> and not of <HI>Su&s;pen&s;ion</HI> from the Lords Supper only?</P>
<P>Secondly, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.5. and 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1.20. which &s;peak of <HI>deli|vering to Satan,</HI> are properly meant of <HI>Excommunication;</HI> yet nei|ther do they deny <HI>Su&s;pen&s;ion,</HI> by way of endeavour to prevent the highe&s;t cen&s;ure, and for the pre&s;ent preventing of mi&s;chiefes to the Offender, and the Congregation, or tho&s;e that know his offence, or of the di&s;honour of Chri&s;t, if &s;uch an one (being as yet not penitent) &s;hould approach his holy Table, to partake of his Body and Blood; of which he will be guilty infallibly, if he &s;o come in his &s;inne.</P>
<P>Thirdly, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.11. <HI>With &s;uch an one no not to eat,</HI> inferres Su&s;pen&s;ion fir&s;t, and after, Excommunication, upon the grounds now mentioned; and afterward to be enlarged and applyed even to this Text, and proved by it.</P>
<P><PB N="7" REF="5">Under your former Que&s;tion you have another, which hath al&s;o two branches (and &s;o we have three Que&s;tions in &s;tead of one in this one Section, and we &s;hall &s;ee the like afterward) You ask <HI>What warrant here is in Scripture, for Mini&s;ters or others to &s;u&s;|pend men from the Sacrament, and not from the Congregation, and all other Ordinances with it?</HI> A. Becau&s;e <HI>Excommunication</HI> is the <HI>highe&s;t cen&s;ure</HI> of the Church, to which men &s;hould not proceed till extreme nece&s;&s;ity, from the Offenders ob&s;tinacy, compell. Mean time it may be evident, that if he &s;hould be admitted, he would <HI>di&s;honour Chri&s;t</HI> in &s;tead of wor&s;hiping him, and <HI>mi&s;chiave his owne &s;oule,</HI> in &s;tead of doing it good. And therefore may fitly in this <HI>Interim</HI> be &s;u&s;pended for the preventing thereof, till it doe appeare whether there will be a nece&s;&s;ity of cutting him off by Excommunication. And again&s;t this none of the forementioned places, which you do annex, do make oppo&s;ition. And among them, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. and 2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 3. will give great approbation to Su&s;|pen&s;ion. The one requiring, <HI>no not to eat</HI> with a Brother (at a com|mon table) that is a Fornicator, if I can avoid it, and therfore cer|tainly, not to &s;uffer him to <HI>eat with me</HI> at the <HI>Lords Table,</HI> even becau&s;e the Church mu&s;t endeavour to <HI>keep the Feast without lea|ven,</HI> celebrate the Supper without the mixture of &s;candalous wic|ked per&s;ons. The other commanding to <HI>with-draw from,</HI> and keep no company with a di&s;orderly walker, requires that he be not &s;uffered to keep the Church company in their <HI>partaking</HI> of the mo&s;t <HI>Sacred Priviledges.</HI> The Rea&s;on is mo&s;t &s;trong, <HI>that he may be a&s;hamed;</HI> which certainly he is not like to be, &s;o long as he may as freely as ever come to the Sacrament and highe&s;t privi|ledge of Chri&s;tians. And as for <HI>Numb.</HI> 12. out of the Old Te&s;ta|ment, which is an example of a Leper &amp;c. this brings to minde a plaine Type of Su&s;pen&s;ion; namely, <HI>the &s;hutting up of a &s;u&s;pected Leper &s;even dayes,</HI> and <HI>again &s;even dayes</HI> &s;ometimes, before he is a together to be <HI>&s;hut out.</HI> What is this, but fir&s;t a <HI>Tryall</HI> (and prevention of infection) by <HI>Su&s;pen&s;ion,</HI> before actuall and finall <HI>ca&s;ting out.</HI> And I wonder you who appeare to be read in Anti|quity, &s;hould affirme, that &s;candalous per&s;ons were ever <HI>excom|municated</HI> and wholly ca&s;t out of the Church, never barely <HI>&s;e|questred from the Sacrament;</HI> whereas it is cleare, that they had <HI>Absten&s;ion, &amp; abstenti,</HI> both before <HI>Excommunication;</HI> witne&s;&s;e
<PB N="8" REF="6"><HI>Cyprian</HI> in diyers places: And after <HI>Excommunication,</HI> before Ab|&s;olution, the <HI>Poenitentes</HI> (as they are called) were kept &s;ome of them a long time, <HI>Ab&s;tenti,</HI> from the Sacrament, and yet allowed to heare the Word among the faithfull, and even to joyne in &s;ome prayers though not in all.</P>
<P>Neither do the <HI>Schoolmen</HI> deny this, however they define Ex|communication, <HI>&s;c.</HI> the <HI>Major Excommunicatio,</HI> (for they had a <HI>Minor Excom.</HI> which was only Su&s;pen&s;ion; and &s;o &s;ome of our Latter Divines call Su&s;pen&s;ion.) Befides, that is not greatly mate|riall how they determine in matters of Con&s;cience. As for <HI>Aretius,</HI> he apparantly defines it wrong, making it an <HI>Exclu&s;ion from Com|munion in all both &s;acred and prophane or worldly matters.</HI> Whenas it cannot be denied, nor is by any but Papi&s;ts, but in manifold pro|phane or common matters, Communion may be &amp; mu&s;t be held by the <HI>faithfule&s;t</HI> per&s;ons with the mo&s;t <HI>&s;candalous,</HI> even when excom|municated with the highe&s;t Cen&s;ure of the Church: and &s;o for &s;ome &s;acred matters; at which even Heathens might be pre&s;ent 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14.23, 24. el&s;e how &s;hould they be converted? And &s;o I have done with your fir&s;t Que&s;tion, and its branches and amplifications.</P>
<P>The &s;econd followes. <HI>By what divine Authority can any keep back any Chri&s;tian from the Sacrament, who earne&s;tly de&s;ires to re|ceive it?</HI> (This is all that is materiall in your Que&s;tion: although you mention a <HI>Mini&s;ter &s;ingle,</HI> and his <HI>private judgement,</HI> and the per&s;on kept away <HI>not yet excommunicated:</HI> but to all this I have &s;po|ken already, and &s;o &s;pare tautology.) To which I an&s;wer, The de&s;ire of any, who&s;oever he be, or how earne&s;t &s;oever it be, is no pro|tection to &s;ecure him from being kept back, while the thing that he would doe will certainly be to the <HI>Di&s;honour of Chri&s;t</HI> (ma|king that per&s;on guilty of his body and blood) and to the <HI>parties owne mi&s;chiefe,</HI> by his eating and drinking judgement and damna|tion to him&s;elfe. In Con&s;cience, Sir, would you have a <HI>man in a frenzie</HI> not kept back, or a man <HI>extremely drunk?</HI> Yet either of them may <HI>earne&s;tly de&s;ire</HI> to be admitted. I knew a woman, that in the depth of <HI>malice</HI> and <HI>dete&s;table prophanne&s;&s;e,</HI> took the Bread out of her mouth and carried it home in a clout, and only toucht the Cup without drinking at all, and afterward boa&s;ted of it, and vowed the Sacrament &s;hould never come within her body, till &s;he had &s;atisfaction for the wrong done her; and yet
<PB N="9" REF="6">afterward, without the lea&s;t &s;hew of Reconciliation toward the party with whom &s;he had a quarrell, or of Remor&s;e for her abo|minable practice, offered to come to the Sacrament, and con|te&s;ted for it; would you have had me to have admitted her upon tho&s;e teimes? If you &s;ay, No, then you may an&s;wer your Que|&s;tion your &s;elfe by <HI>Matth.</HI> 7. <HI>Give not that which is holy to dogs,</HI> (for certainly &s;he &s;hewed her &s;elfe a dog or &s;wine in this) or by any other Text you will; and then all your Arguments to the contrary (pre&s;ently to be con&s;idered) fall to the ground: If you &s;ay, Yes, you &s;hall give me leave to &s;ay, you &s;hall be no Ca&s;ui&s;t in this to &s;atisfie my con&s;cience: And yet I beleeve you walk by rules of Con&s;cience in other matters; only I know not how you &s;warve in this great Que&s;tion.</P>
<P>But you &s;ay <HI>We read of no circumci&s;ed per&s;on that was ever de|bard from the Pa&s;&s;eever by the Prie&s;ts, that was willing or de&s;irous to eat it.</HI> An&s;. Sure you have forgotten (for you have certainly read it) <HI>Numb.</HI> 9. a ca&s;e of per&s;ons unclean, de&s;irous to Receive, and yet kept back, and a <HI>Rule</HI> made upon it for time to come, that &s;uch <HI>&s;hould be kept back.</HI> And 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 20. Officers &s;et by that Godly Reformer <HI>Jehojadah</HI> the high Prie&s;t, to keep away the Uncleane from the Temple. And if you &s;ay, This was only for <HI>Legall</HI> not <HI>Morall</HI> uncleanne&s;&s;e; I would for the pre&s;ent ask you, <HI>whether this were not written for our learning</HI> (and imitation) and what this <HI>Typicall</HI> Law did &s;ignifie, but out contended for <HI>Su&s;|pen&s;ion.</HI> And as for tho&s;e 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 30. admitted, though <HI>not pu|rified after the purification of the Sanctuary.</HI> If the Prie&s;t <HI>knew</HI> any to be unclean, you dare not (I think) &s;ay, but that they <HI>&s;inned in admitting them,</HI> contrary to the forementioned expre&s;&s;e Law. And God &s;hewed &s;ome <HI>&s;igne of di&s;plea&s;ure,</HI> till upon <HI>He|zekiahs</HI> prayer he healed them.</P>
<P>Next you &s;ay, <HI>Chri&s;t him&s;elfe admitted Judas to it, though he knew him to be a Devill and a Traytor.</HI> I grant it (and that <HI>Luk.</HI> 22. proves it, though many argue the contrary from the other Evangeli&s;ts,) But Chri&s;t had not <HI>convicted Iudas</HI> to be &s;uch an one (nor yet named him to any, till by the Sop he in&s;inuated him to <HI>Iohn</HI>) which wholly alters the ca&s;e: For the A&s;&s;embly would not have any man kept away by the Mini&s;ter upon his <HI>owne private knowledge</HI> (though never &s;o certaine) but upon <HI>ju&s;t proofe and conviction</HI> before the Elder&s;hip.</P>
<P><PB N="10" REF="7">But you adde, that <HI>Paul u&s;urped no other authority to him&s;elfe, nor gave authority to others to keep unworthy Receivers from the Sacrament, but only admoni&s;hed them &amp;c.</HI> I an&s;wer: Sure <HI>Paul</HI> never <HI>u&s;urped</HI> any authority at all, neither this nor any other; but his delivering the Ince&s;tuous Corinthian, al&s;o <HI>Hymeneus</HI> and <HI>A|lexander</HI> to Satan, was at lea&s;t a <HI>keeping them from the Sacra|ment,</HI> whatever it was more. For I cannot beleeve your &s;elfe can think, that a man while &s;o in the <HI>Devils po&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion</HI> may be admitted to the <HI>Lords Table,</HI> to partake of the pledges of his Body and Blood. And for <HI>giving power to others,</HI> he doth it not in &s;yllables in that Chapter; But in <HI>declaring openly,</HI> &s;uch as are openly un|worthy Receivers, to be &s;uch Offenders again&s;t Chri&s;t, and Ene|mies to them&s;elves in the very Act of Receiving; he mu&s;t needs <HI>imply</HI> that tho&s;e who are to <HI>judge tho&s;e that are within</HI> (1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.12.) ought to keep &s;uch away from adding &s;inne to &s;inne, and mi&s;chiefe to mi&s;chiefe.</P>
<P>Therefore your &s;ubordinare Que&s;tion <HI>(Whether a Mini&s;ter by admonition and dehortation hath not di&s;charged his full duty and con&s;cience)</HI> is &s;oone an&s;wered. In a <HI>Doctrinall way,</HI> as a Preacher to him, he hath; but not, as he is one to whom, with the re&s;t of the Elder&s;hip, the <HI>Rule and Care of the Church of God is committed</HI> 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 5.17. unle&s;&s;e he have, what in him lies, <HI>judged</HI> (according to proo&s;e) and <HI>cen&s;ured</HI> a &s;candalous Offender, and &s;o kept him from the Sacrament; which, I take it, S. <HI>Paul</HI> threatens to doe to &s;uch Impenitents as he &s;hould finde when he next came to <HI>Corinth,</HI> 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. and Chap. 13. And your cited Text of 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. &s;aith nothing to the contrary. For <HI>Ezek.</HI> 33. and <HI>Acts</HI> 20. they are &s;poken only of the Duty of <HI>Preaching,</HI> that a Prophet or Preacher, <HI>in reference to that duty,</HI> hath delivered his &s;oule when he hath given <HI>warning:</HI> But &s;o farre as he hath a <HI>further power,</HI> he is not quit, if he u&s;e it not. Witne&s;&s;e <HI>Elyrs</HI> &s;inne and judge|ment, who yet gave his &s;onnes as <HI>grave and &s;erious a warning</HI> as could be, 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 2. but becau&s;e being a Judge he <HI>re&s;trained</HI> them not, by cen&s;ures &s;utable to their &s;candals, God charged guilt hea|vily upon him and all his Family.</P>
<P>But I wonder much (I &s;ay not <HI>qu&acirc; fide,</HI> but <HI>qu&acirc; cur&acirc;</HI>) you &s;ay the <HI>Lyturgies of our owne and the French Churches in their Exhortations before the Sacrament, both intimate and re&s;olve</HI> what
<PB N="11" REF="7">you affirme; that a Mini&s;ter hath <HI>di&s;charged his full duty and con&s;cience by admonition and dehortation.</HI> When fir&s;t, you know that in expre&s;&s;e words in the Rubrick before the Sacrament in our late Book of Common prayer, the Curate (a &s;ingle Mini&s;ter) is expre&s;ly charged, <HI>not to admit</HI> an ob&s;tinate uncharitable per&s;on And &s;econdly, all the world knowes (or may know) that the Di&s;|cipline of the <HI>French</HI> Churches, charges Mini&s;ters with the re&s;t of the Elder&s;hip, to <HI>&s;u&s;pend all &s;candalous per&s;ons from the Sacrament when proved &s;o before them.</HI> And accordingly they doe &s;o in all the Reformed Churches in <HI>France,</HI> and all others of that Nation in <HI>Holland</HI> or el&s;ewhere: And <HI>&s;o have done in England over &s;ince K. Edward the &s;ixth time</HI> (except in Q. <HI>Maries</HI>) <HI>by the allowance of our Princes.</HI> As for the <HI>Exhortations before the Sacrament,</HI> they &s;erve to warne tho&s;e who&s;e &s;innes are <HI>&s;ecret and not proved,</HI> and not to &s;tand for <HI>all Di&s;cipline</HI> toward tho&s;e that are notoriou&s;ly &s;candalous. I adde, if it were meant to be the <HI>only</HI> barre of open &s;candals, it would be ridiculous to &s;uch as knew them&s;elves to be &s;uch, and knew that others knew it al&s;o, to &s;ay, <HI>If any of you be a Bla&s;phemer, or an Adulterer &amp;c. bewaile your &s;innes, and come not to this holy Table &amp;c.</HI> as it was in our Lyturgy: Or much more to &s;ay, <HI>I excommunicate &s;uch and &s;uch</HI> (as in the French Li|turgy) and yet I &s;ee them and know them, and &s;o doth all the Congregation, and let them communicate notwith&s;tanding. The very <HI>Pagans</HI> were never &s;o carele&s;&s;e of their <HI>Sacra,</HI> as to let tho&s;e they counted prophane, to partake in them. If <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> &s;hould, will not they ri&s;e up in judgement again&s;t us?</P>
<P>Your third Que&s;tion is, <HI>Whether unprofitable and unworthy hea|ring of the Word be not as great, as dangerous, as damning a &s;inne, as the unworthy Receiving of the Sacrament?</HI> Whereunto you adde diver&s;e Texts <HI>Mat.</HI> 10.14.15. <HI>Mark</HI> 16.15, 16. <HI>Luk.</HI> 8.18. <HI>Heb.</HI> 2.1, 2, 3. and 3.7, 8, 12. and 6.6, 7, 8. and (after) two &s;ubordinate Que&s;tions in the &s;ame Paragraph. I an&s;wer to them all. Fir&s;t, to your maine Que&s;tion I &s;ay, That every <HI>&s;ingle Act</HI> of unprofitable and unworthy hearing of the Word, is not &s;o great, &s;o dangerous, &s;o damning a &s;inne, as <HI>unworthy Receiving the Sa|crament.</HI> Becau&s;e 1. tho&s;e &s;innes are greate&s;t upon which the Spi|rit of God puts the greate&s;t weight; But the Spirit of God puts no where &s;uch weight upon a <HI>&s;ingle Act</HI> of unprofitable hearing.
<PB N="12" REF="8">For all your Texts, every one of them, &s;peak only of <HI>habituall and cu&s;tomary,</HI> and &s;ome of them only of <HI>finall</HI> unprofitable hearing. But 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11, 27, 29. &s;peaks of <HI>every &s;ingle act</HI> of Receiving the Lords Supper unworthily. 2. Againe, whoever receives the Sa|crament unworthily, hath fir&s;t received the Word unworthily (and that, it may be, not once, but many times) and &s;o hath added a further &s;inne to it. But a man may receive the Word unworthily, who receives not the Sacrament at all, and &s;o &s;ins but a &s;ingle &s;in; whereas the unworthy Receiver of the Sacrament &s;ins certainly double. 3. Moreover the matter preached oftentimes, is but a <HI>Particular of le&s;&s;er con&s;equence,</HI> and &s;o the &s;in le&s;&s;e to receive it un|worthily: But the matter of the Sacrament is the highe&s;t of all Chri&s;tianity, and therefore the &s;in is the greater to receive it un|worthily. 4. Further, &s;uppo&s;e the Sermon was of the <HI>Grace of Chri&s;t,</HI> and the benefit of his Body and Blood; yet is it a greater fin to receive the Sacrament unworthily, becau&s;e in that is a <HI>fur|ther manife&s;tation of Gods love,</HI> and Chri&s;ts Grace, a &s;eale to the Word. Therefore to de&s;pi&s;e it, and receive it unworthily, is a fur|ther manife&s;tation of ob&s;tinate impenitency unbeliefe, and &s;leigh|ting the Grace of Chri&s;t, and the Love of God. 5 Once more, The Receiver of the Sacrament doth <HI>more &s;olemnly pretend faith</HI> in Chri&s;t, and owning him as his Lord, then the hearer of the Word: he &s;eales outwardly to God and Chri&s;t, as well as receives outward &s;eales; which the Hearer doth not by the act of his hea|ring (for a Heathen may come in to heare, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14.) Therefore he &s;ins a greater, more dangerous, more damning &s;inne, then any man that this or that time, receives the Word unprofitably and unworthily.</P>
<P>Next, if you would compare a <HI>customary</HI> unworthy hearing, with a <HI>&s;ingle act</HI> of unworthy Receiving, and ask whether it bee not as great a &s;inne, &amp;c. To this I &s;hall an&s;wer, by con&s;idering your two &s;ubordinate Que&s;tions, which are, 1 <HI>Whether Mini&s;ters upon &s;ome pretence may not as well keep the people from preaching, and re|fu&s;e to preach to them, &amp;c?</HI> And 2 <HI>What &s;ub&s;tantiall difference they can produce warranted by Scripture, why they may not deny the Word as well as the Sacrament?</HI> I an&s;wer, Fir&s;t, there is an expre&s;&s;e charge to <HI>preach the Gospell to every creature,</HI> that is, even to Pagans and Infidels while remayning &s;uch: you will not &s;ay, there is the like
<PB N="13" REF="8">for giving the Sacrament, while &s;uch. Secondly, there is a like Charge of <HI>in&s;tructing in meekne&s;&s;e tho&s;e that oppo&s;e them&s;elves,</HI> which will hold, I beleeve, even to profe&s;&s;ed Chri&s;tians, for they are but too often <HI>oppo&s;ers,</HI> and you will not &s;ay but &s;uch mu&s;t &s;till be in&s;tructed, <HI>if at any time God will give them repentance, &amp;c.</HI> But there is no &s;uch charge to admini&s;ter the Sacrament to oppo&s;ers or impenitents. 3 That which gives a warrant not to baptize a man (though pretending to de&s;ire it) will, from the parity of the nature of both the Sacraments, give warrant to <HI>deny him the Lords Supper.</HI> Had <HI>Philip</HI> manife&s;tly &s;een <HI>Act.</HI> 8. that which <HI>Peter</HI> did afterward, that <HI>Simon Magus</HI> was <HI>in the gall of bitterne&s;&s;e and bond of iniquity;</HI> doubtle&s;&s;e he would not have baptized him, though he &s;hould have offered him&s;elfe. An ignorant man, or a prophane man is to be <HI>preached to,</HI> but not to be <HI>baptized,</HI> till he have gotten knowledge and expre&s;&s;ed repentance: Therfore by the &s;ame rea&s;on, one equal|ly ignorant or prophane (though baptized) is not to be admitted to the Lords Supper: and if you would &s;ay, yes, his <HI>bapti&s;m gives him right,</HI> and nothing can after deprive him of it; I pray, would not this furni&s;h the Anabapti&s;ts with a mo&s;t forcible argument again&s;t baptizing of infants? That &s;uch baptizing them makes parents and others carele&s;&s;e of their education, and them&s;elves of their behavi|our when grown up? And I remember this was once urged to me. To which no rationall an&s;wer that I know can be given, if upon this bapti&s;m they may chalenge the Lords Supper at &s;uch an age, how <HI>ignorant</HI> &s;oever they remain, and how <HI>&s;candalous</HI> &s;oever they grow. Were not this the way to make all that are zealous of Chri&s;ts honour and the good of &s;oules, to abhorre &s;uch bapti&s;m as hardening parents and children both in impiety and contempt of God? I pray con&s;ider it. 4 But I adde, <HI>the word is the proper Or|dinance to convert men,</HI> which therefore mu&s;t be preached even to pagans and oppo&s;ers (till they grow altogether de&s;perate.) But the Lords Supper is a <HI>Seal for confirmation</HI> of tho&s;e that are or &s;eem to be <HI>beleevers and penitents.</HI> If therefore any relap&s;e into &s;inne and remain impenitent, the Word is the proper meanes &s;till to be offerd to him for his recovery, which mu&s;t be &s;poken as to an impeni|tent: but the Sacrament is to be denied him (and that deniall is al&s;o a concurrent meanes of this recovery, as proclaiming him to his con&s;cience unworthy of it, and &s;o to others, if the Su&s;pen&s;ion
<PB N="14" REF="9">be publi&s;ht, as it mu&s;t &s;ometimes be publi&s;ht to all the Congrega|tion, but not alwaies,) and that becau&s;e it cannot be given but as an <HI>actuall Seal of Gods forgivene&s;&s;e,</HI> which for the pre&s;ent he de|clares him&s;elf to be uncapable of. 5 Finally, the <HI>Word</HI> hath a power (often manife&s;ted) to <HI>conquer ob&s;tinate &s;inners,</HI> and there are many promi&s;es of it, though the di&s;pen&s;ation of this power be not at e|very Sermon, or to every per&s;on, but when and to whom God plea&s;es: But there is no &s;uch power mentioned in Scripture ac|companying the Sacrament; it is for living men (and &s;uch as are not in a &s;woon neither, but &s;omewhat lively and hungty) to feed upon that banquet; not to be put into dead mens mouths or hands, or tho&s;e who&s;e mouthes (that is, their hearts) appeare to be &s;hut again&s;t it: But the word preached hath ray&s;ed dead &s;oules, thou|&s;ands, millions, (according to the prophe&s;ie and promi&s;e <HI>John</HI> 5) even all that ever come to life in an ordinary way. Here is diffe|rence enough to fatisfy both your Que&s;tions. And for your Argu|ments added to the fir&s;t of them, I an&s;wer briefly, fir&s;t a Mini&s;ter is no way partaker of any ones <HI>unprofitable hearing,</HI> or guilty of his damnation, being <HI>commanded to preach to him</HI> for his good; as it may be, how ill &s;oever he be when he begins to preach to him: But he, and the Elder&s;hip, are partakers of the &s;in of the <HI>unworthy Communicant,</HI> if they admit him, of whom they have &s;uch proofe that they know he will be guilty of Chri&s;ts body and blood, and will eat and drink damnation to him&s;elfe; for they are no where commanded to admit &s;uch to the Sacrament; but forbidden by the nature of the Ordinance, and his apparant unworthine&s;&s;e toge|ther, (be&s;ide the places forementioned, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. 2 <HI>The&s;.</HI> 3.) Secondly a Mini&s;ter is not <HI>to give holy things to dogs,</HI> &amp;c. This is generall, and not confined to the <HI>Word</HI> only. Your &s;elfe only &s;ay, <HI>It is principally meant of the Word;</HI> and &s;ure it hath a <HI>Truth</HI> even relating to the Sacraments; for they al&s;o are <HI>holy things,</HI> and <HI>pearles,</HI> and &s;o are not to be ca&s;t to &s;uch as will <HI>trample and de&s;pi&s;e them.</HI> And though it is true, that &s;ometimes there may be &s;uch a <HI>De&s;perate oppo&s;ition again&s;t Preaching,</HI> as that this &s;entence will forbid a man to <HI>preach any longer</HI> to &s;uch: As your Texts, <HI>Mat.</HI> 10.24. <HI>Acts</HI> 13.46, 51. doe indeed prove. (But <HI>Mark.</HI> 16.15, 16. hath nothing at all to that purpo&s;e but only &s;peaks of the dam|nation of ob&s;tinate unbeleevers,) yet this is rare. And in this
<PB N="15" REF="9">ca&s;e I will grant, &s;uch are not to be preaent to, but kept away what one can; but no others are &s;o in regard of the word. But a man that is infallibly and gro&s;ly <HI>ignorant</HI> of the principles of Religion; or notoriou&s;ly <HI>&s;candalous</HI> and impenitent in it, is to this Ordinance of the Sacrament, a <HI>dog</HI> or a <HI>&s;wine,</HI> as certainly di&s;honouring Chri&s;t and mi&s;chieving his own &s;oul, if he communicate; as a Pagan (who hath nothing to do with Chri&s;t;) and therefore &s;uch a <HI>holy thing</HI> &s;uch a <HI>pearl</HI> is not to be given or ca&s;t to &s;uch. 3 Though the word profit not where faith is wanting, <HI>Heb.</HI> 4.2 yet this is not meant where faith is not already; for then it &s;hould profit none ordina|rily, all being without faith till by preaching, the Spirit of God work it in them; and therfore it is to be preacht to men that want faith, that they may want it no longer: but ignorant per&s;ons have certainly no faith, and impenitents have either none or u&s;e none while impenitents, and &s;o cannot profit by the Sacrament, becau&s;e they cannot &s;eed upon Chri&s;t, and therefore may not be admitted to the Sacramentall eating of the Bread and Wine to the provo|king of Chri&s;t, and further undoing their own &s;oules. 4 Finally, though the word unprofitably heard, (that is, <HI>finally,</HI> to the end of a mans life) encrea&s;es and aggravates his &s;innes and becomes the &s;a|vour of death to death, to &s;uch unworthy receivers of it; yet be|cau&s;e, as the Apo&s;tle told us, there is &s;till a <HI>peradventure</HI> that God may give even to tho&s;e that oppo&s;e them&s;elves now, repentance hereafter, and accordingly he therefore charges &s;till to <HI>in&s;truct in meekne&s;&s;e</HI> even &s;uch; till they come to be open and ob&s;tinate bla&s;|phemers, they mu&s;t be preacht to: But no &s;uch hopes being given nor charge towards unworthy receivers of the Sacrament: Mini|&s;ters and Elders mu&s;t refu&s;e them till they appear to be of a better minde. And this leads to your fourth Que&s;tion.</P>
<P>Which is (&s;ummarily) <HI>Whether &s;uch may bee denied the Sacra|ment, who profe&s;&s;e &s;incere repentance, and promi&s;e newne&s;&s;e of life?</HI> (here again you interpo&s;e <HI>not being excommanicated,</HI> and if he <HI>de&s;ire to receive,</HI> and the <HI>Mini&s;ters private opinion;</HI> to all which it is need|le&s;&s;e to &s;peak again, having done it &s;ufficiently already:) To which you premi&s;e fundry Arguments to prove the negative; and &s;ome follow to refell the affirmative. I will fir&s;t an&s;wer your Que&s;tion, then con&s;ider your Arguments on both hands. To your Que&s;tion then <HI>I</HI> &s;ay 1. if he <HI>profe&s;&s;e his &s;incere repentance, &amp;c.</HI> in &s;uch a manner
<PB N="16" REF="10">as according to the Rules of Chri&s;t the Mini&s;ter and Elders, and tho&s;e that know the &s;candall are bound to beleeve that he doth <HI>&s;in|cerely repent;</HI> none ought to keep him back, and if he were excom|municated, he ought to be ab&s;olv'd, and received again into the Church without delay, as &s;oon as &s;uch repentance appeares. 2 But if you mean his <HI>bare &s;aying &s;o much</HI> without further &s;ign of Repen|tance, or only &s;uch &s;ign as according to the nature of the crime; no rationall man can &s;ay it is a &s;ufficient proof of repentance; the ca&s;e is otherwi&s;e foradultery, or ince&s;t, or bla&s;phemy, there mu&s;t &s;urely be &s;uch a &s;en&s;e of the &s;inne manife&s;ted, &s;uch a taking heed of the occa&s;ions, and the like, as may make it probable that he intends to keep his promi&s;e of a <HI>new life:</HI> or el&s;e it will be a meer mockery for any one to be called before the Elder&s;hip for any &s;candall; for a word &s;hall excu&s;e and acquit them, although perhaps before they came thither, they told their companions, that they meant not to keep any &s;uch promi&s;e; and if this be told to the Elder&s;hip, yet they mu&s;t take his &s;ingle and bare word that he is &s;orry for tho&s;e &s;peeches as well as for his other fault; and &s;o it mu&s;t be twenty times one after another: Which, I &s;ay, were to turn all Church Di&s;cipline into a Ridiculous Folly, and a hardning of &s;inners rather then doing any good upon them.</P>
<P>Yet for this you &s;eem to argue with many rea&s;ons. 1 <HI>God a|lone knowes the heart, and who are his.</HI>] An&s;. They are the Scrip|tures words, but mi&s;applyed in this ca&s;e. 1 <HI>Chron</HI> 6.30. &s;peaks of a mans <HI>&s;ecret prayers to God,</HI> not of proving or approving Repen|tance towards men. 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 4.19. &s;peaks of <HI>Gods knowing his elect,</HI> and not at all that men are not to judge of mens repentance; rather the next words plead for this <HI>[let every one that names the name of Chri&s;t, depart from iniquity]</HI> implying that he who doth not &s;o in his behaviour, cannot be owned <HI>among men,</HI> among Chri&s;tians, as belonging to Chri&s;t, whatever he may be in <HI>Gods &s;ecret Decree.</HI> This then confirmes the Elder&s;hips power of judgeing <HI>by his de|parting or not departing from iniquity,</HI> and not <HI>by bare and &s;leight words only.</HI> Would you in the forementioned ca&s;e of the wicked woman, have taken a few words as a &s;ufficient proof of repentance, without great proof of &s;orrow, and dete&s;tation of her &s;elfe for &s;o horrid a wickedne&s;&s;e? 2 You &s;ay, <HI>Mini&s;ters know not the heart, nor who are Gods, but may oft deem tho&s;e worthy communicants who
<PB N="17" REF="10">are not, (as clo&s;e hypocrites, &amp;c.) and tho&s;e unworthy which are not,</HI> 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 16.5. <HI>to</HI> 14. An&s;. You &s;eem not to be afraid of <HI>judgeing tho&s;e worthy that are not;</HI> when &s;o &s;leight a matter as a <HI>profe&s;&s;ion of repentance,</HI> without mention of any fignes, mu&s;t &s;uffice to count them worthy, becau&s;e <HI>God knowes the heart, not Mini&s;ters.</HI> But Mini&s;ters and Elders are to judge as the Apo&s;tle directs <HI>Timothy,</HI> 1 Tim. 5. Somemens &s;innes are manife&s;t before-hand, and go be|fore to judgement (and &s;o their good) and &s;ome follow after that is, according to apparant proofe offering it &s;elfe, or di&s;covered by time, or enquiry, &s;o the judgement ought to be. <HI>Samuels</HI> judge|ing was not by any words or &s;hewes of good but by a <HI>bodily comeline&s;&s;e,</HI> and it was a peculiar Office; that hinders not but Mini|&s;ters and Elders may judge by mens lives, whether they be worthy of the ordinary priviledges of Chri&s;tians. They are blamele&s;&s;e if they admit only clo&s;e hypocrites, becau&s;e God only can judge of them. But men may judge competently of mens <HI>be haviours,</HI> el&s;e why &s;ayth the Apo&s;tle, <HI>Do not ye judge them that are within?</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.12. and that known Text. <HI>By their fruiis you &s;hall know them;</HI> and if they judge by proof and tokens, and fruits of repentance, ac|cording to the word, they will hardly judge any unworthy who are not, though this be the great Fear alledged again&s;t them.</P>
<P N="3">3. You &s;ay, <HI>God can fuddenly change the heart in a moment, be|fore a Mini&s;ter can take notice of it, Act.</HI> 9.3. to 28.] A. God can, but what is this to your purpo&s;e? By this Argument, there needs not Judges, with the Elders, of tho&s;e that are within, then &s;urely they mu&s;t goe according to &s;ufficient <HI>outward expre&s;&s;ions,</HI> and not ima|gine that God hath turned any ones heart, before others can take notice of it. And your In&s;tance of <HI>Sauls (Pauls)</HI> conver&s;ion clears it. Indeed there were no Mini&s;ters by, when he was &s;truck down; But when Chri&s;t &s;ent <HI>Ananias</HI> to him after a &s;econd charge to goe, he was faine to avouch him a cho&s;en Ve&s;&s;ell; and after that the Church at Jeru&s;alem dur&s;t not own him, till <HI>Barnabas</HI> brought him to the Apo&s;tles, and bare witne&s;&s;e that he had preacht Chri&s;t at <HI>Dama&s;cus.</HI> And when &s;inners expre&s;&s;e any &s;igne of Repentance like this (though they were converted before any took notice of it) blame them that refu&s;e them. But in the meane time, I pray. give leave to Mini&s;ters, the <HI>Stewards of Chri&s;ts My&s;teries</HI> (of
<PB N="18" REF="11">whom it is <HI>required that they be found faithfull</HI>) that they be &s;o jealous over Chri&s;tians with a godly jealou&s;ie, and &s;o zealous for Chri&s;ts honour (the honour of his Death &s;hewed forth in the Sa|crament) as not to beleeve or judge them worthy, who have &s;hewed them&s;elves unworthy, upon <HI>a po&s;&s;ibility that God can turn their hearts in an in&s;tant;</HI> which is &s;o farre from a <HI>Godly jealou&s;ie</HI> or zeale, that there cannot lightly be a greater <HI>Carele&s;ne&s;&s;e</HI> or <HI>Lukewarmne&s;&s;e</HI> imaginable.</P>
<P N="4">4. You &s;ay, [<HI>We mu&s;t not cen&s;oriou&s;ly judge one another, becau&s;e we &s;tand or fall to our own Ma&s;ter, Mat.</HI> 7.1. <HI>Luk.</HI> 6.37. <HI>Rom.</HI> 14.4. <HI>to</HI> 15.] It is true, but very impertinently alledged: Your Texts <HI>Mat.</HI> 7 and <HI>Luk</HI> 6. forbid only private judging, without or be|yond ju&s;t cau&s;e, as to judge a man ill who &s;eems good; or judge ill, when it is as po&s;&s;ible he meant well as ill; or to judge a man a wicked unregenerate for a particular failing, or a man to be a Re|probate becau&s;e he yet &s;hewes no repentance, and the like; it is &s;uch judging as this that is forbidden, not all judging, unle&s;&s;e you will make void (as I am &s;ure you will not) all <HI>Civill Iudicature,</HI> as well as all Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall. And <HI>Rom.</HI> 14. &s;peaks only of judging men as uncon&s;cionable, or not &s;ound Chri&s;tians, for forbearing or u&s;ing Chri&s;tian Liberty about dayes and meats and &s;uch like; not at all of judging men in an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudicatory (no more then Civill) for open &s;candals and impenitency: which al&s;o ap|peares by the words next after tho&s;e you name, <HI>yea he &s;hall be holden up,</HI> which you will not, I think, affirme offcandalous &s;inners. God hath not promi&s;ed to uphold or recover &s;uch, as he hath to uphold weak &s;crupulous Con&s;ciences, that do (or do not) things to him, and not to them&s;elves: Therefore all the &s;trength of this Argu|ment lies in the word <HI>Cen&s;orious,</HI> which I deny can be truly urged again&s;t the Elder&s;hips cen&s;uring &s;candals upon proofe, and not re|ceiving without &s;ufficient proofe of Repentance.</P>
<P N="5">5. You goe on (and &s;o doe I) [<HI>None mu&s;t quench the &s;moaking flax, or break the brui&s;ed Reed; nor di&s;courage weak Chri&s;tians by overmuch rigor or indi&s;cretion, Mat.</HI> 12.20. <HI>Rom.</HI> 14.] An&s;w. Very good But will you &s;ay, that every one that barely &s;aith, he doth &s;incerely repent, and promi&s;es to lead a new life, is a brui&s;ed Reed, or &s;moaking flax? or that to require a rationall proofe of Repentance for an undeniable &s;candall (perhaps very gro&s;&s;e) is to
<PB N="19" REF="11">di&s;courage weak Chri&s;tians by overmuch rigour and indi&s;cretion? You will remember (I am &s;ure Mini&s;ters and Elders mu&s;t) that of <HI>Prov.</HI> 17.15. <HI>He that ju&s;tifiet the wicked, and he that condemnes the ju&s;t, even they both are an abomination to the Lord;</HI> the one as well as the other.</P>
<P N="6">6. But you adde <HI>[Every Communicant is bound to examine him|&s;elfe, which he be&s;t knowes (not others peremptorily to examine him)</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 13.5. <HI>Gal.</HI> 6.4, 5.] I an&s;wer. Fir&s;t, a mans being bound to examine him&s;elfe is no Exclu&s;ive in &s;uch matters as fall within the cogni&s;ance of other men; But it is a precept to every man for his Con&s;cience within, after all the examination and ap|probation of others. Secondly, withall it is not univer&s;ally true, <HI>That a man is be&s;t known to him&s;elfe.</HI> For the Apo&s;tle &s;aith of &s;ome, that <HI>they mea&s;uring them&s;elves by them&s;elves, and comparing them|&s;elves among them&s;elves, are not wi&s;e,</HI> 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10.12. And <HI>Solomon</HI> &s;peaks to the &s;ame purpo&s;e more then once; <HI>The rich man is wi&s;e in his owne conceit, but his neighbour comes and &s;earches him, Prov.</HI> 28.11. <HI>There is a generation that are pure in their owne eyes, and yet are not clen&s;ed from their filthine&s;&s;e, Prov.</HI> 30.12. And there is nothing more certaine among men, then that many wicked per|&s;ons, think they have &s;ufficiently repented, and have faith in Chri&s;t and love to God, when the contrary to all this is more then appa|rant. Thirdly, are there not Duties, which even private Chri|&s;tians, much more Mini&s;ters (and Elder&s;hips) &s;tand obliged unto towards wicked men, and impenitent &s;inners? And if &s;o, then certainly they may <HI>peremptorily</HI> (that is confidently and undoub|tedly) judge &s;uch, and accordingly examine them in &s;uch ca&s;es as they may meddle in; and your other cited Texts &s;ay not a &s;yllable to the contrary: For, as for 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 13.5. S. <HI>Panl</HI> expre&s;ly in that chapter, and the &s;oregoing threatens to cen&s;ure (even &s;harply) ma|ny among the Corinthians; which que&s;tionle&s;&s;e he never meant without &s;trict (and if you li&s;t to call it &s;o, <HI>poremptory</HI>) examination And &s;aith he, not clearly, 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 13.1 <HI>In the mouth of two or three witne&s;&s;es every word&s;hall be e&s;tabli&s;hed?</HI> Even while he is &s;peaking of <HI>his not &s;paring them</HI> when he came again? As for <HI>Gat.</HI> 6. the very fir&s;t ver&s;e confutes your exclu&s;ive glo<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="3 letters"> upon v. 4. and For how can I (or any) <HI>re&s;tore with the spirit of meekne&s;&s;e one that is fallen through infirmity</HI> if I may not peremptorily examine his fact and
<PB N="20" REF="12">offence? If I meddle at all with him being fallen, I may call that an <HI>Infirmity,</HI> which is an <HI>Enormity,</HI> if I examine him not, and others too perhaps about him: I may &s;peak peace, when God &s;peaks none. And I pray, if I give the Sacrament to one whom by all Rules of the Word I cannot but judge impenitent, doe not I really <HI>preach Pcace,</HI> when God &s;aith <HI>there is no peace</HI> to him? And offer him that as an actuall &s;eal that he is forgiven, when God declares to me in his Word, that &s;uch a man is not forgiven, while he &s;o goes on in his &s;inne, as in not forgiving another, or the like?</P>
<P N="7">7. What you adde, [<HI>That every One is to beare his own &s;inne, not anothers, in which he is no partaker, Gal.</HI> 6.4, 5. <HI>Exek.</HI> 33.1, <HI>to</HI> 20. <HI>Ezek</HI> 18.4. <HI>to</HI> 21.] advances your Cau&s;e nothing. For how can a Mini&s;ter avoide being <HI>partaker of anothers &s;inne,</HI> which is notoriou&s;ly &s;candalous, if hee (with the Elder&s;hip) u&s;e not the Power which God hath given them, <HI>(to edification and not to de|&s;truction)</HI> to cen&s;ure tho&s;e that refu&s;e to repent, as unworthy to partake of the Seale of forgivene&s;&s;e, and tho&s;e that &s;o abu&s;e the grace of Chri&s;t as vi&s;ibly to continue in &s;inne, as unworthy to partake of the vi&s;ible Pledges of that Grace of his? To <HI>Gal.</HI> 6. I have an&s;wered already; and your &s;elfe an&s;wers the Texts in <HI>Ezekiel,</HI> by putting in <HI>[in which he is no partaker.]</HI></P>
<P N="8">8. But you have one thing more, [<HI>Every Christian when he is invited to the Sacrament, is bound under paine of &s;inne and con|tempt, to receive it,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. <HI>Heb.</HI> 10.29.] I an&s;wer: If you mean, That <HI>though he be, and re&s;olve to be impenitent,</HI> he is bound to re|ceive; how &s;aid you above. That a Mini&s;ters duty is <HI>&s;eriou&s;ly to dehort</HI> &s;uch as he deemes unworthy, not to receive till they be|come more fit to participate, under paine of eating and drinking their own damnation and other judgements that will follow there|on? Is it a Mini&s;ters duty to <HI>dehort</HI> a man from his Duty, and to threaten with damnation, other and judgements to forbeare, when he is bound under paine of &s;in and contempt to receive? If you &s;ay, No, he is not bound to receive being impenitent, but rather bound not to receive till he becomes more fit: But that he is bound to repent (to examine him&s;elf, that he may repent) and then to come under paines, &amp;c. I &s;ay &s;o too. And from thence inferre, That the Mini&s;ters and Elders, who are by Chri&s;t made Governours in his Church to judge tho&s;e that are within, are to keepe him that is
<PB N="21" REF="12">apparantly unworthy and manife&s;ts not repentance, from eating and drinking his own damnation, when they &s;ee he offers to doe it: And when they &s;ee him penitent, they are to urge him to come to receive the Seale of his Pardon, under paine of &s;inne and con|tempt, if they &s;ee him backward to it, or doubtfull about it. As for your Texts, that in 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11. hath often been &s;poken to; and <HI>Heb.</HI> 10.29. is very &s;trangely cited to your &s;cope; for I be&s;eech you, is the <HI>not receiving the Sacrament,</HI> (even when a man voluntarily neglects it, through &s;ome &s;infull di&s;temper) <HI>a treading under foot the Sonne of God? or counting the blood of the Covenant wherewith he was &s;anctified, an unholy thing? or a doing despite unto the Spirit of Grace?</HI> (which are the Apo&s;tles phra&s;es there:) Or ra|ther is not <HI>unworthy receiving,</HI> which is expre&s;&s;ely &s;aid to be a be|ing <HI>guilty of Chri&s;ts body and blood,</HI> nearer to that horrid wicked|ne&s;&s;e he &s;peaks of? Though I am farre from &s;aying, that every unworthy Communicant is guilty of &s;uch prodigious impiety. But I ask againe, which of the two in the Scripture language and account comes the nearer to it? If the place had any rela|tion in &s;peciall to the Sacrament, I &s;hould not doubt to &s;ay, but the <HI>&s;candalous Communicant</HI> were much &s;ooner meant, then even the <HI>prophane forbearer.</HI> And thus I have an&s;wered your Argu|ments which lead in your Que&s;tion, and whereby you would prove the Negative: and withall part of your refutation of the Affirmative. The re&s;t I &s;hall di&s;patch briefly.</P>
<P N="9">9. You &s;ay, <HI>[He eats and drinks damnation to him&s;elfe, not to the Minister or the other Communicants;]</HI> An&s;. Not to the Mini&s;ter or other Communicants: Fir&s;t, If his &s;inne be unknown: Second|ly, If his &s;inne be unproved: Thirdly, If hee make &s;uch &s;hew of repentance (though God knowes it to be counterfeit) that by the rules of the Word, he is to be judged penitent: Fourthly, If the other Communicants have done their duties to bring him to re|pentance, or have him kept back: Fi&s;thly, If the Mini&s;ter doe what lies in him to keep him back, by judging him for his part ac|cording to ju&s;t proo&s;e. But <HI>to the Mini&s;ter al&s;o</HI> (and the Com|municants in their degree) if he willingly con&s;ent to his com|ming, by re&s;u&s;ing or forbearing to u&s;e his part of power Chri&s;t hath entru&s;ted him with, to keep unworthy ones back; and if the Communicants help not the Mini&s;ter in a fitting manner to debarre them.</P>
<P N="10"><PB N="22" REF="13">10. This is not di&s;proved by your &s;aying, <HI>[he &s;hall only beare his own burthen, and give an account of him&s;elfe to God, Gal.</HI> 6.4, 5. <HI>Rom.</HI> 14.12.] For the Word <HI>[only]</HI> is your addition to the Text of <HI>Gal.</HI> 6. And no other Text in Scripture, I &s;peak it per|emptorily, hath any &s;uch exclu&s;ive as to di&s;charge other men from doing their duties to reclaime impenitents, by &s;haming them, and hindring them from that which would harden them in their &s;innes. Neither is the Word, <HI>only,</HI> in the Text, or &s;ence of <HI>Rom.</HI> 14.12. relating to undeniable &s;innes, or open proofe of repentance or impenitence but only to his inward con&s;cienciou&s;|ne&s;&s;e in u&s;ing or forbearing Chri&s;tian Liberty about meats and dayes (as was toucht before) of that a man only &s;hall give account for him&s;elfe to God and not for another: But in open matters, I am &s;ure there were that had the <HI>rule over</HI> Chri&s;tians, &s;ome that <HI>Watch for their &s;ouls as tho&s;e that mu&s;t give an account, Heb.</HI> 13.17. And tho&s;e, I &s;uppo&s;e, were the Mini&s;ters and Elders: And the Word hath not taken that office from them &s;ince.</P>
<P N="11">11. And whereas you &s;ay. <HI>[The Admini&s;tration is only the Mini|&s;ters Act, which is a holy and Divine In&s;titution, the unworthy parti|cipation the Parties own iniquity,]</HI> I an&s;wer, fir&s;t, that there is no &s;uch In&s;titution that a Mini&s;ter mu&s;t admini&s;ter it to all baptized per&s;ons that offer to come, and promi&s;e to leade a new life. Shew me &s;uch an In&s;titution, and I yeeld you the whole cau&s;e: But this <HI>I am certaine you can never doe</HI> (to returne you your own words above) neither expre&s;&s;ely nor by any Scripture-con&s;equence. For if &s;o, then no man may be at all Excommunicated, or kept from the Sacrament, by any power left to any on earth; Which yet you have not offered to a&s;&s;ert, what ever your Arguments have &s;eemed to in&s;inuate. As for the Parallel of <HI>unworthy communicating</HI> with <HI>unworthy hearing,</HI> I have already &s;poken I &s;uppo&s;e, enough to it: and &s;o &s;hall not multiply more words about it at this time.</P>
<P>I have done with your <HI>Que&s;tions.</HI> But have &s;omething to &s;ay to your <HI>Conclu&s;ion,</HI> wherein your confidence and language ri&s;es high, and you lay load enough upon that &s;ort of men, <HI>Who have not yet put off their prophe&s;ying in Sack-cloth,</HI> What ever others have done. In your Title and Preface, the A&s;&s;embly is &s;tiled by you, <HI>Reverend</HI> and <HI>Venerable:</HI> But now (as St. <HI>Paul</HI> &s;peaks of him&s;elfe, that hee was <HI>as unknown and yet well known</HI>) they are to you, only, <HI>&s;ome men
<PB N="23" REF="13">that pretend to &s;uch a large unlimited Eccle&s;iasticall power,</HI> as you <HI>cannot di&s;cern any &s;haddow of rea&s;on, why any godly Mini&s;ter &s;hould ever earne&s;tly contend for it; much le&s;&s;e, that any of them &s;hould re|&s;olve to give over their Mini&s;ter, to which Chri&s;t hath called them unle&s;&s;e they can obtain &s;uch a power from the Parliament as neither Chri&s;t nor his Apostles, nor the Primitive Chri&s;tians in the pure&s;t times did ever exerci&s;e.</HI> For are you, or can you be Ignorant that in all this you &s;trike at the A&s;&s;embly, the whole body? who as an A&s;&s;embly have pre&s;ented their humble Advices and de&s;ires to the Honourable Hou&s;es; and no other per&s;ons (that I know of) have formally appeared about the largene&s;&s;e and unlimitedne&s;&s;e of the power to keep per&s;ons &s;candalous, or ignorant, from the Sacra|ment, but the A&s;&s;embly only And they only, (of which I &s;hall now give the World &s;ome account, &s;ince you have made &s;o publike a com|plaint of it,) tendring their humble de&s;ires in a late petition, were the men that expre&s;&s;ed their &s;ad &s;traight (in ca&s;e &amp;c.) and humble re&s;olution accordingly. Vnhappy men, (&s;ure) that contend &s;o long, &s;o over earne&s;tly, with &s;uch an unfitting re&s;olution for that which you cannot <HI>&s;ee any &s;haddow of rea&s;on for,</HI> and which <HI>Christ nor his A|po&s;tles, nor the Primitive Church in the pure&s;t times, did ever exer|ci&s;e?</HI> But I &s;uppo&s;e that all men are not of your mind, and that &s;ome of our Readers, that were &s;o partly heretofore, have by this time &s;eene &s;omewhat more then a <HI>&s;hadow of rea&s;on</HI> for what the A&s;&s;embly hath de&s;ired, and I have now pleaded. And that though Chri&s;t did not in per&s;on exerci&s;e any power of Su&s;pen&s;ion or Ex|communication at all, nor the Apo&s;tles frequently that we read of: Yet both Chri&s;t and his Apo&s;tles have given &s;o faire grounds and directions for as much as is de&s;ired in either kinde of cen&s;ure and that the records of the Primitive Church in the pure&s;t times &s;peak &s;o probably for the exerci&s;e of it in tho&s;e dayes, as that they will rather wonder <HI>at your confident oppo&s;ition,</HI> &s;pecially in &s;uch a &s;ea&s;on as this, then <HI>at their de&s;ires or re&s;olution.</HI> Which lat|ter, was not by them rudely taken up or affectedly expre&s;t; but up|on the nature of the bu&s;ine&s;&s;e in hand, and the pre&s;&s;ure upon their con&s;ciences to di&s;charge their duties in &s;peaking out the full truth before it were too late. They had before their eyes how extreamly Chri&s;t is di&s;honoured, by tho&s;e that pretend to honour him; how de&s;perately &s;uch wound and de&s;troy their &s;oules, with that which
<PB N="24" REF="14">they pretend and expect to receive for their eterhall good: That this being generall throughout the Nation, and no &s;ufficient pro|vi&s;ion again&s;t it, mu&s;t needs be a Nationall &s;inne, bringing and continuing Nationall judgements: That God hath brought the Nation, (that part among whom we are) into a &s;olemn and &s;a|cred Covenant <HI>of Reformation according to the Word of God and the example of the be&s;t Reformed Churches, and to endeavour by all weanes the reoting out of prophanne&s;&s;e and what&s;oever is contrary to the power of godline&s;&s;e.</HI> To effect this, they &s;aw no way appointed by God nor po&s;&s;ible in rea&s;on, if the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Power of tho&s;e whom Chri&s;t hath fet in his Church to govern it, be limit|ted &s;o, as that &s;eandalous per&s;ons of all &s;orts cannot be kept away. From all which they concluded, that to &s;it down under a parti|all Reformation, as contented with it (now &s;pecially when Gods Iudgements &s;till &s;hew he is in no wife contented with what wee have yet done,) would be to betray the Cau&s;e of God, &amp; the hopes of all the People of God, that have groaned and wept &s;o long for a through Reformation, and &s;pecially in this particular: and withall to expo&s;e many thou&s;ands of &s;oules to the danger of be|ing drawn away to &s;chi&s;me and here&s;ie (al&s;o Covenanted again&s;t:) The Fautors &amp; Agents of which have never had any &s;uch &s;ucce&s;&s;e|full engine to draw many well affected fouls to them, as the plea|ding our want of the exerci&s;e of this power in our Congregations. therefore after their &s;undry humble Petitions and Solicitations for the &s;etling of this due Power by the Authority of Parliament; They &s;aw no other way left them to beare &s;ufficient and full wit|ne&s;&s;e to the truth, then by keeping them&s;elves from acting in &s;uch a Government as would be &s;o un&s;utable to Chri&s;ts will, to the end of Government, and the expectation of the World after &s;o ma|ny profe&s;&s;ions, and &s;uch a Covenant of Reformation. And being nece&s;&s;icated to re&s;olve thus (in ca&s;e &amp;c.) they could doe no le&s;&s;e then acquaint the Honourable Hou&s;es therewith, that &s;o none might &s;ay hereafter, that had they declared &s;o much in time they might have obtained their defires. And herein, &s;o many as wholly condemn not their de&s;ires, I &s;uppo&s;e, will not think them &s;o farre mi&s;taken in their re&s;olution or the expre&s;&s;ion of it, as you &s;ee me to doe.</P>
<P>Two words more with you, and I have done. You &s;ay, <HI>Mo|darata
<PB N="25" REF="14">durent.</HI> What is the Engli&s;h of this? I meane, how agrees this <HI>Item</HI> with your arguing upon your <HI>Quaere's?</HI> For if you have &s;aid right, (&s;pecially on your &s;econd, third, and fourth <HI>Qua|re's</HI>) there ought to be no <HI>Moderation,</HI> but a rotall <HI>Abolition</HI> of all Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Bower both of &s;u&s;pen&s;ion from the Sacrament, and of Excommunication too: If I under&s;tand you, your arguments confute all, or none. For, I be&s;eech you, which of all your cea|&s;ons or proofes admit of <HI>Excommunication,</HI> and not of <HI>Su&s;pen&s;ion?</HI> Or which admits of excluding for <HI>any one &s;candall,</HI> how great &s;o|ever, which doth not for <HI>all &s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">andals</HI> proved and per&s;i&s;ted in? Or how will you an&s;wer any one of your owne arguments a <HI>ge|nerall unlimited power,</HI> if it be urged again&s;t you, even for the <HI>&s;even &s;candals already voted against?</HI> (Ince&s;t, for in&s;tance, or Murder, or Bla&s;phemy?) And what roome then for <HI>advi&s;e of moderation</HI> among &s;uch arguments? But &s;hall I tell you my heart concer|ning that motion you make in tho&s;e words, and the argument couched in them? And it is among the deepe&s;t thoughts I have, concerning this Matter and this Age. Mr. <HI>Brightman</HI> (who&s;e In|terpretations of <HI>Revel.</HI> 3. concerning <HI>Sardis</HI> and <HI>Laodicea,</HI> have been to Admiration, and neare to Propheticall) makes <HI>England,</HI> as you know, the Anti-type of the latter: Surely whoever thinks he is at all in the right therein, and withall have &s;eene that luke|warme Angell &s;o &s;trangely &s;pewed out, almo&s;t to the de&s;truction of the whole State, (through the difficultie of it joyned to the ne|ce&s;&s;itie,) ought to take &s;peciall heed, that they them&s;elves degene|rate not into like luke-warmne&s;&s;e; which if you can &s;hew mee how it can be avoyded under &s;uch a <HI>limited Presbyterie,</HI> as &s;hall have no power to cen&s;ure <HI>all</HI> &s;candals, <HI>Eris mihi magnus Apollo,</HI> you &s;hall be next an Oracle to me. Mean time I only add, that, though I will yeeld to no man (no not to your &s;elfe) in my Reve|rentiall regard to the Honourable Hou&s;es of Parliament; yet, I &s;ay, that it can be neither the Authoritie of Man, nor the Reputa|tion or E&s;teem of their Wi&s;dom or Pietie, that can <HI>&s;atisie Con&s;ci|ences</HI> in any other <HI>Boundarie</HI> than the Word of God &s;ets, to pre|vent Scandall and Prophanene&s;&s;e in People (and Mini&s;ters too) and Tyranny and Oppre&s;&s;ion of mens Con&s;ciences in the Pre&s;|bytetie. And, if I had lea&s;ure to look over &s;ome books, that you have been acquainted with in the Prelaticall times, I am confi|dent
<PB N="26" REF="15">I could &s;hew you like A&s;&s;ertions to this in other ca&s;es.</P>
<P>My Hopes and Prayers are with God, That hee will make the Parliament Honourable and Happie (above all other things) in this great work for his Glorie, his Sons Kingdome, and his Peo|ples Soules and Comforts. And my &s;peciall con&s;olation is in that Propheticall Sentence, <HI>I&s;ai.</HI> 33. <HI>The LORD is our Iudge, the LORD is our Law-give, the LORD it our King, Hee will &s;ave us.</HI> Amen, Amen.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="postscript">
<HEAD>A Po&s;t&s;cript concerning a &s;econd Edition of the&s;e foure Que&s;tions.</HEAD>
<P>VVHen I had well nigh fini&s;hed this An&s;wer to your foure Que&s;tions, with the Preface and Conclu&s;ion, I was &s;hewed a &s;econd Edition, with &s;ome alterations. I wondred in many re&s;pects at the former, but in &s;ome, much more at this &s;e|cond: Of which I &s;hall now give you a briefe account, that nei|ther you nor our Readers may complaine of mee, as carele&s;&s;e or injurious.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, you have now Engli&s;hed your Quotations of <HI>Aretius</HI> in your Preface, and fir&s;t que&s;tion, which while it &s;tood in Latine, I over-lookt in my An&s;wer. But now I mu&s;t needs take a little no|tice of it. As for his fir&s;t &s;entence, may it not be true of all exer|ci&s;e, even of civill authoritie? Yet he &s;hould (ju&s;tly) incur your blame, that would u&s;e &s;uch language to bla&s;t any lawfull autho|ritie (and if this Ecclefia&s;ticall pleaded for be not lawfull, no danger of a bu&s;e mu&s;t limit it, but the intrin&s;ecall evill of it, mu&s;t reject it altogether,) 2. Next, your Author him&s;elfe &s;eemes to wi&s;h it, while he would not have men <HI>despaire of re&s;toring it.</HI> If it be &s;o dangerous or evill, as &s;ome would make it, it is the object of Feare and Hatred, not of De&s;ire or De&s;paire. 3. Hee layes the blame on mens manners, that will not &s;ubmit to &s;uch a di&s;ci|pline. This commends the Di&s;cipline, though it blame the oppo|&s;ers of it. When <HI>David</HI> &s;hould have puni&s;ht <HI>Joabs</HI> murther of <HI>Abner,</HI> he &s;aith the &s;ons of <HI>Zerviah</HI> were too hard for him. This commends ju&s;tice, though it could not then be executed. 4. As for his la&s;t clau&s;e, you were (it &s;eemes) willing to make your Readers merrie in the&s;e &s;ad times; and yet (I doubt) his double
<PB N="27" REF="15">metaphor of <HI>Mus</HI> and <HI>Spongia</HI> joyned together, will mar the mirth of mo&s;t that look on it, unle&s;&s;e they be &s;o wi&s;e as to laugh at they know not what. 5. But were <HI>Aretius</HI> never &s;o fully yours in all the Que&s;ti|ons (which he is not) though I de&s;pi&s;e him not, yet hee cannot over|weigh, nor counter-ballance <HI>Calvin, Beza,</HI> and others that have writ|ten clearly and &s;trongly for us. Muchle&s;&s;e is he to be oppo&s;ed to all the Reformed Churches, who are &s;o abundantly knowne to have for ma|ny &s;cores of yeares practi&s;ed, what we are now labouring for.</P>
<P>Secondly, next I find you have in&s;erted &s;ome words in divers pa&s;|&s;ages, which &s;o far as I under&s;tand them, do exceedingly alter the &s;en&s;e, and the &s;tate of your Que&s;tions. As fir&s;t in your &s;econd Que|&s;tion, after the&s;e words, <HI>Not actually excommunicated for &s;ome notorious &s;candall upon a legall conviction;</HI> you add, <HI>Or judicially accu&s;ed, Pen|dente lite.</HI> Secondly, afterward Que&s;t. 4. after the words, <HI>Not actually excommunicated,</HI> you add again, <HI>Or judicially accu&s;ed of &s;ome gro&s;&s;e &s;can|dall, Pendente lite.</HI> And thirdly in your conclu&s;ion, whereas before you &s;aid, <HI>Not actually excommunicated;</HI> now you &s;ay <HI>Not actually, or preparatorily, excommunicated.</HI> What do you, or can you meane by this, which de&s;troyes what the re&s;t of your paper builds, or builds what that de&s;troyes. Do you not, to any Readers under&s;tanding, &s;eeme, <HI>not to argue again&s;t keeping &s;uch from the Sacrament, who are ju|dicially accu&s;ed, Pendente lite.</HI> And is not this to <HI>grant &s;u&s;pen&s;ion from the Sacrament, before excommunication?</HI> Let but us obtaine this power, with relation to <HI>all</HI> &s;candals, to keep away &s;uch as are <HI>judicially accu|&s;ed, Pendente lite,</HI> and we will promi&s;e you to ask no more. Have you not then with this da&s;h of your pen yeelded us our whole cau&s;e? and been a <HI>Spongia,</HI> to cen&s;ure your paper, <HI>un&acirc; litur<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">?</HI> Againe, What is to be <HI>preparatorily excommunicated,</HI> but <HI>&s;u&s;pended?</HI> You pretend not to argue again&s;t that: We de&s;ired no more. Shall wee be friends then? And will you be entertained of our Coun&s;ell, to plead our Cau&s;e, &s;o far as the&s;e new in&s;erted phra&s;es will beare? If &s;o, I &s;hall love a &s;econd Edition, (<GAP DESC="foreign">) the better as long as I live. Fourthly, you interpo&s;e the&s;e words neere the end of pag. 3. [<HI>Everie Christian hath a right to the Sacrament,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10.4, 5, 16, 17, 18. <HI>Mat.</HI> 26.27.] I an&s;wer: An <HI>Originall Right,</HI> no man denies; as everie free-borne &s;ubject hath a right to go abroad to the market or el&s;ewhere, without re&s;traint; and &s;ue for debts, and challenge the protection of the Laws: But you will not &s;ay, but he may forfeit this right for a time, he may
<PB N="28" REF="16">de&s;erve to be bani&s;ht, outlawed, impri&s;oned; and impri&s;oned for &s;ome accu&s;ations, even upon &s;u&s;pition. In like &s;ort may a man for&s;eit his right to the Sacrament for a time, &s;o as to be bani&s;ht (excommu|nicated) or re&s;trained of this &s;pirituall libertie, by &s;u&s;pen&s;ion, which if in &s;ome ca&s;es it may not be, even for &s;u&s;pition, yet at lea&s;t upon un|que&s;tionable proofes of &s;candalous practices. Neither do the Text you cite gain-&s;ay this. For though <HI>all the I&s;raelites,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10. are &s;aid to <HI>eat of the &s;ame &s;pirituall meat, and to drink of the &s;ame &s;pirituall drink;</HI> yet this was not qu&acirc; <HI>&s;pirituall meat or drink,</HI> not as Sacramen|tall food; but a they had no <HI>other at all</HI> to eat or drink. The other ver&s;es &s;peak only of the joynt participation of Chri&s;tians, which is not denyed ordinatily. And <HI>Mat.</HI> 26.27. though it &s;ayes, <HI>Drink yee all of this,</HI> yet it &s;aith &s;o to none, but tho&s;e that <HI>were not convicted</HI> of any &s;candall, even <HI>Iudas</HI> was not proved (nor &s;o much as openly na|med) Trayrour or Devill; but the Di&s;ciples at the Supper &s;ay, touch|ing them&s;elves, <HI>Lord, is it I?</HI> no man points at him, and &s;aith, Lord, is it he? Therefore neither that &s;peech <HI>Drinke yee all of it,</HI> (not <HI>Iudas</HI> his admi&s;&s;ion, as was roucht before) declares all Chri&s;tions to have &s;uch a right to the Sacrament, as that they cannot fall from it, no not for a time. But notwith&s;tanding, they have often been admitted, they may appeare &s;o unworthy, by &s;candall and impenitence, as that they cannot for the pre&s;ent claim that right; and it is for his own good al&s;o, that he cannot claime it, as a man in a di&s;traction, or violent &s;eaver, cannot claime the u&s;e of tho&s;e things that would undoubtedly do him mi&s;chief but may be kept from them, even from meat &amp; drink, by tho&s;e that are about him, &s;pecially by tho&s;e that have any power over him. Finally, you have &s;ome marginals, the fir&s;t is <HI>Q</HI> 1. <HI>p.</HI> 2. unto the words of 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5.11. <HI>With &s;uch an one no not to eat.</HI> Your Margent &s;aith, <HI>not meant of eating the Sacrament,</HI> &amp;c. I an&s;wer. Not properly tho&s;e words at fir&s;t, for the Apo&s;tle makes his &s;entence an argument <HI>&agrave; minori ad majus:</HI> you mu&s;t put away wicked per&s;ons out of the Church, becau&s;e with &s;uch you mu&s;t not &s;o much as eat, willingly, at an ordinary ta|ble, if you can avoyd it. It is granted then that it is meant in familiar civill conver&s;ation (&s;o that you might have &s;pared all your con&s;equent Texts, which yet would hardly prove interpretations of 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 5. e&s;pe|cially &s;ome of them, if it were needfull to &s;peak to them particularly.) But I pray, offer but to analize the Apo&s;tles Di&s;cour&s;e there, and make him &s;peak &s;en&s;e in bringing in the&s;e words, while he was urging them
<PB N="29" REF="16">to put away the ince&s;tuous Corinthian (and &s;o making a rule for other &s;candalous &s;inners.) To what purpo&s;e &s;aith he, <HI>No, not to eat?</HI> but that more is meant; you mu&s;t not &s;o much as eat with him at home, there|fore much le&s;&s;e allow him to eat with you in the Congregation.</P>
<P>Your &s;econd Note is to prove <HI>Iudas</HI> was at the Sacrament: I have granted it; and &s;o am contented to &s;ay no more of it: except in thanks for your proofes, to requite you with the An&s;wer of your Objection hence (and prevention of &s;ome other) a little more fully then before, in the words of the French Catechi&s;m, which follow.</P>
<Q><TEXT LANG="eng">
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="catechism">
<HEAD>The 55. Sunday.</HEAD>
<P>Q. <HI>Ovght the Pa&s;tors, to whom the Dispen&s;ation</HI> (of the Sacraments) <HI>is committed, to admit every one without any difference?</HI></P>
<P>A. As for Bapti&s;m, becau&s;e now adayes it is only admini&s;tred to Infants, there is no room for any making a difference. But in the Lords Supper the Mini&s;ter ought to take heed that he give it to none who appeares openly to be unworthy.</P>
<P>Q. <HI>Why &s;o?</HI></P>
<P>A. Becau&s;e it cannot bee done without reproaching and profaning the Sa|crament.</P>
<P>Q. <HI>But did not Chri&s;t vonch&s;afe to Iudas, though he was a wicked man, the partici|pation of it?</HI></P>
<P>A. I acknowledge it, while as yet his impiety was concealed. For though it was not hidden from Chri&s;t, yet it had not broken out as yet into the light and knowledge of men.</P>
<P>Q. <HI>What mu&s;t be done then to Hypocrites?</HI></P>
<P>A. The Pa&s;tor cannot put them away as unworthy, but mu&s;t let them alone, untill &s;uch time as God reveale their wickedne&s;&s;e, that it may be known to men.</P>
<P>Q. <HI>What if the Mini&s;ter him&s;elfe know any man to be unworthy, or any hath admo|ni&s;hed him of it?</HI></P>
<P>A. Even this will not &s;uffice to put him from the Communion, unle&s;&s;e hereunto be added a legall cognizance and judgement of the Church upon it.</P>
<P>Q. <HI>It is requi&s;ite then to have a certaine &s;etled order of Government in the Church?</HI></P>
<P>A. It is &s;o. For otherwi&s;e they are not well managed or rightly regulated. Therefore this is the order, that Elders be appointed, who are to cen&s;ure mens manners, and watch over the &s;candals that may ari&s;e, and to debarrt &s;uch from the Sacrament as they know to be unworthy, and who cannot be admitted without di&s;|honour to God, and &s;candall to the Faithfull.</P>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT></Q>
<P>Your third note is <HI>Q.</HI> 3. <HI>pag.</HI> 3. upon <HI>not partaking of other mens &s;ins.</HI> You &s;ay, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 5.22. <HI>not meant of admini&s;tving the Sacrament.</HI> I an|&s;wer. No man &s;ayes it is only meant of that; but you have not di&s;pro|ved
<PB N="30" REF="17">this to be included, which we contend for; That <HI>to &s;uffer &s;canda|lous per&s;ons by tho&s;e that have authority to judge them</HI> (as you have not yet denied the Elder&s;hip to have) <HI>is to partake of their &s;ins:</HI> And I think I have proved it.</P>
<P>But your la&s;t Note, running along almo&s;t all your la&s;t page, is an admirable one, about <HI>the Mini&s;ters private opinion.</HI> There, if ever, you &s;et up a man of &s;traw and &s;ight again&s;t him, or fight again&s;t your own &s;hadow. For what Relator (or Delator) told you this was the A&s;&s;emblies advice? Or what book of Di&s;cipline or particular Writer, plead, for &s;uch a Power in a fingle Mini&s;ter, as you oppugn; Why then do you in&s;inuate them guilty of going about to introduce the grea|re&s;t &s;pirituall Tyranny that ever was heard or practi&s;ed in the Chri|&s;tian world, and to make every Mini&s;ter an <HI>ab&s;olute Pope?</HI> I adde, and <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word"> then a Pope; for a Pope in Church cen&s;ures hath u&s;ually I take <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word">, his Cardinals with him. But, if we di&s;claime this, will you grant us the re&s;t? Will you yeeld that the Elder&s;hip, upon ju&s;t proofe, may &s;u&s;pend for any &s;candall? If &s;o, all is well: If not, why do you trouble your &s;elf and them, &amp; the world, and make men beleeve <HI>&s;o vile and odious a &s;lander of them</HI> (as thou&s;ands will beleeve it upon the &s;ight of your Paper) as if they were <HI>as badde as the Pope,</HI> or wor&s;e, the grea|te&s;t Tyrants in the world to Con&s;cience.</P>
<P><HI>It was not an Enemy that reproached me,</HI> &s;aith complaining <HI>David.</HI> I will ask no other Reparation then what your own Ingenuity will prompt you unto, when you &s;ee your Errour.</P>
<P>Your concluding Text for <HI>Moderation,</HI> I &s;hall only turne into this Prayer; <HI>God give us all &s;pirits of meekne&s;&s;e, and lead us into all Truth by Ie&s;us Chri&s;t.</HI> Amen.</P>
</DIV1>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</BODY>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
