they might retain his Sins that is declare him unsit for and unworthy of pardon and consequently of the Churches Communion wherein forgiveness is to be obtained and while the Offender remains impenitent Christ declares his Guilt remains on him and his Sin shall not be pardoned But if the party submit and repent so that the Governours of the Church judge him sincere and take off this Sentence by declaring him penitent then his Sin shall be forgiven in Heaven as well as his Censure is reversed on Earth Which promise no doubt our Saviour makes good as often as these his Stewards do judge by the Rules and Measures he hath given them And since Christ gave his Apostles and their Successors no Temporal Power nor any other way to punish Offenders but this they who would rob them of this Power do what they can to strip them of all Authority and bring the Church by Anarchy into Confusion 'T is true these words are repeated to every Priest in his Ordination and the Power is committed to him so far as may enable him to serve the necessities of single Persons whose faults are made known to him by private complaint or voluntary confession But for orders sake where the Offence is publick and the Scandal evident there the Bishop only exercises this Power of remitting and retaining and it is this latter Power which only concerns Excommunication and which was given originally to the Apostles as Governours of the Church And while there are Offences and Offenders in the Church as there will be to the Worlds end this Power must remain in the Church Governours for the preservation of this holy Society which as Jesus did found so he hath we see taken care to endue those he set over it with such kind of Coercive Power as is necessary for the good ordering thereof CHAP. II. Of the Practice of Excommunication § I. SInce our blessed Saviour had thus in as clear words as could be spoken given his Apostles this Power of Excluding Offenders out of that Christian Church which they were to plant and rule it is plain they had Authority to exercise this Discipline by Divine Right and therefore it must be a gross Error in the Learned Mr. Selden to affirm their Right was derived partly from the Jews and partly from the Roman Emperours Edicts which allowed the Jews liberty to observe their own Rites (n) Selden Syned c. 8. p. 120. For though we grant that the Christians did for some few years after our Lord's Resurrection observe some of the Jewish Ceremonies and were by the Gentile Writers grosly mistaken for a Sect of the same Religion many years after yet they had a distinct Name within Ten years after Christ's Resurrection (o) Baron Annal Eccles An. 43. and were long before that Excommunicated and persecuted by the Jews Acts viii 1. Chap. ix 2. and the Synod at Jerusalem had declared that the Gentile Converts need not observe the Ceremonial Law So that the Christians were a distinct Society and had Officers of their own and Assemblies proper to themselves and these Officers did exercise a Jurisdiction over them and openly declared they derived their Power not from the Jews but from Christ 2 Cor. x. 8. 1 Cor. v. 4. So that it is ridiculous to assert That the right of Apostolical Excommunication was from the Jews there is a vast difference between their imitating some of the Jewish Forms or Customs in the exercise of these Censures and their deriving a right from them even as the Church of England doth imitate some of the Forms of the Roman Church in her Excommunications but it doth not follow therefore that she derives her Right to excommunicate from the Pope or the Church of Rome And for the Edicts of the Emperours which were made in favour of the Jews there is no proof that ever the Christians claimed any benefit by them yet if they did these Edicts gave them no right to Govern a Society set up on purpose to abrogate the whole Worship and Ceremonies peculiar to the Jews and though they might give them a liberty from Secular Compulsion in the exercise of that right which Christ had given them yet they did not convey that right to them So that these are meer Subterfuges contrived to escape the force and strong evidence of a Divine Right which is so clear not only from our Saviour's Institution but the Apostolick practice grounded thereon to which we shall now proceed The Apostles principal work was to bring Converts into the Church and yet when need required they also exercised that other Power of Casting notorious Offenders out of it S. Peter to whom Christ directed his first promise of this Authority was the first who exercised it and the first Sin which he retained was the Sacriledge of Ananias and Saphira which was joyned with a hope to deceive the Holy Ghost which dwelt in the blessed Apostle and that our Lord might make his Officers Rebukes more dreadful an immediate Judgment followed the Censure for Ananias and his Wife were struck with sudden death and the effect of this was That great fear came upon all the Church Acts v. 11. And though Christ had given no Secular Power to his Apostles this great Example did make the Christians reverence the Persons and fear the just Reproofs of those he had set over them The next Instance was that of Simon Magus who had pretended to believe and was baptized Acts viii 13. but it seems he had dissembled with God and Men and only designed to make a gain of the Power of Miracles which he vilely offered Money for as if it had been only an Art which might be bought and sold whereupon S. Peter declares him accursed ver 20. saying His Money and he should perish together By which Phrase he intimates he was as the Jews speak under Cherem and that he might separate him from the Church he declares ver 21. Thou hast neither part nor lot with us in this matter which are the very words of the Tribes beyond Jordan who express their fear of their Posterity's being rejected from Communion with the other Tribes because of their distance by this very Phrase They will say unto them Ye have no part in the Lord (p) Josh xxii 5. Cal. Par. Non estis inter quos est verbi divini Communitas LXX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in the like form of Speech the Bond of Society in Civil Matters was declared void 2 Sam. xix 1. 1 Kings xii 16. Yea our Lord thus threatens to reject S. Peter if he would not admit his washing saying If I wash thee not thou hast no part in me John xiii 8. And further as a Reason of this destruction denounced and this Separation inflicted on Simon Magus the Apostle shews he is still 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under the Bond of his Sin which by this Declaration was retained according to the Power given by Christ yet
some Power to punish all those who do disturb the good Order thereof by a false Faith or corrupt Worship or by dissolute Manners and if our Lord had not intrusted the Church with such a Power Reason and Necessity would have compelled the Rulers of the Church to have assumed it because the Church cannot subsist without it No man can so much as govern one Family in the Capacity of a Father or Master unless he be invested with power to let in and turn out of his Family such as he sees fit and to dispense or withhold the Benefits belonging to his Family as he sees Occasion much less can a larger Society be maintained in Peace and Safety without the exercise of such a Power And as the Father or Master may and doth exercise this Authority within his own Family though it be a part of the Commonwealth without damage to the Prince's Power So in this Society of the Church since the ends of it are different from that of the Civil Government the Ecclesiastical Governours may exercise their Power and Authority without incroachment upon the Prince's Sovereignty The ends of Temporal Princes being to preserve their People in outward Peace and Plenty in the enjoyment of their Temporal Rights and Priviledges while they live upon Earth But the ends of the Spiritual Governours are to make Christians holy here and happy hereafter and their Rules and Punishments are both suted to this end The Rules are Precepts of Piety and Charity and the Penalties are proportionable viz. not Corporal (a) Nullum ibi discrimen sanguinis sub incruentâ disciplinâ timebatur Aug. ad Maced ep 54. but Spiritual that is the depriving them of all the comfort and benefit of Church-communion at present and the declaring them to be worthy of Divine vengeance unless they repent So that the Rulers of the World need have no jealousie for their Authority on the account of this Spiritual Jurisdiction from his Servants who declares His Kingdom is not of this World (b) Joh. xviii 36. Audite Judaei Genteâ— non impediam dominationem vestram in hoc mundo Aug. in loc They are to watch for mens Souls to make them inwardly good to reform their Manners and fit them for a blessed Eternity And they govern as Fathers by Arguments and Perswasion by Spiritual Promises and Threatnings by the Rod of Church Censures not by the Sword as the Civil Magistrate doth Yet as the Prince takes care of the Lives and worldly concerns of his Subjects and punisheth those who injure them in either of these so doth the Spiritual Governour in his proper way punish those who act contrary to the welfare of their own or others Souls whether by teaching false Doctrine or setting a bad Example And as there are three ends of outward and civil Punishments First 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Instruction to the Offender to repent and amend Secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Warning to others not to follow so bad an Example and Thirdly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vindication of the Society from the Scandal which might be cast upon it for suffering evil Acts to be done (c) Vidend Aul. Gellius noct Attie lib. 6. c. 14. Clem. Alexandr Strom. 4. So also the Spiritual Penalties aim at the same ends viz. To reform the Offender To warn others not to follow the ill Example And to clear the Church from that Scandal which the acts of evil Men professing themselves Christians may bring on it if they be not punished All which ends are obtained by this Spiritual Penalty of Excommunication duly inflicted by the Church and humbly submitted to by the Offender which doth clearly shew that it is necessary to the being and the well-being of this Spiritual Society the Church even upon Principles of Natural Reason that its Governours should have this Power And that none may doubt whether Natural Reason doth teach this we will shew that the very Gentiles who had no other Guide but the Light of Natural Reason did frequently use this kind of excluding all those from their Society especially from joyning in their Sacrifices who were unfit and unworthy And though there were no Law to turn such Persons out by violence yet their Order was obeyed by all to the shame of those pretended Christians who despise the Commands and deride the Authority of our Lords Ministers in the like Case § II. Among the Grecians Draco was one of their most ancient Lawgivers and he decreed That Murtherers should be excluded from the Drink-Offerings and Festivals from the Temples and Publick Assemblies (d) Demosth Orat. in Leptin And the Scholiast on Aristophanes speaks of this as of an old Custom That no Manslayer should partake of their Sacrifices (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Schol. Aristoph And agreeable to this is that Edict of Oedipus in Sophocles concerning a Parricide That none of his Subjects should receive him into their House nor speak to him nor communicate with him in Prayers or Sacrifices to the Gods nor wash their hands with him (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sophoc in Oedip. Whence it appears That both Civil and Sacred Commerce was forbid to these Criminals and though those who had slain their Mother in Euripides mention only their being excluded at Argis from all Mens houses and conversations (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eurip. Oreste Yet we may infer they were much more uncapable of coming to the Sacrifices Plato also ordains that such as strike their Parents should be expelled from their Cities and their Temples and that whoever had any conversation with them should be excluded from the Assemblies and Sacrifices till they were purged (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plato de leg 9. fol. 881. And if it be enquired whose office it was to do this we may learn that from Julius Pollux who tells us there was one at Athens called the King of the Sacrifices whose office was To proclaim that the contumacious or rather the unholy who were of contrary disposition to the holy Rites should abstain from the Mysteries and other established Rites (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Poll. Onomastic lib. 8. cap. 9. pag. 397. And Alcibiades for having revealed the Mysteries of Ceres which ought to have been kept secret was devoted to Divine Vengeance by the Priests in all their several ways of Religion (k) Se Dâ—is per omnium Sacerdetum religiones devotum cognovit Justin Hist lib. 5. Where note that this sort of Excommunication was attended with solemn Curses which was a delivering them to the Divine Justice and we may further observe that this penalty was not inflicted only for Murther but for any great offence either against Religion as here or against good manners As in that remark concerning the Cercetae now called the Circassians who used to forbid all that did any injustice to come into their Temples (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Stobae Serm. 165. And that Example
not to Peter only but to all the Apostles yea to all the Clergy and the whole Church (d) Haec autem ligandi solvendi potestas quamvis soli Petro data videatur à Domino tamen caeteris Apostolis datur necnon etiam in Episcopis Presbyteris toti Ecclesiae Raban Maurus And our Saviour himself to anticipate this unjust Claim doth afterwards twice grant the same Power to all the Apostles which here he seems only to give to S. Peter Matth. xviii 18. John xx 21 22. Yet this false Gloss of the Romanists with the wild and extravagant Inferences deduced from thence hath put some Learned Protestants into the other extream that is into denying there is any Power granted to the Apostles here more than the Power of a Doctor or Teacher and they will have the Key to be only the Key of Knowledge Luke xi 52. and out of the Talmud they go about to prove that binding and loosing signify nothing else but determining what things are lawful and these are said to be loosed and what things are unlawful which are said to be bound (e) Gamero in loc item Lightfoot horae Hebr in Matth. But we must not let the Sense of the Fathers and the Power of the Keys to be at once wrested out of our hands by this Novel fancy For first the place cannot bear this Sense since it is ridiculous to affirm that Christ gave his Apostles such a Power That whatever they declared or taught to be unlawful on Earth should be unlawful in Heaven and whatever they taught was lawful God would make that lawful this were to give them a power which God himself never did assume viz. to change the eternal and unalterable Rules of Good and Evil And besides in the parallel place where these words are repeated by Christ Matth. xviii 18. they are applyed to Offenders refusing to Repent upon the Churches admonition which obstinate sinners are to be avoided as Heathens and Publicans by private Christians and if they value not this as being an Act only of their Equals Christ supposes his Apostles will then bind them by Excommunication and to shew the weight of that Censure he saith Whatsoever they bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven ver 18. which being spoken of the validity of the Punishment inflicted on evil Men can never be drawn to signifie only Teaching yea after our Lords Resurrection he who is the best expounder of his own meaning declares that binding and loosing signifies remitting or retaining of sins John xx 21. and turns the Whatsoever ye shall bind c. into Whosesoever sins ye remit c. Again since the Misna which is the oldest part of the Talmud was written 150 years after the destruction of Jerusalem which is later than any Canonical part of the New Testament (e) Sixt. Senens Biblioth lib. 2. pag. 148. those Learned Men above mentioned ought not to expound the more ancient Phrases of the Gospel by these Talmudical expressions yet even in the Talmud Binding and Loosing is often used for Excommunicating and Absolving (f) R. Samuel status cornu ligat et flatus cornu solvit Talm. Bab. Moed Katon c. 3. fol. 16. Os quod solvit est os quod ligat Tract Demai cap. 6. §. 11. which is the more obvious and natural Sense of the Words and because the doing things forbidden by the Rabbins caused Men to be Excommunicated or bound by this Censure Therefore by a Trope the things themselves were said to be bound So that we may conclude That our Saviour doth actually here give Authority to his Apostles and to their lawful Successors to shut Men who are scandalously wicked out of his Church and to let them in again upon their Repentance declaring their Sentence shall be ratified in Heaven And thus the Ancients generally expound this place and from thence they frequently speak of the Power of the Keys given by Christ to the Church in order to the Excommunicating and Absolving of Sinners Of which because there are innumerable Instances one or two shall suffice (g) Ecclesia quae fundatur in Christo claves ab eo regni coelorum accepit in Petro i. e. potestatem ligandi solvendique peccata Aug. Tract 124 in Johan Cum excommunicat Ecclesia ligatur in Coelo excommunicatus Aug. in Psal 108. Vid. Ambros de poenit l. 1. c. 6. that so Reason and Authority both may shew our Exposition of this Place is true and certain which will be further confirmed by considering the second place where this Power is mentioned viz. Matth. xviii 18. Verily I say unto you whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever ye shall loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven the very same words with those spoken to Peter Chap. xvi 19. But if we look back to the occasion of them here it will appear they can be meant of nothing but of Ecclesiastical Discipline For in this xviiith Chapter Our Lord first labours to prevent the doing Injuries and Offences to the meanest of his Disciples ver 1. to ver 14. But secondly in case Injuries be done or any Scandal or Offence given Christ teaches the offended Person what method to take viz. First privately to admonish the Offender ver 15. If that prevail not the grieved party must rebuke him before witness ver 16. And if this also prove unsuccessful and the Offender remain obstinate then he must complain to the Church which is supposed to rebuke and if need be to Censure the stubborn Criminal and if he do not hear the Church that is submit to its Sentence and make reparation then Private Christians are to renounce all Communion and Commerce with that Man and carry themselves toward him as the Jews did to a Heathen or Publican with whom they would not discourse nor eat Matth. ix 11. Galat. ii 12. nor yet suffer them to come into that Court of the Temple where they were wont to pray Acts xxi 28. for on the Gate was written Let no Stranger go into the Holy Place (h) Joseph Bell. Jud. lib. 6. cap. 14. That is they must no longer count this Man a Member of the Christian Church nor call him a Brother but esteem him as a Pagan and one who never yet was admitted or a Publican who for living in open Sins was cast out and with such a Man the rest of the sound Christians were not to have any Commerce in Civil or Religious Matters But if all this will neither shame nor terrifie the wicked Wretch so as to bring him to Repentance because he may think this Sentence inflicted by the Church is but an Human Act and pronounced only by Mortal Men Our Lord declares That this Sentence is of Divine Authority and though it be pronounced only by Men yet it shall be confirmed in Heaven For saith he Verily I say unto you whatsoever ye shall bind c. ver 18. And
because Christ was to be in Heaven he assures them ver 19. 20. That whatever Publick Acts of Discipline they did when they were assembled and desired his Confirmation of them he would grant it to them yea when they met together in his Name and by his Authority committed to them did proceed to Censure Offenders he declares he was present there virtually and effectually ver 20. Now here seems to be no room for evasion yet those who love to find knots in the Bulrush do object to this plain Exposition First That this is meant of private Injuries when the Believers had no Judicatures to right them but Jewish or Heathen and though in that Case they were to use this Method yet now Christians have Magistrates and Laws of their own this order is void of it self To which Grotius replys That Christian Tribunals do not take away the power of judging from the Church because the Civil Laws do only punish the grosser Crimes and such as are most contrary to Civil Societies but there are many Offences against Charity Meekness and Patience not forbid by the Civil Laws but only by Christ's Laws by which the Church judgeth so that Constantine and his Successors did well to leave this power of Judging to the Church and to confirm it by their Laws as may be seen in the Acts of the Councils and in the Code (i) Grot. Com. in Luc. vi 22. To which I shall add That Christ here speaks not only of Injuries but of all kinds of Sins which are called Scandals or Offences because they may be an occasion of our Brethrens falling into Apostacy or evil Practises if these go unpunished and many Sins must be unpunished if none be taken notice of but those which the Civil Laws forbid (k) Rom. xiv 13. 1 Cor. viii 10. and therefore Scandals and Trespasses are used promiscuously (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matth. xviii 7. but ver 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So also 1 Cor. viii 12. So that many evil things which are scandalous and offend weak Christians are still to be punished by the Church and since the ends of Church Censures are to bring the Offender to Repentance to clear the Church from the blot contracted by this Crime and to warn others not to follow so ill an Example and the nature of them is more gentle and more spiritual than the Civil Punishments doubtless they may well subsist together in the same Nation without subverting one another Secondly The Learned Mr. Selden seeks many Glosses for those words Tell the Church which he sometimes expounds of the Jewish Magistrates in the Synagogue and sometimes of the whole Assembly manifestly designing to take this Power out of the Bishops hands But for his first Notion how improbable is it that Christ should allow his Disciples who were not to sue for their very Cloaks Matth. v. 40. to go to their mortal Foes the unbelieving Jews to complain of Injuries and according to Mr. Selden's Notion of a Synagogue for a Court of Justice they were more like to be scourged or receive new Injuries than to get right there and Christ would rather have said Tell it to the Synagogue than tell the Church But an easie Prolepsis will solve this seeming difficulty for it was usual with our Lord whose words were to be writ for after times to allude to things not then instituted as he doth to Baptism John iii. 5. and to the Eucharist John vi 51. so we may reasonably believe he gave this Rule with respect to those Assemblies of Christians which he foresaw would soon after grow into a distinct Society and be ruled by his Apostles and their Successors to whom these Complaints were then to be made For I must venture to prefer S. Chrysostom's Exposition before that which Mr. Selden writ under a Rebellious Democracy and that holy Father tells us expresly that by the Church here is meant the Governours of the Church (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 69. in Matth. Tom. II. p. 385. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. whom Theophilact agrees with And St. Augustine expresly affirms That it is the Governours of the Church which have received this power from Christ in this place of St. Matthew xviii 17 18. (m) Augustin de Civ Dei lib. 20. c. 9. p. 213. And common Speech confirms this explication of the Fathers for we say He complains to the City who complains to the Governours of it But our Saviour puts it past all dispute that he intended this Power only for his Apostles and their Successors because to them and no other he grants a Commission to remit and retain sins John xx 23. 'T is true the Apostles and Primitive Bishops were wont to exercise this Discipline in the Presence of the People and with their Approbation but the Authority was wholly in the Governour and the Judicial Act was solely his St. Peter and S. Paul did pass the Censure and the Bishops their Successors But they did this in and before the Assembly for greater Solemnity and because the People were to know and avoid these Offenders as also that the openness of the shame might make the Criminals sooner repent and be a more effectual warning to others not to follow so bad an Example But from this presence of the whole Assembly to infer their joyning in the Authoritative part is a very weak Consequence and confuted both by Scripture and Antiquity as we shall see in the sequel For this shall suffice here to prove that in this second place our Lord Jesus hath left Power with the Governours of his Church to receive Complaints concerning scandalous Offenders and to bind them with the Bond of Excommunication till they do repent and that he hath commanded the People to refuse all Communion with these in Sacred Civil Actions while they remain obstinate yea and declared that they who remain obdurate and impenitent under this Sentence shall not only be excluded from Communion with the Church on Earth but be bound in Heaven also and excluded from thence if they do not submit and repent Thirdly these two places being only promises of a future Priviledge we may read the fulfilling of them when Christ ordained the Apostles for Governours of his Church after his Resurrection for he sent them with Authority as his Father sent him John xx 21. and to give them inward ability to exercise this high and holy Office he gives them the Holy Ghost by the Ceremony of breathing on them ver 22. Finally to oblige all the Society to revere and obey them he grants them the power of binding and loosing without a Metaphor saying Whosesoever Sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whosesoever sins ye retain they are retained ver 23. Which place evidently makes them Judges under Christ concerning such Offences as are committed by those in the Church so that if they should find any Man obstinate in his evil ways
the Church was to judge them and its Members were to avoid them then Excommunication was practised as it is now in the main even in the Apostles days and their Rules and Actions are our Warrant for it But since Christ gave his Apostles not only a power to retain but also to remit Sins we have a further account in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians That this Incestuous Person for of him the Fathers generally agree S. Paul speaks 2 Corinth ii 6. (x) Origen in Psal xxxvii Ambros Hieron Theoph. in loc who had grieved the Church of Corinth was exceedingly grieved himself and in danger to be swallowed up of too much sorrow wherefore S. Paul desires his Censure may be taken off declaring that this publick Reproof and severe Sentence (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. ii 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocantur Poenae Canonicae in Act. Consiliorum ap Chrysost de Sacerd. Grot. in the presence of the whole Congregation having brought him to Repentance was a sufficient Penalty and now he requires them to forgive him and grant him Absolution ver 7. expecting they should obey him in all his Orders as well the former for censuring as these for absolving ver 9. First Because in all his Orders he had respect unto their good And secondly Because he commanded them by the Authority and as the Ambassador of Christ who in all these Judicial Acts of Excommunicating and Absolving did represent the Person of Christ himself (z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ver 10. Non in mea persona sed Christi qui dixit Quaecunque solveritis in terra erant soluta in Coelo Hieron Ut factum Apostoli factum sit Christi Ambros 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. who had given this Commission to his Apostles That whatsoever they should bind on Earth should be bound in Heaven So the Fathers expound this Phrase in the Person of Christ And we may observe That as S. Paul did Cast him out of the Church not by their common Suffrages as S. Ambrose speaks but with the Power of our Lord Jesus Christ that is by his Authority and Sentence whose Ambassador on Earth the Apostle was (a) Ambros Comment in 1 Cor. v. p. 358. So he restores him again upon his Repentance not by any Suffrage of the Church Members but by Christ's Authority and as his Representative which shews that the People are meerly witnesses in this Case but the Governours of the Church only act by Authority The Peoples presence tends to the Solemnity not to the validity of Excommunication or Absolution which in this Instance are both plainly founded by S. Paul upon a Divine Authority and deduced from that Commission granted by Christ to his Apostles and consequently to their Successors I have been the larger on this because it is a fair Precedent drawn by the Hand of an Apostle of the Practice of these two great Points of Jurisdiction and a clear Commentary upon our Saviour's Commission as well as a strong Proof that Church Censures are of Divine Right Many other Expressions there are in these Epistles relating to this Matter which we will only briefly remark viz. all those which speak of S. Paul's coming to them in sorrow (b) 2 Cor. ii 1 2 3 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. and making them sorry that is by ordering Offenders to be censured which Act was alway done with sorrow as the receiving them in again was with joy So he saith He fears when he comes again God will humble him among them and that he shall bewail many who have sinned already and have not repented (c) 2 Cor. xii 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Teoph Eugere dicitur pro excommunicare Grot. in 3 Cor. v. 2. which the Ancients expound of Excommunicating them And in that sense we are to understand those places where S. Paul speaks of making them sorry with an Epistle 2 Cor. vii 8. and of the godly sorrow which worketh Repentance to Salvation not to be repented of ver 10. Again To this belongeth that Authority which made him ready to revenge all disobedience 2 Cor. x. 6. which he calls The Authority which the Lord had given him for edification and not for destruction ver 8. For whereas the Temporal Sword destroys the Criminals these Spiritual Censures are designed to bring Offenders to Repentance and Salvation and therefore the Apostle useth this Phrase again Chap. xiii 10. where having as our Saviour directed Matth. xviii 15 16. admonished them twice by his Epistles he assures them that when he comes which would be the third Application made to them He will not spare the Impenitent 1 Cor. xiii 2. but would use sharpness or severity ver 10. (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vid Tit. i. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. that is proceed immediately to Excommunicate them according to that Power wherewith Christ had invested him for edification and not for destruction For which cause they ought not to think much at this Power which Christ had given the Governours of his Church because the end of it was not the destruction but the reformation of Offenders And if they would amend without it our Spiritual Fathers would be much better pleased Further we may note That not only for wicked practices but for Heretical Opinions and false Doctrines also the Apostles used Excommunication as in that place If we or an Angel from Heaven preach any other Gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you let him be Anathema or Accursed Galat. i. 8. And to shew this was no rash but a deliberate Judicial Act he repeats it ver 9. And here it will be seasonable to enquire into the Sense of this word Anathema so often used concerning Excommunication (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 87. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theophâ—e Chrysost Abominabilis sit Hieron Condemnatus devotus detestabilis Aug. The Ancients explain it Accursed Excommunicated Separated Alienated Abominable Detestable and Devoted all which respect Persons Excommunicated And the LXX do generally thus translate the Hebrew Cherem (f) Josh vii 1. Deut. vii 26. alibi the name of one Species of Excommunication among the Jews 'T is true it sometimes signifies a thing dedicated to God The reason of which different Senses S. Chrysostom thus gives As no man dares touch a Gift offered and devoted to God so no man dares touch one that is Anathematized but this is done for different reasons None will come near the holy Gift because it is Consecrated to God but all men separate from the Excommunicated as being unholy and alienated from God (g) ap Theoph. in Rom. ix 3. ipse Chrysost hom 16. in 9. Rom. ita etiam Theodor. in loc And Theodoret notes that Anathema signifies not only that which is offered to God but that which is alienated from him and in the latter Sense he applies it to
Laying on of Hands Cypr. Epist ad Pleb num xii before they had repented lest he should make himself liable to other Mens sins ver 22. In like manner S. Paul advises Titus his Vicegerent and Successor in Crete concerning those Jewish Seducers who subverted many and concerning those Cretians who were seduced by them To rebuke them sharply (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Titus i. 13. See 1 Cor. xiii 10. that they might be sound in the Faith And more plainly Chap. iii. 10. he commands him After the first and second Admonition to reject a Man that is an Heretick which is a direction for depriving him of the Communion of the Church since whomsoever the Bishop did reject he was necessarily excluded from Divine Offices and all the Faithful who cleaved always to their Bishop renounced such a Man's Consersation for in so doing they observed our Saviour's Order that when any would not hear the Church they should count him as an Heathen man and a Publican Matth. xviii 17. which was the Case of an obstinate Heretick that would not hear the Bishop's Admonitions And as the more Religious Jews would not eat with Publicans or Sinners i.e. Gentiles so the Faithful were enjoyned by the Apostles with notorious Criminals no not to eat 1 Cor. v. 11. that is not to eat a common Meal with them as the Jews would not eat with one Excommunicated by Niddui and indeed eating was a sign of Friendship which Orthodox Christians were not to have with these who were an abomination to them Genes xliii 32. and Galat. ii 12. Now it is in my Opinion a very weak Enquiry to ask here Whether this eating be meant of the Lord's Supper or no Because it is certain à minori ad majus that if a Christian might not eat an ordinary Meal with an excommunicate Person in a private House much more ought he to avoid his Company in so high an Act of Religion as eating the Lord's Supper For no doubt whosoever was under Censure so as to be shut out of the Houses of Christians were not admitted to their Religious Assemblies For these Disturbers of Christian Unity like dead Branches or gangren'd Members were to be wholly cut off from the Body of Christ's Church as S. Paul speaks Galat. v. 12. in so much that S. John expresly forbids the Faithful to shew any kindness by way of common Civility to those who hold not the right Faith saying If any come to you and bring not this Doctrine do not receive him into your House nor bid him God speed 2 Epist S. John ver 10. Which aversation and utter disclaiming all Testimonies of Friendship were grounded on those Anathema's pronounced by the Apostles against all such notorious Hereticks who were by all to be esteemed as excommunicated ipso facto And hence arose that usage in the Ancient Church not to salute any that was excommunicated as we see in Synesius's Epistles (r) Synesij Epist 58. p. 503. and in the Capitulars (s) Capitul Francor lib. 5. cap. 42. p. 96. and we may be sure if they would not pray for them in way of usual Civility they would not endure them in their Houses of Prayer it being recorded of this S. John That he leapt out of the Bath unwashed when he saw Cerinthus the Heretick come in thither (t) Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 3. And truly it was useful and safe for the Orthodox Christians thus totally to renounce all Conversation with these Seducers whose words might easily infect them if once they held communication with them But if any Scruple yet remain concerning the excluding the excommunicated from Religious Assemblies and consequently from Prayers and Sacraments in the time of the Apostles the Instance of Diotrephes will sufficiently remove it for he bearing himself as a Bishop would not communicate with those who came from S. John and if any did hold Communion with them he Cast them out of the Church 3 Epist S. John ver 10. or Excommunicated them by forbidding them to come into the Christian Assemblies and denying to them the participation of Divine Offices which was the principal part of the Penalty in that Exclusion And his doing this to such as he counted false-Teachers and Men walking disorderly shews it was frequently practised in that time Thus we have seen how the Apostles exercised that Authority which our Lord Jesus gave them as often as there was Occasion And by what hath been said we may observe That they made Christ Jesus the Author of this holy Discipline and the Apostles with their Successors the sole Ministers thereof That they inflicted this Censure for Heresie Schism and for gross Impieties and Immoralities and counted the Person who was thus Censured in a very deplorable and damnable Condition and one who was no Member of the Church and so would have no Communion with him in Civil or Religious Actions yet in all this they aimed only at his Repentance and upon unfeigned signs of that the Church Governours were ready to Absolve him and take him in again which being the Pattern of our Excommunication proves it to be of Divine Right § II. By what is Recorded in S. Paul's Epistle to Timothy and Titus it doth appear That the Apostles communicated that Power of hearing Complaints and of rebuking and censuring Offenders which they had received from Christ unto those Persons whom they fixed as Bishops in the Churches they had planted And it was necessary they should do so because otherwise they had not invested them with sufficient Power to discharge their Duty nor to keep the Churches committed to them in good order And as an undoubted Proof that the Primitive Bishops who succeeded the Apostles had this Authority vested in them we shall now shew That they did exercise this Power of the Keys in the purest Ages of the Church and declared they did it by Commission from Christ and his Apostles which considering the Charity and Integrity of those Ages none can imagine they would have pretended if it had not been really so The first Instance we shall remark is that famous Excommunication of Aquila of Pontus who had translated the Old Testament into the Greek Tongue and who was Converted and Baptized by the Disciples of the Apostles at Jerusalem yet continuing his former vain belief of Astrology and also drawing Schemes of his own Nativity he was admonished and rebuked by all the Doctors of the Church for this and not amending but rather opposing them and contentiously disputing with them about Fate they cast him out of the Church as one unlikely to be saved saith Epiphanius (u) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. de ponder mensuris This happened about the year of Christ 120. in the Reign of Adrian and about twenty years after S. John's death In which Relation we note First That this Censure was inflicted by the Doctors of the Church that is the Bishops met perhaps in a Synod at
Cyprian and the African Bishops and not only so but also rebuked and confuted yea Excommunicated by all the holy Bishops of the whole World (w) Novatiano nuper retuso refutato per totum orbem à Sacerdotibus Dei abstento Cypr. Stephan lib. 3. Ep. 13. And he advises Stephen Bishop of Rome to send Letters into France to declare Marcion Bishop of Arles one of Novatus his followers Excommunicate and that another might be put in his place (x) Idem ibid. Which passage about Novatian or Novatus as he is sometimes called is also in Eusebius who saith By a Roman Council of Sixty Bishops and more than so many Priests and by the Bishops of divers other Provinces in their Synods he was declared Excommunicate (y) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 6. cap. 35. pag. 178. And he also mentions his Excommunication by the African Bishops as before Which Zonaras expresseth by his being Cast out and Anathematized (z) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zonar in 8. Can. Concil 1. Niceen words of the same import with the former and implying his being declared Accursed as well as cast out of the Church To this we might add more out of the same Father as where he calls Papianus his judging of his Bishop making himself a Judge of God and of Christ who saith to his Apostles and so to all Bishops that succeed them in that Office He that heareth you heareth me (a) Te judicem Dei constituas Christi qui dicit ad Apostolos ac per hoc ad omnes Praepositos qui Apostolis Vicariâ Ordinatione succedunt c. Cypr. Epist lib. 4. Ep. 9. And where he saith No Man can have God for his Father who hath not the Church for his Mother and if any could escape out of Noahs Ark then they may escape who are out of the Church (b) Cypr. lib. de simplie Praelat But these are sufficient to shew that S. Cyprian believed the Bishops were the Apostles Successors and Christs Vice-gerents and had their power from him to Censure the disorderly who by that Sentence were put out of the Church in which alone Salvation could be had About the year 270 that numerous Council of Bishops and Clergy assembled at Antioch and deposed Paulus Samosatenus from the Bishoprick of that City for Heresy and other heinous Crimes yea they deprived him of the Communion of the whole Catholick Church under Heaven (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb lib. 7. cap. 23. pag. 205. and when he would not yield up his Possession to that Successor which the Council had placed in his stead they intreated Aurelian who was then Emperor to compel him thereunto who decreed the Possession should be granted to him whom the Bishops had chosen (d) Idem ibid. cap. 24. for he though an Idolater thought it just that he who would not obey the Sentence of those of his own Faith should be deprived of having any part with them (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haeret. sab 8. Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a Dividend or Share of the Profits of the Church So that Mr. Selden might have spared that note (f) Seld. Synedr l. 1. cap. 13. pag. 274. De voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vid. Jul. Polluc l. 15. c. 13. That this looked not like an Opinion of Divine Right for the Bishops to desire an Heathen Emperor to do that which they could not effect For they had first rejected this Heretick according to the Power given them by Christ and if he yet kept possession of the Church and the profits it was no diminution of their Spiritual Power to call in the Secular Magistrate to compel him to quit the place and temporal advantages which is all that is meant by Eusebius his saying That he was with extream disgrace driven out of the Church by the Secular Power (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 7. c. 24. But his being Excommunicated by the Council and by the Judgment of all the Bishops is mentioned also by Theodoret who further observes That Lucian who was Paulus his Scholar in this Error remained a long time Excommunicated for the same viz. during the time of three Bishops (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apost Can. 10. I will not trouble my self to produce any more instances of the practice of this Discipline during the time that the Empire was in the hands of Heathens only I shall note what those famous Apostolical Canons which were undoubtedly made in this Period by the Primitive Bishops say with respect to this matter And first the tenth Canon is remarkable which saith He that prays with an Excommunicate Person though it be in a private House shall be Excommunicated himself (i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 5. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 29 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 51. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 73. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 79. By which we see that whatever the Jewish Custom were the Christians renounced all Communion with the Excommunicate in Religious Offices In the rest of those Canons there is frequent mention made of Excommunication under divers Phrases yet to the same purpose viz. Of being separated being wholly cut off from the Church and wholly cut off from the Communion being cast out of the Church being punished with separation not being allowed to pray with the Faithful And in all those Canons the penalty for the greatest Crimes in the Clergy is to be deposed in the Laity to be Excommunicated And particularly He that receives one that is Excommunicated in one City when he comes to another City without commendatory Letters is to be Excommunicated himself (k) Apostol Can. xii xiii In the Case of Simony perpetual Excommunication is decreed (l) Ibid. Can. xxix In the Case of Schism three Admonitions must precede the Censure (m) Ibid. Can. xxxi And none must absolve but the same Bishop who Excommunicated (n) Ibid. Can. xxxii To enter into a Synagogue of the Jews or a Meeting of Hereticks to pray with them is Excommunication (o) Ibid. Can. Lxiv Which with many other Canons do shew that the Discipline of the Church was then strictly observed when the Bishops had no Authority from Secular Powers and when it was only the belief of a Divine Commission granted to them which prevailed upon the People to submit to it To these Canons we will add the Council of Elliberis which was held before Constantine began to Reign Anno 305. And in this Council there are many plain Evidences concerning the use of this Rite For there it is Decreed That Apostates to Idolatry Murtherers Adulterers and such like heinous Offenders should be Excommunicated and never received into the Church again Can. 1 2 5 6 7 c. Parents that marry their Daughters to Jews or Hereticks were to be Excommunicated for five
several injurious practices and would not absolve him no not at the Peoples request leaving that to Theophilus Only he had impowred those Presbyters which should be present when he should be nigh unto death to restore him to the Communion for saith he None shall dye under this Bond laid on by me (i) Synesij Ep. 67. Theophil pag. 215. Which manifestly shews that he esteemed it a dreadful thing for any to dye under this Sentence and that it might make their Estate very hazardous in another World and therefore it is wonderful how Mr. Selden could infer That this looks as if he thought this Bond not of Divine Institution but of Humane Invention (k) Seld. Synedr 1. cap. 13. p. 285. For it proves the contrary since if it were only a Humane Invention it is no matter whether it were taken off or no from one who is bidding adieu to Mankind nor could it be any prejudice to a Man at Gods Tribunal if it were not laid on by his Authority Therefore it was this belief which made the Old Canons so careful to restore those who had not fully gone through the Degrees of Penitence unto the Communion of the Church in case of mortal Sickness lest if they died bound on Earth they should be bound in Heaven Soon after lived Prosper An. 433. who saith The greater Sinners must be sharply rebuked and if this will not bring them to amendment as rotten Members of the Body they are to be cut off by Excommunication lest like to dead Flesh not taken away they corrupt the sound parts (l) Prosper de vit contempl lib. 2. cap. 7. It would be tiresome to my self and the Reader to search any further in so undeniable and clear a Matter and therefore without enquiring any further into the declining Ages of the Church We will here conclude That it was the Sense of the Primitive Catholick Fathers That Excommunication was exercised by Divine Right and by Authority derived from Christ himself § IV. We will now go on to consider the Sense of the Councils in this Period concerning Excommunication And out of innumerable instances there of the use of this Rite we will only select the most material And first upon that Principle That the Whole Catholick Church was but one and that whosoever was cast out by any one Bishop was cut off from the Body of Christ The Nicene Council decreed according to an Ancient Canon meaning the 32 Canon Apostolical That whosoever was cast out by one Bishop should not be received into the Church again by another (m) An. 326. Concil Nicen. I. Can. 5. Bev. Tom. I. p. 64. By which they declared that they believed Christ had given the power of judging to every Bishop as to all those under his Charge and yet since Bishops were but Men and might chance to vary from those rules which Christ had left them to judge by through Passion or Partiality this Great Council provides That if any be unjustly Excommunicated the matter shall upon Appeal be tried in a Synod of neighbouring Bishops to be held twice in each year and there the Case is to be tried finally And the like Order of not receiving those into one Church who were cast out of another without the Sentence of a Synod of Bishops is renewed in all succeeding Councils (n) An. 341. Concil Antioch Can. 6. An. 314. Concil I. Arelat can 16. An. 305. Concil Ellib Can. 53. An. 347. Concil Sardic Can. 13. An. 397. Concil Tamin Can. 4. An. 559. Concil 3. Paris Can. 7. An. 570. Concil I. Lugdun Can. 4. An. 789. Capitul I. p. 213. Which shews this was the Opinion of all Ages There is no mention of any Appeal to the Emperors And though they were then Christian and had the Title of Pontifices Max. yet the Councils believing this Power wholly in the Bishops make the highest and last Appeal to be unto a Synod of them And this gave ground to that Custom mentioned before of the giving notice to the neighboring Bishops concerning Persons Excommunicated in any Church after which notice they were either to Excommunicate them over again or at least to avoid them as the Canons do shew (o) An. 441. Concil I. Araus Can. 11. An. 587. Concil II. Turon Can. 8. Iv◠Carnot ep 76. Yea the Popes themselves for many hundred years were content to agree to these Rules as their fellow Bishops did So that Benedict the Ninth did revoke an Absolution granted to a certain Count without the knowledge and consent of the Bishop of Auvergne who had Excommunicated the said Count (p) An. 1034. Epist Penedict 9. in Concil Lemov By which discipline the Men who fell under these Censures justly had no remedy but to repent and seek Absolution from that Bishop who best knew the nature of their Crime And for a further proof that no aid was to be expected from the secular Power but only from the Colledge of Bishops The famous Council of Sardis Ordains That if a Bishop in his anger do cast any man out of the Church he may go to another Bishop and intreat him to intercede for him with that Bishop who had laid the Censure on which Bishop ought to be willing to have this matter examined by his fellow Bishops but the person censured was to be in the same case till the matter was determined (q) An. 347. Concil Sardic Can. 14. Yea the second Council of Carthage Decrees That if any who were Excommunicated for their Crimes fled to the Court or to the Civil Judicatures those Bishops or Clergymen who received them should be Excommunicated themselves (r) An. 397. Concil II. Carthag Ca. 7. So little did the Fathers of that Age dream of any Power in the Christian Emperors as to Binding and loosing or of their own having it by any Grant from the Imperial Authority And here I cannot but digress a little to relate a most remarkable instance of God's approving the Bishops acts in censuring evil Men if it be true what is related by Faustinus and Marcellinus two Presbyters of the Luciferian Schism who wrote while the person most concerned was yet alive The story this * Faust Marcel Libell prec p. 26 27. When the Arrians by their interest in Constantius the Emperor had violently thrust out Maximus the Catholick and Orthodox Bishop of Naples from his See and got him sent into Banishment Maximus Excommunicated Zosimus whom the Arrians had unjustly put in his place and when Zosimus went into the Church to do his Office before all the Congregation his Tongue did swell and hang out of his mouth so that he could not speak one word and when he went out of the Church he was restored to his speech but going in again he fell into the same calamity and this so often that at last he resolved to quit the Bishoprick (s) An. 359. Which memorable Judgment in a Case where the Bishops
Divine Right to Excommunicate was despised and the Imperial Authority so oft made use of as a Shield against it doth manifestly shew that God himself had put this power into the Bishops hands and that no External Force could wrest it from them or hinder its due effects To proceed the Canons of divers Councils do declare That those who were Excommunicate were not worthy of the Priviledges which other Christians enjoyed and therefore as Jews and Pagans Testimonies were not to be received against the Bishops and Clergy so the second General Council at Constantinople forbid those who were cast out of the Church or Excommunicated to be admitted to accuse a Bishop (t) An. 381. Concil 2. Constantinop Can. 6. Where we may note the distinction between the greater and the lesser Excommunication Those who are cast out being such as were for ever cut off from the Church and the Excommunicate such as are separated for a time (u) Zonaras in loc ap Bever Tom. I. p. 95. de signif verb. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Zonaras expounds the Phrases But neither of these were admitted to bear witness against a Bishop as being supposed unworthy of credit and inclinable to be revenged on their Censurers Which Law was revived in divers other succeeding Councils (w) Cod. Can. Eccl. African Can. 128. Capit Tom. I. l. 7. cap. 181. p. 1063. And as they did take away their External Priviledges so they also deprived them of all the comfort and benefit of Religious Offices which is not only signified by the Phrases before mentioned but expresly decreed For first the Council of Antioch declares That it is not lawful to Communicate with those who are Excommunicate and if these Persons after their exclusion from the Churches Prayers went into any House or other Church to pray whoever prays with them especially if he be of the Clergy shall be Excommunicated (x) An. 341. Concil Antiochen Can. 2. which Canon is renewed in the fourth Council of Carthage (y) An. 398. Concil 4. Carthag Can. 73. And as it was grounded on former Canons and a constant usage of the Church from the Apostles time so it is repeated in almost every succeeding Council so that the particulars need not to be cited Now can any have so hard an opinion of these Holy Fathers who lived so near the Apostles to imagine they arbitrarily assumed this power of excluding Criminals from holy Offices and retained it even after the Emperors were Christians and had made secular Laws to punish them or that they pretended Christ the Author of it if he left them no such power The first Council of Toledo Ordains That if any Lay-Man be Excommunicated none of the Clergy or Religious shall converse with him or come at his House and a Clerk deprived shall be avoided by the Clergy and if any be found to discourse or to Eat with them they shall be also Excommunicated if they know them to be under the Censure (z) An. 400. Conc. 1. Tolet. Can. 15. The same Council Decrees That a professed Virgin offending shall not be received into the Church till she have done ten years Penance and none may pray or eat with her till she be admitted into the Church (a) Ibid. Can. 16. Not long after this we meet with the accustomed Form of Excommunication used in that Age which shews both the Original and Effects of this Sentence and the words are these Following the Canonical Sanctions and the Examples of our holy Fathers We Excommunicate ...... by the Authority of God and the Judgment of the Holy Spirit from the Bosom of our Holy Mother the Church and from the Conversation of all Christians until they repent and make satisfaction to the Church of God (b) An. 441. Concil 1. Araus apud Gratian. Which Form shews That they believed their Authority was from God and their direction from the Spirit in laying on this Censure and that the persons so censured were cut off from all Civil and Religious Commerce with other Christians And that this Opinion prevailed even in these remoter parts of the Christian World may be seen by those Ancient Synods held in these Islands under S. Patrick where it was declared That none who was Excommunicated should come into the Church till he had received his Penance (c) An. 456. Synod Patric Can. 18. Spelm. Tom. I. p. 53. And if a Clergy-man were Excommunicate he must Pray alone and neither presume to offer or Consecrate (d) Ibid. Can. 28. And again Hear the Lord saying If he hear thee not let him be to thee as a Heathen and a Publican do not Curse the Excommunicate but repel him from the Communion from the Table from the Prayers and from the Blessing (e) Alter Syn. ejus Can. 4. item ap Spelm. Where grounding the Censure upon our Saviours words they Charitably Condemn all dreadful Anathematizing and allow only the Separation which is more Primitive and more agreeing to the Gospel Spirit For in this Age they considered the dreadful Effects of Excommunication even of the mildest sort and were not forward to proceed that way in light Causes For it was about this time that Pope Leo I. in one of his Decretal Epistles saith Let not the Communion lightly be denied to any Christian neither let that Sentence be uttered by any Priest in Anger which ought to be laid on unwillingly and with grief as a punishment for the greatest Crimes For we know some who for little Offences or slight words have been deprived of the Comfort of the Communion So that the Soul for which Christs Blood was shed by the inflicting of this dreadful punishment is exposed naked disabled and without any defence to the Devils Assaults so that he may take it at his pleasure (f) An. 450. Leon. Decret Epist 89. ad omnes Episc Provenc pag. 469. Where we see he supposes the Excommunicate to be delivered into Sathans power and in extream danger of Eternal Damnation And upon this account it was that those holy Bishops were so loth to inflict this dreadful Sentence till nothing else would do About the beginning of this Age lived the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions as they confess who dispute against that pretended Antiquity which the Romanists attribute to this Work and all do grant it contains a true Scheme of the Church Discipline about the end of the fourth Century And in this Book we find divers passages to confirm this Opinion As where it is ordered that the Bishop shall sit down when he Preaches as having power to judge Sinners for to you O Bishops it is said Whatever ye bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatever ye loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven (g) An. 400. Const Apostol lib. 2. cap. 11. Again the Bishop is commanded when he knows any one to have Sinned to order him to be turned out of the Church with Indignation
And when the Deacons have turned him out they are to return and beg of the Bishop to admit him to Repentance (h) Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 19. And a little after it is said If they do not separate a Wicked Man from the Church they make Gods House a Den of Thieves (i) Idem ibid. In the next Chapter The Bishop ought to remember his Dignity because he hath received power both to bind and to loose (k) Idem lib. 2. cap. 20. Afterwards the Bishop is directed to admonish him twice according to Christs precept who hath offended and if he be still obdurate then he is to declare his Obstinacy to the Church and after that to account him as a Heathen and a Publican and not to admit him into the Church as a Christian but to avoid him as a Heathen (l) Idem lib. 2. cap. 41. cap. 42. Finally There is reckoned up the several sorts of Offenders who are to be Excommunicated or to be utterly rejected (m) Idem lib. 8. cap. 38. Adulterers and all that minister to unlawful Lusts such as make Idols and live by the Stage those that use Divination and follow the Jewish or Gentile Superstitions all these are to be Excommunicated till they forsake their evil ways But upon their repentance to be received Which evidently proves That Excommunication was then believed to be the Bishops Office and that this power was derived from Christ and founded upon those Words of the Gospel which we have cited before It were endless to cite all the Councils which mention this Sacred punishment because it is mentioned in every one But it may be worth observing That in the famous General Council of Chalcedon which was confirmed by the Emperors Authority there are Decrees for Excommunicating some Offenders and for Anathematizing others (n) An. 450. Concil Chalced. Can. 2 4 7 8 15 16 20. 27. And this Canonical punishment is particularly ordered to be inflicted on any belonging to the Church who forsake the Judgment of their own Bishop and fly to secular Tribunals (o) Ibid. Can. 9. So that the Bishops did determine what Offences were thus to be punished and the Emperors were so far from hindring them that they confirmed all their Determinations so that such as were obstinate durst not but submit to them in regard the Civil Powers gave them the force of Laws and by Temporal Penalties compelled Men to obey the Canons which is one great end of Christian Magistrates as Mr. Selden confesseth out of Isidore The Magistrates would not be necessary in the Church but only that what the Priest cannot effect by the Word and Doctrine the Magistrate may cause to be done by the Terror of his Discipline (o) Isidor Hispal Sent. l. 3. cap. 53. But to proceed It was a manifest Sign that these Ages did believe Excommunication had its effect upon Mens Souls and not only excluded them out of the Society of Christians upon Earth but also put them into extream danger of Damnation in the next World because in all the Old Councils such care is taken that none who had submitted to Penitence should dye without being absolved and admitted to the Holy Communion for their restoring to the Communion of the Visible Church could signifie little to them who were never like to walk abroad again or to come to the Church any more wherefore this was intended to prevent the sad effects which this Sentence unreversed might have upon them in another World as being laid on by the Authority of Christ The old Canons which take this care may be seen together in Albaspinaeus But the same Proviso was made in the Councils of this Age also viz. That such as were Excommunicated and fell into Mortal Sickness should have the Sacrament before they died (p) An. 524. Concil Ilerd can 2. Can. 5. Item An. 540. Concil 3. Aurel. Can. 6. Can. 16. Cum multis alijs And here also I must note That about this time there was a Custom Annually to Excommunicate some kind of Notorious Offenders which is mentioned in the third Council of Orleance (q) An. 540. Concil 3. Aurel. Can. 13. Can. 30. though some would pretend it to be a Custom of later times only As to the Condition of Persons Excommunicate the Ancient Discipline was still observed They were to put on the habit of Mourners (r) An. 506. Concil Agathens Can. 15. none were to eat with them (s) An. 507. Concil I. Aurel. Can. 13. For which the Apostles words are quoted (t) An. 524. Concil Ilerd Can. 4. They were to be deprived of all Conversation and discourse with the Faithful (u) An. 531. Concil 2. Tole tan Can. 3. And finally whosoever did either Pray with these or Eat or Converse with them were also to be Excommunicated (w) Concil Bracar l. Can. 33. An. 563. An. 590. Concil Antissid Can. 38 39. So that we may see the Ancient Discipline was still in force until the year 600 after Christ and that with little or no Variation unless in the dealing more gently with Penitents because the World could scarce bear those ancient severities so many years together After this we may observe out of Gregory the Great that it was then the General Opinion That Bishops held the place of the Apostles and they who had obtained this Degreee for Government had received the power of Binding and Loosing Yea that whether the Pastor laid on this Bond justly or no it was to be dreaded by those of his Flock (x) An. 600. Greg. M. hom 26. in Evang. Tom. II. pag. 129. And in his Epistles which passed for Law through divers Ages there are many Instances of the exercise of this Power which S. Gregory would not have any Bishop use rashly nor to revenge his private wrongs because it was designed for more Spiritual ends (y) Greg. M. Epist lib. 2. ind XI ep 45. Item ibid. ind c. X. Ep. 34. And it seems the Pope did not then pretend a General Commission to Absolve all that other Bishops Excommunicated for he gives this reason why he Absolves one of Milan because the Bishop who censured him was dead and no Successor chosen (z) Ibid. ind XI epist 65. And in the Instructions he gives to Augustine the Monk for the right Governing the newly Converted English Saxons he doth allow him in some Cases to Excommunicate (a) Greg. resp ad interrog August Cap. 7. Spelm. p. 98. though since it was a new planted Church he adviseth him to proceed gently However it is certain that the use of this Censure came into this Nation with their Christianity And that Almighty God did shew his Judgments upon those who despised this Sentence which was pronounced in his Name may be seen in that memorable Example related by Beda who tells us That S. Chad Bishop of the East-Saxons Excommunicated one of King Sigebert's Earls for an
unlawful Marriage Warning all not to come into his House till he did repent But the King would not forbear visiting this Earl whereupon the Bishop foretold the King that if he persisted to converse with this Excommunicate Person he would be slain in that very house which accordingly came to pass for that very Earl and his Complices slew Sigebert there (b) An. 638. vel An. 660. Bedae histor lib. 3. cap. 22. Which remarkable Judgment no doubt made the Sentence of our Venerable Bishops to be much dreaded in those days And for that reason our old Canons decreed That a Bishop should not rashly Excommunicate any Man no not though there were never so just a Cause (c) An. 750. Egber Excerpta Can. 48. Spelm. pag. 263. because of the dreadful consequences then believed to follow upon this Censure But to return to Foreign Countries In this Age were made those Ancient Laws of the Almains wherein besides the Temporal Penalties for Sacriledge it is declared the person so offending shall incurre the Judgment of God and the Excommunication of holy Church (d) An. 630. Leges Alem. Cap. 1. Capital Tom. I. pag. 57. So that they did not think Secular Penalties made this useless in a Christian Commonwealth but on the contrary the Temporal Laws now began to decree severe punishments to be inflicted by the Civil Magistrate upon those who despised the Authority of Church Censures A memorable proof of which we have in the Constitutions made by King Pepin Father to Charles the Great with the advice of his Bishops and Barons Wherein they Ordain That whoever wittingly Communicates with an Excommunicate person he shall be Excommunicated also And that all may know the Nature of this Excommunication they declare He who is thus under Censure must not come into the Church nor eat or drink with any Christian none may receive any gift from him or give him a kiss or joyn in prayer with him nor salute him till he be reconciled to his own Bishop And if any think that he is Excommunicated unjustly he may complain to the Metropolitan and have his Cause tried by the Canons but in the mean time he must lye under his Sentence And if any despise all this so that the Bishop cannot amend him then he shall be Condemned to Banishment by the King's Judgment (e) An. 753. Pipin cap. 9. Capitul Tom. I. pag. 172. Which Law is repeated again by some of the Successors of this Pious Prince (f) Capitul lib. 5. cap. 62. pag. 836. And indeed in those Capitulars of the Ancient Kings and Emperors of France there are many excellent Canons of Old Councils revived and established by the Royal Authority which Canons the Bishops first made and Decreed in their Synods and then to make the People more strictly obey them the King with his Bishops and Barons confirmed them and put them among their Laws Which was not any Exercise of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction nor done with any intent to take the Government of the Church and the power of Censures out of the Bishops hands as Mr. Selden pretends but rather to strengthen their Divine Right by a Civil Sanction For these very Capitulars do still own That the Bishops have Authority from God to Excommunicate Which one instance out of very many there to be found shall suffice to prove The Laity must know that the power of Binding and Loosing is by the Lord conferred on the Priest and therefore they ought to obey their Admonitions and humbly to submit to their Excommunications (g) Addit 3. Lud. cap. 23. Capit. Tom. I. pag. 1161. I cite this the rather because Mr. Selden hath the confidence to quote this very place in his Margin as a proof that the French Princes did take upon them to Order the Matters of Excommunications and Penances (h) Seld. de Synedrijs Lib. 1. cap. 10. p. 192. whereas this as well as his other proofs do only shew that those Princes believed the Bishops had a Divine Right to Excommunicate and therefore that it was their duty to compel the Refractory to submit to their Censures Nor did those Princes ever take this power out of the Bishops hands but rather fix it there where God had placed it Whence it was that they made these Laws If any Lay-Man of higher or lower Degree hath Sinned and being called by his Bishops Authority refuseth to submit to Penitence and Amendment he shall be so long Banished from the Church and separated from the company of all good Christians as he forbeareth to amend (i) Capitul lib. 6. cap. 88. Tom. I. p. 936. And again He that is Excommunicated shall be excluded not only from Eating and Discoursing with the Clergy but also from Eating or Talking with any of the People (k) Capitul l. 6. cap. 142. pag. 946. Also it is Ordained That the Christians shall not lightly esteem the Excommunications of their Clergy for even this Contempt is a just Cause of Excommunication (l) Ibid. cap. 248. pag. 964. And in another place That no Excommunicate Person shall be a Godfather for those who by Gods Law and the Authority of the Canons are turned out of the Church and out of the Camp lest they bring a Curse on the People these are much more to be kept off from these Sacred Duties (m) Capitul Additam II. cap. 1. p. 1135. Where besides the express and plain affirmation That Excommunicate Persons are by Gods Law to be excluded the Church we see That from the History of Achan's bringing a Curse on the Army of Israel they would not suffer the Excommunicate to bear Arms in their Camp Which is also intimated in those Laws which cite that place of Joshuah There is an Anathema in the midst of thee therefore thou canst not stand before thy Enemies (u) An. 869. Car. Calv cap. 20. Tom. II. pag. 213. And it is most clear by these Capitulars that the Kings Authority did follow the Bishops Act and the Temporal Justice did punish him that was stubborn and refractory and would not obey the Bishops Sentence nor be brought to Repentance by his Spiritual Censures Thus Lhotharius ordains That an obstinate Person who is Excommunicated shall be Imprisoned by the High-Sheriff or the Count (o) An. 824. Capit Lhothar cap. 15. Tom. II. pag. 323. And he that infringes the Liberties of a Church is to be Excommunicated by the Bishop and notice to be given of it to other Bishops and the High-Sheriff is to make him pay his Fine and if he despise all this being judged by Law he is to be Beheaded and his Goods Confiscated (p) An. 367. Capit. Lud. 2. cap. 8. ibid. pag. 363. Yea those who were Excommunicate for Fornication and did not submit were to be Banished the Kingdom and such as retained them were thought to offend against God and the sacred Authority yea and against the Common Interest of Christianity
iii. 10. but the Arrians and other Hereticks were then so numerous and so bold as to hold their Churches in despite of the Ecclesiastical censures Whereupon the Orthodox Emperors strengthened the Bishops Sentences with Secular Laws and by temporal penalties enjoyned the same things which the Bishops had decreed by Divine Authority and writ to their Prefects and great Officers to see the insolence of the Hereticks restrained and that they should turn them out of the Churches by force from whence the Bishops had excluded them by their Spiritual sentence Now is this to take the Bishops office and power from them Yea is not this the plainest evidence the Emperors could give that they believed the Bishops had this Power from God when they make themselves executioners of their Sentence upon the stubborn and refractory Again the eldest of these rescripts bears date An. 381. and Mr. Selden supposes that this power was delegated to the Bishops by the Emperors long before and if so how came they now first personally to exercise it or when did they reassume this Power or take it from the Bishops again Did not the Bishops at Constantinople in the second general Council this very year exercise this same power Why then should this confirmation of their Sentence this following their decision by a Temporal Law be supposed a taking away their power If we examine the date of that Council it is plain that the Council was begun in May and continued to November An. 381 as the learned Dr. Beverege computes (z) Bever Annot Tom. 2. p. 89. But this Law bears date the 4th of the Ides of January following and under the same Consuls (a) Justin Cod. l. 1. tit I. L. 2. p. 1. So that the Bishops had first Excommunicated every Heresy contrary to the Nicene Faith in the first Canon of that Council and then some Months after the Emperor orders his Prefects to see their Sentence executed Fourthly Mr. Selden brings in those Imperial Laws that did allow the Bishops to be the Judges in all causes if the contending parties consented and also those which only permit them to judge causes concerning matters of Religion or matters between Clergy-men and he supposes the Emperors permitting enlarging and tempering or restraining this sort of jurisdiction arbitrarily will prove that they did the same as to Excommunication which is the principal instrument serving to this Jurisdiction (b) Seld. Synedr L. I. cap. 10. p. 187 188 189 190. To which I reply that the Bishops had a power of Excommunication long before they had this Jurisdiction and the one no ways depends on the other nor do these Edicts at all mention the power of Excommunication Nor was that Power ever limited to be used only against the Clergy as this Jurisdiction sometimes seems to have been And again if it were only a power to judge causes where both Parties were willing as is clearly expressed in the Laws of Arcadius Honorius and Theodosius They who will try their causes before them by consent (c) Justin Co◠L. I. tit 4. L. VII and they who have chosen the Priests to hear their cause (d) Ibid. L. 8. p. 25 26. then Excommunication was not needful nor could it be any instrument serving to this kind of Jurisdiction Wherefore the Emperors enlarging or restraining this Jurisdiction did no way enlarge or restrain their power of Excommunication which they exercised against Hereticks and such as were guilty of impieties or immoralities not against those who contended about their Civil Rights So that all these Laws are nothing to the purpose Only we may observe That Constantines first Law giving them a general power of hearing all sorts of Civil causes bears date An. 314 (e) Selden Syned L. I. cap. 10. p. 177. and remained in force above Sixty years and if it were narrowed An. 376 (f) Ibid. p. 187 of which if it were to our purpose some question might be made yet it was soon after enlarged again viz. An. 398 (g) Ibid. p. 190. and the great Bishops at that time exercised all manner of Jurisdiction (h) Socrates hist l. 7. cap. 7. Now I refer it to any indifferent judge whether it be likely that those Emperors who gave them more Power than Christ had appointed should take from them an ancient piece of Authority which these Bishops openly declared they derived from Christ and which they and their Predecessors had always enjoyed Fifthly He alledges that Justinian doth very often in his own name pronounce Anathema's against Hereticks (i) Seld. ibid. p. 172. But this is easily answered out of the places cited by Mr. Selden For Justinian declares there That herein he followed the Apostles and the holy Bishops who succeeded them (k) Justin Cod. L. l. tit 1. L. V. praef And that he followed the holy Priests herein (l) Ibid. L. VI. praefat and did Anathematize all them that had been Anathematized in the four General Councils (m) Ibid. L. VII §. 3 4 5. Yea he saith that all the Bishops which were present had subscribed these Anathema's (n) Ibid. L. VII §. 3. p. 4. Wherefore this is only a declaration of that Emperors Faith and an evidence that he held the true Catholick Religion nor was his putting these Anathema's into his Edict any exercise of the power of Excommunication For besides that they are levelled at opinions and not at any particular persons This general Anathema was not properly a Censure but an high act of detestation declaring the Person using it abhorred those Opinions and thought such as held them deserved to be accursed that is by those who had the Power to pronounce them so judicially And Mr. Selden knew this very well for in the next Page Page 173. he observes that some learned Men do distinguish concerning these Anathema's used by Lay-Men either in Donations or Laws and those pronounced by the Clergy for these are effectual but those of the Laity only signify those that use them wish such a sentence might be issued out effectually by the Ecclesiastical Orders against these Hereticks or that they give their assent to some such sentence formerly pronounced by these Orders or that they highly detest and abhor such persons and their Opinions Even as the reconciled Quartadecimani who were Lay-Men did Anathematize that and all Heresies in the Council of Ephesus (o) Seld. Synedr l. I. cap. 10. p. 173. Item Binius Tom. I. par 2. pag. 260. Now it would be a very weak assertion to say these Lay-Men did in this renouncing Heresy with Anathema's exercise the office of Bishops and yet that is as true and reasonable as to think or affirm that Justinian did take upon him by his own Imperial Authority to Excommunicate these Hereticks by Anathema's For when the Anathema was a formal Sentence it was always pronounced by a Bishop Sixthly his most specious Argument is that Novel Constitution of
say that Excommunication is especially requisite to be retained according to the Word of God He grants also that the Gallican Confession declares the same thing and that Beza and Calvin both have written for the Divine Right of Excommunication (e) Idem ibid. pag. 176. And for the Church of England the Form of Excommunicating since the Reformation agreed upon in a Synod under Queen Elizabeth An. 1571. doth fully declare the same Opinion for the Bishop is appointed in the Name and by the Authority of Almighty God to Excommunicate such an one from all fellowship with Gods Church and as a dead limb to cut him off from the Body of Christ (f) Canones Anni 1571. ap Spar. Collec p. And that admirable Apology of Bishop Juel which is owned by all to contain the pure Doctrine of the Church of England saith in the name of this Church We say that Christ hath given to Ministers the power of Binding and loosing shutting and opening and this power of Binding and Shutting we say they exercise when they shut the Kingdom of Heaven against the unbelieving and contumacious and denounce the wrath of God and eternal punishments on them or when they publickly Excommunicate them out of the Bosom of the Church and the Sentence which the Ministers of God thus inflict God himself doth so approve that whatsoever by their means is Loosed or bound on Earth he will Bind or Loose and make valid in Heaven (g) Juelli Apol. Eccles Angl. §. 5. p. 30 c. The Canons of King James also declare That such as offend their Brethren by Adultery Whoredom Incest Drunkenness Swearing Ribaldry Usury or by any other Uncleanness or Wickedness of Life shall be presented to the Ordinaries to be punished and that they shall not be admitted to the Communion till they be Reformed (h) Can. An. 1603. Can. 109. I could give many other clear proofs that this is and always was the Doctrine of the Reformed Church of England but this is enough to satisfie all impartial Persons that the Opinion we maintain hath been owned for truth in all Ages as well in Ancient as later times And we may now conclude That the Bishops have a Right to Excommunicate by Arguments drawn from the Light of Nature and the practice of the Jews by the Express Institution of Christ and by the practice of the Holy Apostles recorded in Scripture Which power they have claimed as belonging to them of Divine Right in all Ages and upon that Principle have used it in Censuring notorious Offenders by excluding them from Civil and Sacred Commerce to bring them to shame and so to Repentance and Amendment of Life And their Sentence when pronounced according to the Rules of the Gospel on the Sinful and Contumacious hath been feared by all orderly Christians as a Sentence which God will ratifie and which without Repentance will deliver over the Criminal to his Eternal Vengeance § VI. The third particular proposed concerning the ends for which Excommunication was instituted having been often touched at already may now serve for a Conclusion And there are three Principal ends of this holy Rite as may be gathered from the Scripture First it was instituted for the honour of Christ and his Church and the Credit of Christian Religion Our Lord himself was pure from all Sin his Religion obligeth all that profess it to depart from all Iniquity (i) 2 Tim. ii 19. Professio fidei Christianae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zosim hist l. 4. p. 779. and he designs his Church shall be without Spot or Wrinkle Ephes v. 27. a holy Nation a peculiar People 1 Peter ii 6. free from the leaven of Malice and Wickedness 1 Cor. v. 7. And therefore he hath left power with his Church to cast out all Workers of Iniquity Revel xxii 15. There will be offenders and offences but if the Church do admonish the Criminals and Censure them publickly that clears her from all suspicion of Guilt and from all just ground of Calumny and preserves not only her purity but her Reputation It was the great Honour of Sparta as a Senator there said That none could be Wicked in that City and be unpunished And this Discipline kept up the Credit of the Ancient Church for many Ages so that its very Enemies did admire it and Millions of Proselytes came over to it But when this Primitive Discipline did abate the Church evidently decayed in its esteem as well as its Manners And this is but too plainly verified in our days for since these Censures have been brought into Contempt we are almost overwhelmed with a Flood of those Wickednesses which the Secular Laws seldom Punish Adultery Fornication and Incest Drunkenness Blasphemy and Swearing Sacriledge Faction and Malice (k) Canon 109. Can. 4 6 7. Rubric before the Commun which are properly of Ecclesiastical Cognizance are grown so common and so daring that they have brought an infinite disgrace and a deplorable Scandal on our most holy Religion This drives some from the Church hardens other in their Sinful Separation and opens the Mouths of all our Adversaries as if they justly left that Church where such Wickedness goes unpunished 'T is true their Argument is as ill grounded as their Separation For they may be as virtuous as they please in a Church wherein many are vitious and while wickedness displeaseth them it cannot hurt them for Lot was innocent in Sodom so long as he was vexed at the Conversation of the wicked 2 Pet. ii 7 8. And besides it is not the Churches fault that these Crimes are not amended and therefore it ought to be as free of the blame as it is of the Guilt of this Impunity The Priests lament it and complain of it The Bishops do all they can to suppress these growing Evils but being Judges they must not be Informers And one Cause of this mischief is the neglect of presenting such Offenders to the Ecclesiastical Tribunals Those whose Office it is though solemnly sworn to do it yet for fear of the Rich and in favour to the Poor neglect this useful duty choosing rather to offend God by Perjury and to offend the Church by being the cause of this Scandal than to disoblige their vicious Neighbours But if they would Present them then if they be not either amended or cast out of the Society the fault would lye at the Churches door I know these Officers excuse their negligence and Perjury by pretending that sometimes the Criminals get off by Money or Friends and then they are exposed to their revenge for being Instrumental to their Conviction But our Bishops do enquire after and punish this Male-Administration whensoever they discover it and I know it is their desire and endeavour that no Scandalous offender shall get loose from this salutary Bond till they have given good evidence of their sorrow for their fault their purposes of amendment and their Charity to such as were