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
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
Jerusalem Secondly That it was after two Admonitions as Christ advised Matth. xviii Thirdly That hereby he was thrust back into that same estate he was in before his Baptism About thirty years after Cerdon the Heretick came to Rome in the time of Hyginus An. 153. and at first confessed his Error in the Church and lived orderly but being found out to have taught it in secret often and often to have recanted it again he was at last admonished and turned out of the Assembly of the Faithful (w) Iren. lib. 3. cap. 4. ex eo Euseb l. 4. c. 11. Soon after came Marcion to Rome also whose Father being Bishop of Sinope in Pontus had Excommunicated this Son of his for the Crime of Fornication and refused to receive him in again Nor would the Presbyters of the Roman Church who had conversed with the Apostles receive him into Communion though he had offered 200 Sesterces to their Church (x) Epiph. Panar l. 3. Tom. I. haeres 42. p. 135. Tertul. de praescript haeret c. 30. p. 212. semel atque iterum ejecti novissime in perpetuum dissidium relegati Tertul. ibid. but rejected him and his Offering also which was in the time when Hyginus their Bishop was dead An. 155. And Tertullian adds That Valentinus and Marcion having been once and again cast out at lest they were for ever Excommunicated by that Church which he saith was in the time of Eleutherius whos 's next Successor Victor about the year 192. excommunicated Theodotus the Heretick then living at Rome for denying the Divinity of our Saviour (y) Euseb Hist l. 5. c. 27. p. 145. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Eusebius relates And had he exercised this Power only upon those of his own Church he had not met with so much opposition but he about the year 198. Excommunicated the Bishops of Asia for not agreeing with him in the time of keeping the Feast of Easter (z) Euseb ibid. l. 5. c. 23. p. 142. which rash act of his displeased many even of the Western Bishops and Irenaeus particularly who sharply rebukes him for it shewing that none of his Predecessors had ever done such a thing to Excommunicate Foreign Churches for a difference only in a Matter of Ceremony yet still this shews the practice of Excommunication was frequent in these early times And the manner of inflicting these Censures is soon after An. 200. described by Tertullian who speaking of the Religious Assemblies of the Christians saith There are Exhortations Rebukes and the Divine Censure for they judge with great Authority as being assured of God's Presence among them so that if any so offend as to be excluded from communicating in Prayers from the Assemblies and from all Sacred Commerce it is a strong presumption of their Condemnation in the last Judgment The Presidents of these Assemblies are divers ancient and approved Persons (a) Tertul. Apol c. 39. p. 31. In which eminent Testimony we see there were Admonitions first and then sharper Rebukes preceding the Censure according to our Saviour's Method And for the Authority of these Censures it is expresly said to be Divine and upon Christ's Promise to be with those who met together on this occasion in his Name Matth. xviii 20. Tertullian affirms they are certain of God's Presence with them in this Act yea since our Lord had said What they bound on Earth should be bound in Heaven he reckons that the last dreadful Judgment will go according to this Ecclesiastical Sentence And as to the Effect of this Excommunication on Earth the Party under it is neither to come into the Church nor to pray or have any commerce with the Faithful Finally The Bishop and his Clergy are the Dispensers of this Discipline and the Governours of Christian Assemblies and if any doubt of this last particular the same Tertullian speaking of what was in the Apostles days and his own too in the Bishops Power expresly saith It was in his power to Excommunicate (b) Ut extra Ecclesiam quis detur erat in Praesidentis officio Tert. de pudicit c. 14. p. 556. which are so clear Confutations of all our Innovators in this Matter that these places alone might silence them Yet there are more passages in this Father to this purpose As where he saith Whoredom and Murder are interdicted and the Gladiators are driven out of the Church (c) Tertul. de Idololat c. 11. p. 91. And where he affirms That Christians marrying with Heathens are counted guilty of Whoredom and are to be excluded from all Communion with the Faithful according to the Orders of the Apostle who saith With such no not to eat (d) Arcendos ab omni communicatione fraternitatis Tert. ad uxor l. 2. c. 3. And for other unlawful Lusts he saith They did not only exclude them from the Church Porch but allowed them not to come near that holy place being not barely Vices but monstrous Crimes (e) Non modò limine verùm omni Ecclesiae tecto submoveâ—nus Tert. de pudicit c. 4. p. 557. And Albáspinaeus hath observed That in the first Ages of the Church Murtherers Adulterers Apostates and such like notorious Offenders were irreversibly Excommunicated and if they were admitted to remain among the Penitents yet they would not Absolve them nor restore them to the Communion of the Church so long as they lived till by degrees the Discipline of the Church slackened (f) Albaspin observ l. 2. c. 8. c. and then certain years of Penance were enjoyned those Offenders and if they gave signs of great Sorrow and hearty Repentance after that time they were by certain steps restored to the Communion of the Church And now we have mentioned that Learned Author it may not be amiss to hear his description of the state of Excommunicate Persons in these times of which we now speak They were not only driven from Religious Assemblies but all despised abhorred and fled from them as putrid Members fit to be cut off It was counted a sin to treat or make bargains with them none would salute them or call them Brethren none would look on them speak to them or invite them to a Meal yea so strict were they that none would joyn with them in Prayers to God (g) Albaspin l. 1. obs 1. p. 2. Which Character is the more to be esteemed because he there proves all this by the Canons of very ancient Councils which Excommunicate those who pray with these Persons (h) Apost Can. 10. Laodic Can. 33. Antioch 1. Can. 2. Carthag 4. Can. 73. and those who have any Conversation with them or be in the same House or Feast with them or speak to them (i) Antioch 1. Can. 2. Arelat 2. Can. 30. Antissiod Can. 39. as may be seen more at large in that Author All which abundantly proves That the Christians of that Time did look upon the Excommunicate to be in a damnable Condition