pleading thy right during thy priviledge of positive Church membership And in the last place I shall in all humility offer a few words to the reverend Ministers of God as a means to quench the present flames that are in the Church of Christ in England First let me beseech you not to urge upon your people any practise under necessity of duties of worship either publique or private that is not evidently commanded or at least deducted from the clear and genuine sense of holy Scripture by necessary consequence Secondly labour so to agree among your selves in the main essentials of Doctrine Worship and Discipline that in every place there may be a preaching and holding forth of the same things in all Thirdly condescend to the meanest of your people with an equall respect in all your ministeriall administrations both publique and private that none may be discouraged nor any indulged in an evill way Fourthly be as watchfull of those that are inclined to an inordinate zeal in the smaller matters of Religion as of those that expresse but little zeal at all in Gods worship Fifthly allow the worst of your people the title of Christians beleevers members and allow them all other externall priviledges which of right are theirs in regard of their relative state as they are such yet deal faithfully with them as touching their reall state in order to their eternall weal or woe Sixthly decline as much as may be novelty and variety in profession catechismes and all essentials of publique worship that your people may more willingly adhere to you and give you the greater advantage to advance the Christian Religion among them Lastly What in you lies restore with the spirit of meeknesse in your private admonitions weak brethren that through infirmity fall do not exasperate any w th pulpit invections unlesse it be in case of known obstinacy But I shall leave all to your charitable construction and sober apprehension of what I do here offer to your consideration I am a poor worm and look to be despised for medling with things out of my spheare but I see it 's the common lot of the most learned in these times to be reproached and therefore I shall the better bear it though for this my vindicating of Mr. Humfrey from reproach I be the more reproached I am sorry his principles be not vindicated from the reverend Doctors exceptions and objections by a better pen then his Who is thy humble servant breathing after the simplicity of truth John Timson The Barre to free Admission to the LORDS SVPPER removed MEEting with a Book called A Barre to free Admission to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper written by Doctor Drake in answer to Mr. Humphrey and having diligently read both I finde that even good men are too apt to reprove one another in things controverted betwixt them which ought not so to be As for Mr. Humphreys vindication of free admission as he states bounds and handles it it seems to me more rationall and clear then to deserve so many harsh expressions from the reverend Doctor as he hath let slip whether in haste or more deliberately I leave to himself to consider Sure I am some words might better have been spared then so published in print to the world it being not yet determined whether Mr. Humphreys discourse be untrue or no though disputable with the Doctor it seems whether it be more full of words or untruthes which is very uncharitable and unbrotherly dealing but I forbear Both the reverend Doctor and Mr. Humprey are Gentlemen I am altogether unacquainted with whose gifts learned abilities I yet much reverence and wish this poor distracted Church may never want such officers to rule and feed her in the Lord as the meanest of them be It 's an unhappy controversie I confesse and little cause there is to take content in these debates yet as times are it hath need of scanning and sifting because much of the unity and welbeing of the nationall Church depends upon the right stating and clearing of this Question our doubts and scruples concerning the holy Supper having upon the matter unsetled all Some mistakes about admission thereto have run thousands into faction schisme and separation under a zeal of separating the Precious from the Vile of withholding the childrens bread from dogs of preserving the Ordinances pure c. The premises are good conducing much to reformation were they not misapplyed in respect of persons and in respect of the right way and means of putting them in execution as things now stand as I beleeve it will appear they are by this following discourse wherein I shall endevour to vindicate that little Tract of Mr. Humphrey from the Doctors unbrotherly dealing with him according to my measure and meannesse Not that I intend an orderly and exact reply to every particular which neither my capacity nor occasions of my laborious calling will bear but to undermine his chiefest strength passing by the rest And first of all for the Text which Mr. Humphrey delivers his discourse upon though he may be thought not so happy in his choice of it in order to what he insisteth on as having rather a sound then a true and full sense of the question and point concluded yet I doubt not but the discourse will as to the substance thereof be warranted by other Scriptures And for Judas his receiving or not receiving I look not upon it as clearly argumentative one way or other Neither do I think that first president without the supply of other Scriptures would make much for or against us in this matter they being Apostles only that then received whose office in the Church is now ceased In short I shall not go about to defend every quotation or assertion in Mr. H. Book nor to clear him from some inconsistences pointed out by the reverend Doctor it 's sufficient that he hath made good the main thing asserted namely That all Church members of years and under Church indulgence not rightly excommunicated may come freely to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper His free Admission is limited with exceptions of infants distracted the excommunicated and he might say the drunk Now the Doctor saith That by the same reason that he excepts these we may may except the grosly ignorant and scandalous in the Church Concerning which this twofold inquiry is made 1. Whether Church members of years having the exercise of reason being ignorant be as uncapable of the Sacrament as Infants or distraught 2. Whether scandalous members under Church indulgence may be equally debarred this Church priviledge with the regularly excommunicated To the former of these the Doctor saith That the grosly ignorant are as uncapable to examine themselves and discerne the Lords body as Infants and therefore as justly to be excepted against nay more because Infants and distraught may have the grace of the covenant really the other not To which I answer what the secret working of the
committing of some grosse and scandalous sinne is made by God an occasion of conversion shall any take warrant therefrom to commit scandalous sins c. To all which I answer That all which he hath to that purpose is argued from meer mistakes he taking for granted all along that the unregenerate in the Church do necessarily eat and drink unworthily in the Apostles sense whereas I conceive the contrary hath been already fully declared And therefore it would be well if he would see his mistake and alter his judgement that others might not be in danger of being misled by him In the mean time what he hath charged Mr. H. with in point of excommunication untruly may be retorted upon himself justly It is a cruell assertion a bloudy tenent c. And that not only in his depriving many souls of the benefit and spirituall good of so blessed an ordinance but in his detracting also from the goodnesse grace and power of God in that ordinance as if Christ had appointed it in the Church rather for the hurt then for the spirituall good of his visible subjects they partaking thereof conformly according to their present capacity Object But then saith the Doctor If it be a convering ordinance we may administer the Sacrament to the Heathen to convert them to Christianity for if it will convert those in the Church that have but the form to the power of Religion then it will sure convert the Heathen at least to the form if it will do the greater much more the lesser To this I answer Solution That an argument drawn from the greater to the lesser must be of things of the same kinde and so of men under an equall capacity else it will not hold I can throw a stone over a house can I therefore throw a feather this is lesse then the other and yet though the same arme and strength be put forth it will not do it The fallacy of the argument lies in this That there is not the same capacity of receiving good by the Sacrament in both the formall professing Christian is not in such an incapacity of receiving good by that ordinance as the Heathen are We know that to Heathens that never heard of Christ or at least do not acknowledge him their redeeming Lord so as to come under his Lawes no not so much as Baptisme the outward elements are but meer civill things And they might be easily perswaded to take and eat of those elements of Bread and Wine in order to the good of their bodies but not for the good of their souls before they own Christ to be their Lord Redeemer and Saviour till then they know not what these things mean But those among us educated in the true Religion do acknowledge Christ their redeeming Lord and they do know in some measure what these things of God mean so that the Sacrament in an ordinary way may work some proper effect upon the one but can have none upon the other without a miracle Besides it is clear enough that as no uncircumcised persons were to enter into the Sanctuary or to eat of the Passeover so no unbaptized person is to partake of the holy Supper in that Communion Were there the like ground of denying the Sacrament to the ignorant and scandalous persons under Church indulgence that there is of denying it to infidels this controversie had been at an end before this time It cannot be denyed but excommunication is appointed in the Church to convert and reduce the obstinate and wilful sinners therein doth it therefore follow that we may exercise this means of conversion to Heathens out of the Church What can be more absurd Nay what have we to do to judge them that are without 1 Cor. 5.12 The Doctor knowes well enough that different premises will not bear the same conclusions and the truth is for want of making premises equall according to Scripture presidents we have run upon false conclusions to instance in some 1. Because we finde in Scripture the distinction of beleever and unbeleever used to distinguish the Church from the World how commonly is the same used to make a distinction in the Church amongst us who in Scripture sense are all beleevers for it is evident that an unbeleever in the Scripture sense is either a Pagan infidell or an unbeleeving Jew that absolutely renounces Christ under the notion of a false Christ a deceiver a devill c. refusing to obey his Lawes or to expect salvation by him 2. Because we finde that these unbeleevers are under wrath Aliens from the common-wealth of Israel strangers to the Covenants of promise without hope and without God in the world Ephes 2.12 Which was true of the Ephesians before they received the Gospell that therefore the unregenerate in the Church are under the same condition though they beleeve in a true sense though not sincerely and are under the Covenant and persons to whom the adoption and the giving of the Law and the service of God pertains as once to the Jewes Rom. 9.4 34. finding warrant in the word to separate from the Infidell and idolatrous world especially in matter of worship therefore they conclude we must separate our selves from the unregenerate in the Church 4. Because we finde that some beleevers have by their unworthy and undecent behaviour in time of administration profaned the Sacrament to their own perill and judgement therefore we conclude First That those whose persons are unworthy as not being regenerate eat and drink unworthily Secondly That some other unworthy actions of Christians committed before their comming to the Sacrament renders them uncapable of worthy receiving and consequently renders them liable to judgement therein 5. Because we finde in the Scripture some excommunicated for foul and scandalous sins and blasphemous opinions therefore we conclude we may exercise Church censures for any sin even for omission of such duties as are dubious whether injoyned in the word or no but I have done with these false conclusions There is one objection more which the Doctor makes against Mr. H. Free Admission to which I desire to speak something The objection is this Object That Mr. H. Free Admission strengthens the hands of the wicked by promising them lies in the Name of the Lord and makes sad the hearts of the righteous whom God would not have made sad by their profaning the ordinance c. And this he endevours to back with the language of the Sacrament or words which the Minister uses in the delivering of the Sacrament to particular persons by his words and action giving and tendring Christ and all his benefits of grace and glory to the wicked as well as to the godly the which grace and glory the Sacraments are appointed to assure and confirm c. When as in the preaching of the word it is farre otherwise the Minister therein not dispensing the same to all alike but preaching comfort to whom comfort belongs and terrour to whom
can and what they cannot let them patiently suffer and with love groan and lament it And to the same purpose he brings in the advice of Augustine touching the abounding of drunkennesse in Africa this and the like evils according to his judgement are to be taken away not roughly nor after an imperious manner but more by teaching then commanding more by admonishing then by threatning and that is the way to deal with a multitude of sinners severity must be exercised on the sin of a few c. And he concludeth thus The command of the Apostle 1 Cor. 5.7 to cast out the wicked is in no case to be neglected when it may be done without perill of breaking the peace of the Church Institut lib. 4. cap. 12. Sect. 11.13 And we may take notice that where there is mention made of the Apostles exercising of Discipline it is only upon particular persons and not upon a multitude when he findes many guilty of evill practises he reproves admonishes and threatens to come with the rod 2 Cor. 12.20 13.21 1 Cor. 4.21 And truly as the state of things now stands I think it will be found a very difficult thing to get into possession of the true way of discipline and to make that use of it that the Churches peace and edification may be promoted and not prejudiced by it For either the supposed unregenerate in the Church shall on the one hand be cast off and separated from as in the Independent way and some others or else on the other hand the dissenting brethren will be judged schismatical for causing divisions and separations in the Church contrary to the Doctrine of Jesus Christ And therefore our condition is the more sad in that Discipline which tends so much to the wel-being of the Church can so hardly be attained amongst us Thus I have given you my judgement and apprehensions in this point Now in the next place Because these Gentlemen have commended a way of Discipline to the godly I shall crave leave a little to examine it whether it be such a one as godly men may safely receive and use as the discipline of Jesus Christ and not rather reject it as having nothing of Christ in the rise and root of it according to holy Scripture and this I shall do very briefly because I have said so much to the point already 1. It 's well they acknowledge our parochiall congregations to be true Churches though it be but in a large sense for being such they come under the same lawes and priviledges externally which belong to true Churches in the strictest sense that is unlesse they can finde a different rule in Scripture for true Churches though not in the same degree of purity which I believe they cannot because I do not finde but Laodicea and Philadelphia as they were both true Churches so they were both under the same rule c. 2. They confesse that none but such as are already excommunicated and such as ought to be excommunicated are to be kept from the Sacrament and in this Mr. H. and they seem to be agreed pag. 27. provided say they that Mr. H. mean such as of right ought to be excommunicated by the Church For his meaning they may be sure he doth not mean that Church members should be censured without regular triall and that by a Church that is in a fit capacity to hear and judge and sentence according to divine rule But how will these gentlemen prove that the greater part in a parish are such as of right ought to be excommunicated and never put it to the triall whether their sinfulnesse be of that nature for which excommunication may and ought to be inflicted It is obstinacy and wilfull persisting in grosse sins after private and publick admonition that is to be punished with excommunication and how can they know that the greater part of a parish do so sin when they never admonish them either privately or publickly Sure there must be a clear conviction of their sins and all fair and amicable Christian means used to reclaim them before they can judge any in their parish excommunicable were they in a capacity thus authoritatively to deal with them which I think they are not 3. But they say This is a most generally received truth that every particular congregation hath power in it self to reforme it self according to what shall be practicable to them pag. 158. To which I shall oppose their own words pag. 7.10 Where first they say That the ignorant and profane must be withdrawn from because it is clear they cannot be regularly cast out by discipline neither is there any way how they should be rightly excommunicated for that the major part of the Church is corrupt and the same may be well supposed of most of the mixt parochiall congregations in England and will not excommunicate nor are fit to do so nor to chuse officers to do it pag. 9 10. Now is not this a strange thing they condemn Mr. Humfrey for not setting up Discipline in his Church and strongly assert That every Congregation hath power to reform it self and yet they say it is clear that the ignorant and profane cannot be regularly cast out by Discipline nor is there any way how they should be rightly excommunicated Reader Canst thou desire a better justification of Mr. Humfreys present practise in the matter of the Sacrament then these mens own words If he cannot reform in a right way must he and others undergoe reproach because they dare not exercise discipline in a wrong way as these gentlemen do There are many sober and godly Ministers that judge it better not to pretend to discipline at all then to take up that way to which some give the name when there is nothing of the nature of true discipline If we cannot exercise it aright why should any be censured for not exercising it wrong To doe evill that good may come the Apostle judges damnable so rarely it is that good ends and evill means stand together But they say Object If they cannot regularly excommunicate the ignorant and scandalous that are excommunicable then the Minister and those that are convinced of their duty to come up to a more close communion and fellowship in the Gospell must withdraw from the corrupt majority and wait for their coming in upon the same termes agreed upon by the minor part and for this they commend to us Mat. 18. 1. Answ It is very harsh to say that the ignorant in the Church are for that excommunicable they may expresse their desires to learn and use the means appointed to that end and so not be excommunicable nor to be separated from And for the scandalous they are to be tryed as was hinted before and then excommunicated if there be just cause else they shall be deprived of a speciall ordinance of the Church intended as the last remedy to convert the obstinate sinner from his evill waies And as
THE BAR to Free Admission TO THE LORDS-SVPPER REMOVED OR A Vindication of Mr. Humfreys Free Admission to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Wherein the most materiall Exceptions and Objections of Doctor Drake against it in his Book called A Bar to Free Admission c. are taken off and answered Whereunto is annexed an expostulatory Speech unto them of the Congregationall way And also an Examination of the Book called A Scripture Rail to the Communion Table by some Ministers in Glocester shire By JOHN TIMSON a private Christian of Great Bowden in Leicester-shire JOH 15.14 Ye are my friends if ye do whatsoever I command you London Printed by E. Cotes and are to be sold by Will. Tompson Book-seller in Harborough 1654. To the Reader COURTEOUS READER I Am necessitated not only to give thee some advertisement concerning the following discourse but also to make some Apologie for my self in this my so bold undertaking as this will be thought to be and that perhaps even by some truly godly sober Christians and reverend Ministers of the Gospel to whom it may seem unfit that such a one as I should interpose in this Controversie concerning Admission to the Lords Supper and that I should undertake to make answer to a Reverend Doctor about these things And therefore let me intreat thy patience though I seem somewhat tedious in this Epistle by reason of the length of it I trust it will not be impertinent nor unprofitable but helping to the following discourse to free my self from blame and to help thee in the right understanding of what thou shalt read and of my end and aime therein The truth is these few sheets were not at first intended for publique view but only to be sent privately to the reverend Doctor that by the answer which I hoped he would return my self and some friends of mine might receive some satisfaction but through the importunity of some others to whom I imparted my thoughts herein I am now overcome perswaded to make them publique but with great disadvantage not having time to perfect and amplifie things sutable to so different an end from what I first intended And I confesse I have not so heedfully kept to the Doctors expressions nor writen arguments with that latitude or fulnesse nor kept to his method orderly as he goes on in answering Mr. Humfrey as I should and would have done if my intent at first had been to appear in publique But yet I have been as carefull as I could in taking his sense and have not omitted any thing of moment which I had occasion to insert and answer in my own method and way which I propounded to my self at first And for Mr. Humfreys arguments I have made but little use of them more out of haste then out of any dissenting from him and chusing rather to adde to what he hath asserted and strongly evinced then to repeat his own because I have an earnest desire that this controversie may be better sifted and more throughly searched into it being of greater concernment then most even of those that are godly have or do judge it to be for the ending of the present distractions and divisions in this unsetled Church Our being dissatisfied about Sacramental communion hath been the great occasion and instrumentall cause of our confusions and disorders tending to the Churches destruction If satisfaction can but be given in the warrant of free Admissions I conceive the only instrumentall cause of the Churches unsetlednesse will be removed and nothing will much hinder the falling in of Presbyterians and Independents into one way of communion and discipline especially the orthodox party of both And as for those that deny our Baptisme Church and Ministry as Antichristian there is little hope of gaining their return I desire it may be put to some solemn and serious debate impartially For although the principles committed to consideration in the ensuing discourse be somewhat against the common stream yet I have some hope they may be a means to discover some common mistakes with such glimmering of rationall and Scripture light as better heads may make to shine more bright in the Christian world I look to be censured for this my presumption in dissenting from the common interpretations of severall Scriptures and asserting some things against the judgement of many or most Divines and godly Christians who will be ready to object against me and charge me with a fault herein against which give me leave to make some defence First by confessing that this very thing of dissenting from so many learned and godly hath been a greater barre in my way then any ground of Scripture or strength of argument I ever heard or have seen from any godly man And were the Church in a well ordered setled state I had rather chosen in some lesser things to erre with the Church then dare to do any thing that mâ—ght break the peace and order of the same But in an unsetled disorderly condition of the Church as it is now with us all things in the Church being now upon the brinck of confusion and ruine it concerns even every private member to shew himself and to contribute his mite toward the conservation of the whole In vain do we look to have the effects and consequences our divisions breakings and separations to cease while the most sober and godly nourish them in their rise and cause The same principles maintained by the godly in the Bishops times would as necessarily have run us into the same separations and divisions had not the severity of discipline put a restraint to our excesse from the same or like mistakes Secondly I deny that this free admission pleaded for is altogether novell or a new thing For did not our first reformers maintain a free Admission nay command a generall observance of the Supper of the Lord three times in the year at least under some punishment to be inflicted for unnecessary neglect grounded I conceive from the equity of the Law of the Passeover Numb 9. and the command of Jesus Christ Do this in remembrance of me And will any say that our first reformers were not godly and learned men It 's true they urged it not till Church members were of years of discretion and not under Church censure and required that all should learn the Lords Prayer the Creed and the Ten Commandements c. which would be now easily yeelded to in order to the Sacrament Thirdly do not Protestant godly writers in all reformed Churches maintain infant Baptisme upon Covenant relation in that the children of Christians by birth priviledge are really members of the Church and so esteemed to be as truly as those that by nature are aliens and admitted upon their profession of faith And is not there the same reason for the injoyment of the other Sacrament of the Supper being of years and already admitted members should not these have as much priviledge as those that come in
Spirit may be in such comes not within the Churches cognisance to inquire but what is agreeable to the revealed will of God and then if any of years being baptized professing the true religion be in the same incapacity as Infants or distracted it 's true there is the same exception against them otherwise not For mine own part I never knew any of years but could take and eat and drink of the consecrated signes reverently and orderly according to the institution as to the externals of that service which the state of Infants is uncapable of And mad men would indanger the abuse of the holy signes by their undecent and unreverent demeanour in those necessary acts of communion and worship And it must be granted that persons at years are not under that naturall incapacity that infants are in order to the outward form of worship Neither are Infants as such under the obligation of precepts of worship as grown persons in the Church are Nor can it be reasonably imagined that such a state of persons in the Church should be admitted actually to receive that in the discretion of the Church are no proper objects of Church censures in point of offending which grown persons in the Church are though never so ignorant And what though the Doctor say he can teach a childe of three or four years old as much or more then some of our people at years have learned all their life time A Parrat may be taught to speak words but can he make such children rationally understand what they are taught and exercise devotion from a principle of conscience in reference to religious worship as in charity we may hope of grown ones according to that little they know which may be conceived by their desires after it and their demeanour in the Sacramentall actions Moreover I doubt not but the Doctor or any other Minister of the Gospell may in a short time inform the ignorant among their people so as to make them capable of discerning the Lords body and to eat and drink lawfully in the Apostles sense though not in the sense I shall give account of hereafter All which being laid together I conceive that Church members of years most ignorant are not so uncapable of the Sacrament as Infants or mad men are and therefore the same or like ground of excepting against the one will not equally reach the other And then the Doctors often retorting Mr. H. exception doth rather discover weaknesse then adde any strength to the cause This to the first inquiry As for the other namely whether the scandalous members under Church indulgence may be equally debarred this Church priviledge with the regularly excommunicated I do not finde the Doctors judgement so expresly delivered but he seems to debar such from the Sacrament But sure to debar Church members scandalous their externall priviledge during Church indulgence and toleration they being under triall or otherwise is contrary to the judgement and practise of the independent Churches and seems irrationall and unjust to execute before a judiciall triall and sentence I confesse I am unsatisfied with their proceedings as Presbytered toward Church members of years admitted 1. They set up an Eldership whose office is very doubtfull too doubtfull to assume and exercise the keyes of Christs Kingdome especially where there is no association of Churches so that upon the matter the power of sentence is in the Pastour alone or in those whom Jesus Christ never impowered with the keys at all to binde and loose authoratively 2. They set up such a way of triall and Church examination of native Church members in order to the Sacrament the observance whereof is both their duty and their priviledge as no word doth warrant discouraging the most from indevouring after their duty and priviledge so that upon the matter they are left out without any regular casting out 3. They cause a carelesse forbearance of the Sacrament and make their suspension and excommunication upon the matter all one and the Doctor allowes all presence at every ordinance denying only the act of receiving to the worst 4. They positively suspend Church members for ignorance and such like wants and comings short of what they should be to God for which there is not the least warrant either of rule or president in divine writ 5. They make excommunication lesse then it is indeed in allowing the excommunicate presence in the congregation at every ordinance and make it more then indeed it is in dismembring Church members by it it being appointed as the last remedy to heal diseased members not to destroy them They are not thereby dismembred but to be lookt upon saith Mr. Cawdry as diseased members under cure 6. No more priviledge is allowed to Church members not approved of by the eldership though not yet under any positive sentence then is allowed to Heathens and to the excommunicate as much of priviledge in the ordinances of the Church is allowed as to Heathens All which upon triall will be found to be beside the rule I think and yet such are the consequences that flow from the Doctors own principles and premises in his Bar to free admission to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper In the next place the Doctor declares his judgement concerning a scandalous member of a congregation impresbytered presuming to receive what is to be done in such a case As first the Minister is to tell him of the sinne and desire him to forbear if that will not do then to shew him the present danger of murdering Christ and eating and drinking judgement to himself and he hath done his duty But then it may be inquired whether he mean only in case of common fame the scandall having been publick otherwise I suppose it will not be a time to nominate any members sinne or person in publique first Then secondly I question whether a scandalous member doth necessarily murder Christ and eat and drink judgement to himself in the Scripture sense whether the person be regenerate or unregenerate For he may be Scandalous and yet knowing and able to put a difference between common bread and the instituted signs in order to their end He might be drunk the week before and yet sober scrious and reverent in the act of receiving and not guilty of the body and bloud of Christ nor eat and drink judgement to himself in the Doctors sense He often distinguishes of worthy Church members and unworthy according to the judgement of visibility accounting the regenerate in the Church only worthy of admittance but not the other they not having a personall worthinesse must necessarily eat and drink unworthily and so judgement to themselves in the Apostles sense c. Now because all his conclusions seem to be deducted from meer mistakes and misapplyings of the Apostles sense 1 Cor. 11.20 to the 34. to the great perill and danger of the visible Church of Christ as causing rents and divisions therein I shall therefore make
of discretion and professing the true Religion The Doctor hath written very understandingly and informingly concerning the Covenant and the manner how it is sealed and yet he fals off in his conclusions and applications excluding the unregenerate in the Church from the Sacramentall seals whom yet he allowes to be objects of Covenant grace saying that only the elect and persons effectually called are the objects and yet he intimates that the elect unregenerate are the object of initiall grace and that grace and faith be a part of the Covenant sealed by the Sacrament and yet he would not have those receive that have not this faith and grace though promised in the Covenant and sealed in the Sacrament But if the elect before conversion be in the writing and in the Church then Sacraments seal to them but doubtlesse God hath his elect to call in the Church else we cannot tell where they are if not under the ordinary means of their calling And therefore there can be no danger in sealing that part of the Covenant to such And doth not the Doctor himself and others act accordingly in administring the seal in Baptisme Are they within the Covenant then by vertue of a visible profession in their parents and upon that account sealed with the Sacrament of Baptisme and yet grown to years denyed the same seal of the Supper If they had right then how comes it to passe they have none now The Doctor saith Because of their antifederall wickednesse they prejudice themselves and deprive themselves of covenant right and that those that are in the state of nature are out of the Covenant and the grosly ignorant are such c. And therefore to be denied the sacramentall Seal To which I answer It 's hard to such that any born in the Church of Christian Parents they continuing to uphold an externall profession of the true Religion are out of the Covenant how ignorant or wicked so ever they be For if there be a more immediate object of those promises of giving the first grace in the Church where the ordinary means of working that grace are then persons in the state of nature and unregenerate in the Church are the immediate object of those promises before others out of the Church But there is a present and immediate object of those promises in the Church that are under covenant ordinances except the day of Gods giving the first grace be past in the Church Therefore those in the State of nature and unregenerate in the Church are the present and most immediate object of those promises in the Covenant of Gods giving the first grace As for those in the Church that have the first grace already they cannot be the proper objects of it in the promise and those that are out of the Church not having the ordinary means of putting those promises into performance cannot be the present and most immediate or most likely objects For as touching the state of Paganisme the Apostle intimates plainly That they are strangers from the Covenants of promise without hope and without God in the world Ephes 2.12 Therefore the unregenerate in the Church are the present and most proper objects of those promises and consequently of Sacraments that seal to the truth of those promises And for those that will not allow men in the state of nature and unregenerate to be of the Church they will allow the Covenant a full object in the Church And for particular sins and personall miscarriages in the Church we are to make no difference in the regenerate and unregenerate there being the same rule to guide us in dealing with both But let none mistake me when I say the unregenerate in the Church are the immediate and proper objects of the promises of the first grace I do not mean that all such in the Church must necessarily have that grace given them but such there are in the visible Church which by nature are as bad as any others and in no consideration differ from the worst of men considered in themselves but are simple sinners wholly lost with the rest of fallen mankinde That which makes the difference is out of themselves it 's the meer good will and pleasure of him that worketh all things after the counsell of his own will giving grace to whom he will of those that in all respects are equall in sin and misery So that when we shall come to judge of persons in the Church under the most evident characters of unregeneracy yet we may not exclude them from being objects of covenant grace and mercy nor from the seals and pledges of that grace and mercy during their abode in the Church and the Churches indulgence toward them In a word nothing excludes from covenant relation but the sin against the Holy Ghost which I fear many of our blasphemous Sectaries are guilty of and positive unbelief such as was in the hardned and obstinate Jewes who denyed the holy One and true Messiah sent among them obstinacy and Apostasie in the justly excommunicated renouncing the Christian Religion hating to be reformed by the Churches censures these things exclude and nothing else And this might suffice for answer to the Querie but I shall adde two or three arguments more 1. The very nature of the Sacrament of the Supper is a visible Gospell representing Christ crucified to sight and all the other senses by instituted signs which more ordinarily is carryed to the ear by the word but in this all the senses are made the inlets to the soul carrying the knowledge of Christ crucified to the understanding heart and conscience And I think the unregenerate in the Church have as much need of being taught Christ crucified by the visible signs as any others and they have as much need of the benefit and advantage of their outward senses as the regenerate and more they being more dull and slow of spirit to understand or to be affected with the meaning and end of this service then they are 2. The main end of this service is to keep a continuall fresh remembrance of the death of Christ and that satisfaction made by him by which all the same blessings of the Covenant are procured to fallen man Christs bloud was shed for many for remission of sins that he might gather into one the children of God scattered abroad in all the world and in all ages of the world is the end of his death Joh. 11.52 And the Sacrament is to be observed in remembrance of that by all those that professe hope of being saved through the merits of his death which the unregenerate in the Church do and cannot be excluded from the number of those many Christ shed his bloud for and therefore it is proper for such to remember the death of Christ in order to their spiritual good whom we cannot exclude from being the sheep he died for 3. The actions of taking eating and drinking are naturall actions of the body in reference to
those spirituall ends the institution directs us to the which actions the unregenerate are in a naturall and rationall capacity to performe externally as the Word requires Though the Doctor be pleased to judge them altogether uncapable as not having a hand to take he making faith the hand which he saith they have not which indeed is true of the unregenerate but is he able to prove that by the act of taking and eating exprest in the institution is meant the act of faith I rather conceive it one thing among many others he takes for granted which would give better satisfaction to hear soundly proved by the Word then to leave us meerly to credit the dictates of men 4. The language of Sacraments runs in generall and indefinit termes This cup is the New Testament in my bloud shed for many for the remission of sins drink ye all of it so saith Matthew and Mark indeed Luke and Paul restrain the word many to you as being a part of that many in the judgement of charity and so Paul judges of the Corinthians I doubt not but if the Doctor examine the institution well he may finde enough to warrant a forbearance of that particular application in the delivery of the Sacrament which he so much urges in his Book I cannot finde in Scripture language any such thing as he makes giving and receiving to be Pag 4â—2 What danger is there of confirming the unregenerate in presumption if they take and cat in remembrance of Christs death Who have more need of remembring the death of Christ then they that must perish for ever dying without the saving benefits thereof Who have more need of those gracious tenders of life favour then such in the Church For is not regenerating grace a benefit that comes by the death of Christ And is not remission of sins a benefit that comes by the death of Christ And is not Christ and all his benefits exhibited by those outward signs And doth not that include or suppose a proper subject of those benefits present which the unregenerate and unpardoned in the Church are What incongruity is there in all this Besides it sounds very harsh in the Church to exclude this ordinance of Christ from being a renewing and a converting ordinance or a means of renewing and converting grace to the unregenerate they being the most proper objects of that grace as it is held forth in the promises for the putting of which into execution all the ordinances seem to be subservient Again that one main end of the work of the Ministry is the conversion of souls none will deny and I think none can exempt any essentiall part of that work from being a means subservient to this end and if no essentiall part can be exempted then not this of administring this Sacrament of the Supper which none can deny to be an essentiall or necessary part of the Ministers work in reference to the good of souls That ordinance in the Church that was instituted to shew forth the death of Christ till he come is a means of conversion But the Sacrament is an ordinance in the Church instituted to shew forth the death of Christ till he come Therefore the Sacrament is a means of conversion What may more strongly move a sinner to convert then the death of Christ which sets forth the hainousnesse of sin the wretched condition of the sinner in himself without Christ and yet a possibility of salvation by Christ Thirdly The word and prayer confessedly means of conversion are so necessary to the right administration of the instituted signs that without them there is no Sacrament and therefore to deny the Sacrament to be a means of conversion is to deny the Word and Prayer to be a means of conversion unlesse we shall say that the adding of the instituted signs to the Word and Prayer hinders the power and efficacy of them from their intended end so that though the Word and Prayer be means of conversion out of the administration of the Sacrament yet in it they are not And whereas the Doctor saith There is no promise made to that Ordinance in that respect it is easily answered for there is a promise of Christs presence in every ordinance Mat. 28.20 Besides Precepts and Promises are relatives in Precepts we are to understand Promises included and in Promises Precepts are understood As sinners are to seek God while he may be found and to call upon him while he is neer so they must seek him where he will be found As we may not exclude the mercifull presence of Christ from the Sacrament so neither may we exclude sinners in the Church from seeking Christ there We know not but that a wilfull or carelesse neglect of this one duty of worship and homage may hinder a blessing from all the rest as he that turns his ear from the Law his prayer shall be abominable But when the Doctor cannot with any clearnesse answer the argument to satisfaction he would evade it by allowing all presence at the administration which he saith is profitable and answers the end pleaded for c. 1. And indeed in that his device Church members of years are beholding to him for his charity in allowing them as much priviledge in order to the Sacrament as he allowes to infidels and the excommunicated 2. If that bare presence answer that end then much more actuall receiving having the advantage of more of their bodily senses then meerly to be spectators and I think that in yeelding this he hath granted the argument and his putting the question to actuall receiving is not to any purpose because the act of receiving abstracted from word and prayer necessary essentials to the very being of the ordinance is but a civill thing only And therefore the whole must goe together to make up that service and his question is beside the question It is sufficient to prove the argument that the whole administration be blessed to that end as Mr. H. states the question But what devices do men finde out in pretence of advancing Sacraments Some exclude all Infants others some Infants in the Church The papists will give the Sacrament but in one kinde many among us in neither kinde The Doctor will allow all presence at the Sacrament they may hear and see but they may not taste they may not take and eat according to the Commandement But why will he allow all to be present Why because presence may convert but actuall receiving not because naturall men being present may get good without that sinne which they are in danger of by unworthy receiving but by their receiving they can receive no benefit but do prejudice themselves by their unworthy receiving besides their being guilty of murdering Christ And shall we think that that act wherein they eat and drink judgement to themselves shall be so blessed of God as to become a means of conversion to them c. And besides because the
practise of the Greek Churches urged I say what is that to us when it is not agreeable to the practise of the first Apostolicall Church of Christ For upon the like ground on which they made four degrees of excommunication they might have brought in ten And therefore not so much their practise as the ground thereof is to be regarded in this point But then the Doctor addes That if this admitting of the excommunicated to be present at all ordinances be an error it is out of indulgence and an errour on the right hand for whereas he excludes from one ordinance he might exclude from all according to Mr. H. tenent c. 1. To this I answer right hand errours are evill as well as left and to be taken heed of and therefore not to be pleaded for but to be reformed 2. Suspension from the Sacrament only is no legall censure 1. Because it hath no ground nor footing in the Word 2. Because it is the same with excommunication according to the Doctors own principles and practise For he allowes presence at all the ordinances in the Church in both and his proceedings in order to both are the same And he and the rest of his opinion and way not coming up to the true nature of Church censures do as much as in them lies hinder the end of censures which is that the persons censured may either be ashamed and penitent and so return to Christian obedience or else renounce their profession and turn Apostates Thus I humbly conceive Mr. H. tenent is no bloudy tenent but a most mercifull way and means set up in the Church and left to be used as the last remedy for the cure of the most desperate souls And not to use this remedy according to its nature and true intent of Christ therein is to deprive the obstinate offendor of the only means left of his amendment and salvation and so is indeed far from being an errour on the right hand And yet by the way to expresse my thoughts a little further I hold that all unnecessarily friendly familiarity with scandalous disorderly brethren that sin out of wilfulnesse whether they be under Church induigence triall or censure is to be declined according to that 1 Cor. 5.10 11. which sense I humbly conceive comes neerer the meaning of the place then to understand it of or to inferre therefrom a suspension from the Sacrament The last thing that I shall speak to is the Doctors exceptions against some of Mr. H. quotations of Scripture concerning which I say let him but allow Mr. H. the same liberty he takes himself in some of his own quotations and then he will have little cause to finde fault for his impertinent allegations of Scripture I have given account of some of the Doctors already I shall here take notice of two or three more 1. He urges many texts of Scripture to prove that some in the Old Testament were debarred the priviledges of worship for morall uncleannesse but his proofs in that fal short of what they are brought to prove being in cases that will not serve his turn For such persons in the Jewish Church came under the censure of the Judicial Laws which were very severe against such offenders and there is nothing exprest in Moses or the Prophets that I know of in reference to excommunication And in that Church the porters charge concerning uncleannesse is to be understood of ceremoniall and Gentile uncleannesse Again for that Tit. 1.15 brought by the Doctor to prove that some in the Church not excommunicated were unclean I deny that those the Apostle there speaks of were of the Christian Church Let him consult with the tenth verse and he may easily see the Apostle means those vain talkers and deceivers that were especially of the circumcision they professe they know God as other unbeleeving Jewes did but in their works they deny him being abominable and disobedient and to every good work reprobate vers 16. They were either such as never were of the Christian Church or if they were once of it yet now were revolted and become Apostates by their horrid opinions and abominable impieties And then what is this to members of a Christian Church professing Christianity Again for Church examination in order to the Sacrament the Doctor alledges 1 Pet. 3.15 Be ready alway to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meeknesse and fear having a good conscience c. The scope of the place is to shew what a Christians duty is when they are apprehended and under the terrour of persecuting adversaries which duty is to be so far from being affrighted from their Christian profession that in such case they should be alwaies ready to give a reason of the hope that is in them with meeknesse and fear c. And the Apostle urges them to this duty of constancy from a great incouragement If you suffer for righteousnesse sake happy are ye vers 14. Now how impertinent is this place for Church examination or examination by the Pastour or Elders before admittance to the Sacrament If such kinde of proofs be sufficient to warrant that practise of examination and suspension from the ordinance for neglect of it men may prove any thing they have a minde to and make every fancy of their own a necessary duty and so make void the necessary Lawes of God by their traditions I shal instance in one quotation more and then I have done and it is 2 Pet. 3.5 For this they are willingly ignorant of that by the Word of God the heavens were of old c. This the Doctor quotes to prove that grosse ignorance in Church members is a scandalous sin for which the Church may proceed to censure them and to suspend them from the Sacrament but sure this is not very pertinent to his purpose as will easily appear if he consult with the Context This second Epistle was written to stir up their pure mindes by way of remembrance that they might be mindfull of the words spoken before by the holy Prophets c. and to arme them against those Scoffers that should come in the last daies 2 Pet. 3.1 2 3. Knowing this first that there shall come in the last daies scoffers walking after their own lusts and saying Where is the promise of his coming c. Scoffers at the Promise which notes the highest degree of defection from and renouncing of piety so Psal 1.1 of the three degrees of ungodly men the scoffers or scorners is the last as being the worst And by these are meant such as fell off and joined their selves with the persecuting Jewes complying with them and falling into all the villany in the world exprest here by walking after their own lusts that is going on habitually as in a constant course doing whatsoever seemed right in their own eyes without any restraint of law of nature of Christ c. In the
not under the promises made to Gospell administrations I wonder at it that such Ministers would be accounted the only men that patronize free grace and the only Gospell Preachers and yet forget that Christ came into the world to save sinners and to give repentance and remission of sins to seek and to save that which is lost as all were and are untill he finde them and gather them to himself by a blessing of spirit and power in the use of his own ordinances The Scriptures distinguish indeed between the Church and the World but these men will be making a world in the Church and a world out of the Church and make Infidels of the baptized and such as were born in the Church and make a profession of faith and that truly too an to the object at least and yeeld externall conformity in the materials of worship and Christian obedience But you that are so bold to unchurch Christians and to make spoile in Christs Kingdome did you ever read any such thing approved in the Scriptures I confesse these are bold times but let not men make too bold with Jesus Christs interest suffer him to have his full possessions and dominion over all his subjects that professe loyalty and homage unto him in the world Let us wish grace and peace to all that call on the name of the Lord Jesus both theirs and ours and let us have union with them and communion too in all the Lawes and ordinances of Jesus Christ He hath spirit and grace sufficient to answer all the wants to prevent all the evils of all that seek after him according to his own institutes Oh brethren hinder none in seeking after Jesus discourage none because they are sinners from coming under the most ingaging ordinances to preserve Christian obedience do not act so contrary to the Apostolicall daies The Apostles did what they could to convert the world unto Christianiâ—â— and rejoyced in bringing sinners to the obedience of faith and were all for the inlarging of Christs kingdome for which end they put themselves upon the greatest hazards And will many of you pervert Christianity into the world ' Christ into Belial unchurch and unchristian such as the Apostles did generally imbrace and receive to communion upon as slender grounds as ours are desired to be received Did you over read that they refused any one that imbraced the Doctrine of faith and was willing to be baptized Did you ever read that they required more to breaking of bread then they did to Baptisme Did you ever read that they called any in the Church Unbeleevers Heathens Belial Dogs c. Did you ever read of this distinction of Church and World in any of those Churches the Scriptures speak of I would you would prove a twofold world one in the Church another out of the Church and a twofold Kingdome in the visible Church of Christ where men and women generally submit to the Lawes and Ordinances of Jesus Christ Will you confound things that so much concern the Lord Christs interest can you put no difference between the unregenerate under Covenant lations and administrations and the infidel world that are left to wander from all these and to sacrifice to the Devill and not unto the true God at all Will you allow them no better titles and priviledges then you will allow to Heathens I wonder what rule you walk by and judge by and what spirit it is that you act so vigorously from Suppose the Indians in America should generally embrace the Christian faith and disavow their worshipping of Devils and desire to imbody themselves with those that professe the Christian religion would you not offer them Baptisme and upon their coming under it would you not admit them to all the ordinances of Christian profession and communion Whether you would or no the Apostles have done it in the like case Or suppose the infidell Jewes should be convinced of their mistake and should now confesse that Jesus whom their fathers crucified is the true Messiah and Saviour of the world and upon that account renounce their errour and desire the Baptisme of Christ professing their resolution to submit unto his administrations and come under Christian obedience would you refuse them and not baptize them untill they were so qualified as to come up to your termes of communion I think you would not And I pray then why will you separate from the most of ours that are lawfully baptized and come up to the same profession and are of no other religion but the Christian religion and expect salvation by Christ alone Is it because they have this by education and the helps of tradition which in the other case is not so I pray you do not undervalue any benefits and helps that are the consequences of the Covenant of grace Remember how sadly the Apostle laid it to heart when the Jewes by their infidelity in denying Christ to be the Son of God did unchurch themselves and apostatize Rom. 10.1 and the 11. compared It was not their being carnall and otherwise ignorant and wicked but their not beleeving that Christ was the Messias promised unto their fathers that did unchurch them and their posterity to this day for that unbelief was the thing that barr'd them from his administrations so are said to be cut off although by birth priviledge they were the only naturall branches or Church members Were they refused by the Apostles or cast off or did they eject cast out themselves from being branches of the true Olive Christs coming in the flesh not discerned by them was the occasion of their fall from being the Israel of God he was the stumbling stone and the rock of offence that made them fall from their Church state and relation They would not own any other administration but that of Moses and upon that account undid themselves and perished What think you would have been the issue had they owned Jesus Christ to be the true Messias and so had come under the Gospell administrations as ours are and would not be under any other that they should have been refused and separated from as being none of the Church of Christ I beseech you consider of it did not thousands of the Jewes come in and offer themselves to Baptisme at the preaching of one short word or sermon Act. 2. And can we imagine that they were all true Converts in your sense was any refused that desired to be one in the Christian profession Suppose that all the common people in England were unbaptized as some reproachfully and slanderously report they are and were sensible of that condition and should come and desire Baptisme upon no other account then their present capacity would admit of confessing themselves sinners and promising obedience to the word of God professing hope of mercy and happinesse through the merits of Jesus Christ which all that have learned their Creed are capable to do I would fain know whether you could
and Church priviledges and be incouraged unto Church communion in all the waies of Christ that so they may come under Church discipline the best remedy to reclaim the obstinate and wilfull offenders 6. I wish the gifted brethren were better imployed then in unchurching our Churches and gathering Churches out of them it were a work more proper and acceptable either to be content to exercise their gifts to the edifying and building up of that Church in which they received them or else to goe into the infidell world as the Apostles did and preach the Gospel and plant Churches there The Scripture Raile Examined REader since I parted with what I had written in answer to Doctor Drake in the foregoing discourse there came to my hand Mr. Humfreys Rejoyner in vindication of himself a work very well performed by him wherein the truth formerly by him asserted is better cleared and confirmed to the satisfaction of many souls fearing God and breathing forth their earnest desires after the settlement reformation and uniformity of the Church of God in England according to the Word of God Be not prejudiced against his book by other learned men who have and still do appear with much bitternesse and passion against him more to affright with words and humane dictates meerly then with matter of grounded truth according to the sense of the holy Scripture witnesse that book put forth by some Ministers of Glocester-shire intituled A Scripture Raile to the Communion Table I confesse the title is good for we do acknowledge there ought to be such a thing but not in their sense as I hope shall appear by the discovery made in this short discourse following in which I shall wave what hath been already written in answer to D. Drake by Mr. Humfrey and my self and take notice only of some things in the Scripture Raile which have not yet been spoken to that I know of And this I shall do as briefly as I can because I would not anticipate him whom it doth more nearly concern And first of all because I would not leave the weak and incautelous Reader deceived with vain and groundlesse words in reading this Scripture Raile let this be noted that I take Scripture discipline to be the only Rail for the Communion Table which I hope both the Author reproached and my self earnestly desire may be set up and all our indevours tend as conducible means to that end as being assured that the first stone in the building of the reformation as to our case is holy discipline And whether their principles or ours tend most to that I hope to make appear to sober and unprejudiced Christians And the way I shall take shall be to discover some of these Gentlemens unbrotherly dealings with Mr. Humfrey first in perverting his sense Secondly in setting up a Raile to the Lords Table by perverting Scripture and so making that Raile to be a pretended discipline meerly 1. They have damned and censured his Book to be an ungodly pamphlet in which is a masse of perverting Scriptures tending to destroy all Church reformation little better then carnall and profane reasoning sophistry a heterodox piece abomination a vile piece with divers other such hard censures language enough to affright any from ever looking into it that have any care of their souls to avoid their own destruction in complying with that soul damning practise of maintaining mixt communion as they call it I must confesse these men seem very confident in reproaching and censuring both the Book and the man but in this their indeavour to make it thus vile and odious to the world they have not the least evidence of truth or strength of reason to evince it that I can finde in their Book And it will so appear if you minde what is Mr. H. scope and end in his discourse and what are the principles upon which it is founded As 1. That the visible Church of Christ consists of men making a profession of faith in Jesus Christ and so are Saints by calling what ever they are in truth while they so professe and adhere to the true worship the means and matter of which are hearing the word receiving the Sacrament and prayer and of these many are called and few are chosen 2. That all of these of years come under the obligation of Christs commands and are bound to do their duty homage to Christ their Lord as well as they can according to Mat. 28.19 20. 3. That all such ought to submit to Church discipline and not to be excluded from any observance nor denyed any Church priviledge untill they be judicially proceeded against and debarred by vertue of positive excommunication 4. That Ministers by vertue of their function and office may lawfully administer the Sacraments to Church members though they be ignorant and scandalous he doing his duty as well as he may in preparing them in the want of Church discipline These I dare boldly affirme are the main things asserted in that little despised piece which with a sober spirit the Author hath soberly discussed and cleared from the common exceptions made against it by men of different mindes for which his pains first and last I verily beleeve the Church of God in England have great cause to be thankfull to the Lord of the harvest for sending such a faithfull plain-hearted labourer amongst us the sweet temperature of his spirit so adorned with wisdome charity and such a peaceable frame bespeaks him taught of God the true sense of his will in his holy Scriptures rather then his reproachers 1. Touching the visible Church what evill hath he done in asserting it to consist of men making a profession of faith in Christ Wherein doth he dissent from the most orthodox writers in all ages in judging the Church of England a true Church It is confessed by the adversaries and also that a parochiall congregation where the Word is truly preached and the Sacraments administred according to order being a part of the whole is a true Church likewise And this is also confessed by these Gentlemen for they grant that our parochiall Churches are true Churches in a large sense and that is enough as to this and so I hope there is no evill in this first position 2. For the next thing by him asserted namely that all of years in a parish being baptized come under the obligation of all Christs commands it is proved by the text before cited Mat. 28.19 20. And that in order to the Lords Supper Do this in remembrance of me is a known duty belonging to every particular member of the Church in common with all other parts of the worship and service of God And is it then profane reasoning to urge Church members to do their duty and homage in this particular more then in all others To this these Gentlemen have said but little that I can finde to take off what is urged by Mr. H. As for that of the Passeover Mr. H.
H. provided it be done by the just censures of the Church so that these Gentlemen may see what a noise they make about nothing But they go on and tell us what Gelaspy saith on 1 Cor. 10. in his Book called Aarons Rod budded concerning those Israelites that did eat of the Manna and drank of the Rock that followed them that they falling into idolatry whoredomes murmurings and the like the wrath of God came upon them hence they inferre They did not eat of the Manna and drink of the Rock after the committing of those sins and so were excluded for morall uncleannesse as good a consequence as the former For first I deny that all that were guilty of those sins were cut off from the congregation for the whole congregation murmured c. yet were they not all destroyed their carkasses fell in the wildernesse not all at once in one day but by degrees for many years and yet those that were spared did eat Manna otherwise they must needs have perished with hunger Secondly For those that were destroyed and cut off was it that they might not eat Manna any more What a strange and absurd consequence is this They were destroyed for their idolatry whoredomes and murmurings therefore they were cut off that they might not eat of that Sacramentall Manna What a strange fancy is this as if a malefactor were put to death that he might not live to come to the Sacrament any more me thinks it were more rationall to say they were cut off by death that they might not dishonour God by the committing of those sins of idolatry whoredomes and murmurings any more In the same page from the false and absurd premises as they are already discovered to be those Gentlemen urge Mr. H. with an argument but it is so long flat and false that I shall passe it by having already cut the legs it stands upon And the truth is the Author whom they reproach hath said enough concerning this Scripture to stop the mouth of very malice and envie it self if any thing would do it But let us remember what we are upon These Gentlemen have denied that all the Israelites were admitted to their Sacraments especially the Passeover and to prove this they have brought some Scriptures I have examined them you see and their interences and conclusions drawn from them and all they have said and make a shew of amounts to no more but this 1. That some were denyed the Passeover for a moneths space by reason of their legall uncleâ—nnesse 2. That some have been cut off by death for morall uncleannesse or that some have otherwise been separated from the congregation and so from all ordinances of divine worship for scandalous sins And all that can possibly be gathered hence is no more then what Mr. H. hath all along granted for he excepts the excommunicate in his Free Admission to the Lords Supper and this is by them yeelded unto if he mean right according to the word the matter is ended So that one would think they granted this and in another place that our parochiall congregations are true Churches in a large sense that the whole difference between Mr. H. and them were only in point of discipline And if so then the fault Mr. H. is chargeable with in this point is his not setting up discipline but exercising the ordinances of worship without it But M. Joanes hath said enough to take off this in urging and proving a necessity of administring the Sacrament of the Supper in congregations not Presbytered Thus we have considered the admission to the Passeover among the Jewes Now seeing there is such analogie between the Passeover and the Lords Supper the admission to the one seems to be a good rule for admission to the other and seems to be granted on both sides in that it is urged by both And therefore I shal assert some things from the law of the Passeover for further confirmation and strengthning of the duty of free admission to the Lords Supper 1. The Passeover was the same for substance with the holy Supper signifying the same things 2. It was a service commanded the whole Church that whosoever should neglect it in his season should be cut off from his people 3. The people of Israel were a mixt people and many of them as uncapable of making a spirituall use of the Passeover as ours of the Supper 4. The Church under the Gospell administration is under the same Covenant and is but added to or graffed into the Church of the Jewes and their constitution Rom. 11.18 5. The Church of Christ since the comming of Christ in the flesh is under the same principles and in some respects greater then under Moses and the Prophets And therefore why should not admission to the Lords Supper be as free as the Passeover First I say the Jewes Passeover was the same for substance with our Sacrament of the Lords Supper both signifie the same things 1. The Paschal Lamb appointed for that holy service was a lively type of the Lamb of God slain from the beginning of the world to take away the sins thereof 2. The offering of this Lamb whole without dismembring or breaking a bone of him did shew that whole Christ must suffer that his suffering might be sufficient to satisfie divine justice 3. The bloud of the lamb was to be stricken on the lintels and side posts of every ones door as a token upon those houses where the Israelites were that when the Lord passed through the land of Egypt to destroy the first born both of man and beast the plague might not smite those houses which was to instruct them that this Lamb of God Christ Jesus whose bloud was shed upon the crosse was the only Saviour of his Church and people from the wrath which the Egyptian world lies under and not having any knowledge of him nor means of coming unto him must needs perish And all this concerning the Passeover was to be observed yearly at the time appointed through their generations for ever for a memoriall of their deliverance out of Egypt which though it were but bodily and temporall yet it was to lead them to the understanding of their spirituall and eternall deliverance by the bloud of Christ And hence it is that the Apostle saith Christ our Passeover is sacrificed for us 1 Cor. 5.7 We in the Supper have the signs of Christs own death held out as already accomplished they in the type had him held forth as decreed and promised to be accomplished and both to be observed in that remembrance And as it is well observed that Christ having kept the last Passeover did immediately institute the Sacrament of the Supper that it might succeed in the room and stead of the Passeover A change in the thing typified Christ then to come and suffer death now already come and suffered was the cause of the change in the externals of this service Secondly That the Law of
it is a means of conversion as these Gentlemen do confess the Magistrate may constrain all in the Church to come under it and submit to it They say Iesus Christ should rule by the Word of his mouth and not by the Magistrates compelling edicts and yet they say That in bringing all to converting ordinances they humbly conceive the Magistrate is to put forth his power pag. 176. And then will it not hence follow that as discipline is a means of conversion the Magistrate is to put forth his power for the bringing of all under it Yea doubtlesse and to assist the Church in the setling exercise and execution of it And to withdraw without a judiciall proceeding neither doth nor can attain the true end but doth harden and prejudice sinners a great deal more and so makes them worse in stead of making them better The end of withdrawing according to the Scripture is to bring the persons withdrawn from to shame and repentance and is this a likely way to attain that end for a Minister and some ten or twenty of his people to withdraw from three or four hundred as in some places would be the case they all professing the true Religion Do these men think the Apostle meant such a withdrawing to bring sinners in the Church to shame The rule is in reference to a disorderly brother to bring him to shame but in our times applyed to hundreds at once by the minor part in a Church and that very unfitly too there being many in some such places that as truly fear God and live in Christian obedience beyond some of them that withdraw from them who yet had rather be reckoned among sinners then to joine with them that by schisme break the peace of the Church Besides grant that many of them should be excommunicable doth that warrant a separation when it is not in our power to do it regularly It is ten to one that those that are so zealous for separating did never deal with their offending brethren so far as they lawfully may and ought to amend them If we should deal thus in the Kingdome of this world as they do in the Kingdome of Christ there would be but a sad accompt given of many subjects therein If it were enough to say such are fellons and hangable by the Law and thereupon never bring them to triall but knock them on the head and there 's an end of them How long think you would this Common-wealth stand were such a confusion and barbarisme tolerated Suppose these Gentlemen in Glocestershire are run into a dangerous way of schisme in the Church through error and mistake would they be content without any ordinary means used to convince them of their error or warning and admonishing them to retract to be forthwith sentenced by a Bench of Elders as schismaticall persons and upon that accompt suspended from their Ministry I think they would not And yet by what they appear by their Book to be I think they are scarce qualified as Bishops ought to be that undertake the rule of Christs Flock and my prayer is that their uncharitable practises may not be an occasion of destroying many weak brethren for whom Christ died As for Mat. 18. it comes now to be examined that we may see how it is appliable to these new found models of Discipline hinted at by these men in the preamble of their Book And it is most clear and certain that the main scope of our Saviour is to teach us these two things in generall First That the meanest person coming to Christ and professing faith in him is not to be despised Secondly That not to deal with offending brethren in the way and order by him there prescribed is to despise them And then for the way prescribed by our Saviour it ought to begin with private admonition in case of a brother offending and if that prevail for his amendment he is not to be put to publick shame but if that will not work upon him then upon sufficient proof of the fact he may and ought to be complained of to the Church and the Church may convent him before them admonish to confesse and reform his sin But if out of obstinacy he stubbornly refuse to hear the Church after first and second admonition then to be cast out not otherwise Now what is there in all this to favour or warrant these Gentlemens practise do they proceed after this manner with every offending brother in their severall parishes before they deny them Christian communion in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper If not why will they urge a rule from Jesus Christ to others which they themselves will not practise Would they have others do that themselves neither will nor can do as themselves confesse where the greater part is corrupt And this being the case of most Parishes in England how shall we take up an establishment of discipline from this place Why they tell us by withdrawing from the major part of the Church But then it will be demanded whether this Scripture do warrant any such practise and it must needs be granted it doth not Thus you may see how sutable these new models are to those Scriptures alledged by themselves for proof thereof But to proceed a little further concerning this Scripture Mat. 18. The greatest difficulty as I conceive lies in the word Church when our Saviour bids tell the Church I shall give my thoughts concerning that also and leave them to the intelligent reader to consider 1. I conceive our Saviours rules here given in this case respected the present state of the Jewes Church as well as the Christian Churches in after times and was practicable in that present state of the Jewes Church 2. According to the same rules and order his Disciples and their followers should act in after ages as vers 18. doth plainly shew Concerning the former of these as the rule given by our Saviour respected the present state of the Jewes and was practicable in that Church we are to inquire whether the complaint were to be made to the whole Church consisting of rulers and ruled assembled together in holy worship or to the Rulers and Officers of the Church only assembled in a Court of Judicature for the hearing of complaints and trying of offenders and punishing evill manners To this I answer That to one it seems very probable that Church here is to be taken in the latter sense because the common people among the Jewes never had any such authority in that Church as to judge of manners and censure according to the rule given by our Saviour in this Scripture But it is clear that they had a Councell of Elders called the Sanhedrin Mat. 5.22 that judged of manners and punished such as reviled their brother intimated in these words He that shall say to his Brother Racha shall be in danger of the Councell or Sanhedrin The Pharisees and chief Priests were chief in that Councell or
bold to present to consideration these necessary queries in reference to a discovery of the most probable sense of the place humbly praying the Reader when ever he think of me to think seriously and impartially of them 1. Enquiry is to be made whether the Apostle intends any such thing as personall worthinesse or unworthinesse in order to the Sacrament 2. Whether the unworthinesse the Apostle speaks to were not meerly their miscarriages and actuall offending in or about the externals of Sacramentall actions and order 3. What were those sins that provok'd the Lord so immediately to punish them for the present and made them liable to be further punished for the future 4. Whether they were chastised for unworthinesse of person or other sins they were guilty of before they came together to celebrate the holy Supper 5. What is the remedy the Apostle prescribes to that Church to prevent future judgement and to enjoy present benefit 6. Whether the unregenerate and most ignorant person professing and owning the true Religion among them were not in a capacity so to use the remedy as to prevent the judgement and receive benefit by the ordinance where God gave a blessing 7. Whether the duty of self-examination in order to the Sacrament is not to be restrained to the premises treated on in the context 8. Whether a carelesse neglect or incapacity of this duty of self-examination before do excuse and give a writ of ease from that precept of publique duty and service Do this in remembrance of me 9. Whether there be any thing in the institution nature end language action of the Sacrament in the context or elsewhere incongruous to the receiving of the unregenerate in the Church I doubt not but an ingenuous answer to these Queries would much moderate the unchristian rigour of these times about Sacramentall communion if not to make the controversie to cease among sober godly men And therefore pardon my boldnesse in adventuring to present to publick view my confused apprehensions in answer to these queries and that with as much brevity as I can Something must be done and if I can discover the truth or give occasion unto some more able to doe it I shall blesse God and think my labour well bestowed For the first I conceive there is not the least hint or sound of unworthinesse of persons in the Church of Corinth spoken to by the Apostle in reference to the Sacrament nor are they blamed or punished for their reall unworthinesse as to God visible to the Church though it 's probable they had such amongst them in that communion For in the beginning of this Epistle the Apostle gives them the titles of the Church of God sanctified in Christ Jusus called to be Saints c. And of those that were punished for profaning the ordinance the Apostle speaks very hopefully nay confidently that their persons were justified they were chastened of the Lord that they might not be condemned with the world But it may be said Object The Church of Corinth were all of them at least visibly worthy in respect of their persons and therefore their free admission is no warrant for us seeing many of ours want that visible worthinesse And if those that were visibly worthy did through their miscarriage eat judgement to themselves what may we think of ours that have not so much as that visible worthinesse which they had 1. I answer Solution If there be nothing against personall unworthinesse in persons professing the true religion in the context in order to the Sacrament then unworthinesse of person in such can be no bar against them but the former is true therefore the latter is true also 2. If the Apostle upon so weighty occasion meddle not with their unworthinesse of person in reference to their receiving then neither need we to meddle with it it is sufficient that those we admit be baptized and of the true Religion under Church indulgence to entitle them to all the ordinances which they are to use as means of their spirituall good they being given to the visible Church to that very end 3. If our Baptisme were rightly administred according to the Word then ours of years that are of the same with them of the Church of Corinth have as much externall priviledge in the Church as they had till either by Apostasie they fall off or by the right exercise of Discipline they be put out And had we the same charity the Apostle had we would allow them the title of Saints beleevers brethren by profession and calling as they did all along For the second and third Quere I am sure the Text is clear for the affirmative namely that their unworthinesse was meerly their miscarriages and actuall offending about the externals of Sacramentall actions and order And they did eat and drink unworthily not discerning the Lords body and they profaned the holy Ordinance in that they put no difference between their own supper and the Lords Supper their own bread and the instituted signs And for persons to make the consecrated signs appointed by Jesus Christ to spirituall ends as in the institution a common or civill thing to please and satisfie the outward man must needs be a great evill and was that high and provoking sin for which they are there punished as well they might For indeed it was a sin worse then carrying the Arke of the Covenant contrary to order and yet for that the Lord made a breach upon them And Nadab and Abihu were destroyed for offering strange fire which the Lord commanded not so dangerous a thing it is not to come up to or to adde to or to profane divine institutions Doubtlesse the Corinthians were very rude unreverent and disorderly in the present observance some were hungry and some drunk some had too much and others could get none or but little as is intimated in the remedy or direction given to that particular case To tarry one for another as to order and if any hunger let him eat at home not make the holy Supper a meer businesse of eating and drinking that they come not together to condemnation for time to come as they had done before To the fourth Query I answer They were not chastened for unworthinesse of person or for any other sins they were guilty of before but for unworthy actings in the act of receiving or at that time For this cause some are weak and some are sick and some are fallen asleep that is for eating and drinking unworthily contrary to order and decency the which word unworthily respects their manner of doing not their persons It 's no were said Whoso eateth and drinketh being unworthy is guilty of the body and bloud of the Lord. And I think it is no where else the language of Scripture to require reall worthinesse of person before they be sit to come under precepts of duty and service Doth not Baptisme lay ingagements upon all to observe all the commands of Christ