This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.
Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.
EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.
EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).
The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.
Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.
Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.
Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.
The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.
Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).
Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.
OF THE POVVER OF THE KEYES: OR, OF BINDING and LOOSING.
. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
LONDON, Printed for Richard Royſton, at the Angel in Ivie-lane, 1651.
Chriſt on his Apoſtles, as for the governing of the Church, (and exrepentance, ſhould be ſo either wholly dilapidated, or piteouſly deformed, as to continue in the Church only unformality, or of an engine of State, and ſecular conChriſtian uſe of ſhaming ſinners into reformation, being well-nigh vaniſhed out of Chriſtendome) might by an alien, or an heathens, much more by the pondering Chriſtian, be conceived very ſtrange and unreaſonable, were it not a title clear, that we are faln into thoſe times of which it was foretold by two Apoſtles, that in theſe laſt dayes, there ſhould come ſcoffers, walking after their own luſts: the Pride and contumacy (which have almoſt become the Genius) of this prophane polluted age, heightning men to an Atheiſtical fearleſſe ſcoffing and ſcorning of all that pretends to work any cures, to lay any reſtraint on them, to rob them of any degree of that licentiouſneſſe, which is become the very religion, and doctrine of ſome (under the diſguiſe of Chriſtian Liberty) and (the Lord be merciful
unto us) the practiſe of moſt rankes of Chriſtian Profeſſors. This is the more ſad & wounding a conſideration, becauſe it was antiently reſolved, that Chriſtianity wherehumility, meeknes, purity, peaceableneſſe, juſtice, charity, ſobriety, imagiwickednes and diſſolution of manners was to be lookt on as the only hereſie, (and therefore Simon Magus, the Nicolaitans, and Gnoſticks, with other their neerVan of hereticks in Epiphanius, are notoriouſly known to have been perſons of the moſt vigood life revered as the only orthodox profeſſor
moſt holy faith, (or farther then ſo, emgood ſpirit of God the author or cheriſher of any of their unchriſtian enterprizes) but eſpecially they that diſcharge and baniſh out of the Church thoſe means which might help to make the generaChriſtians better, have the ſpirit of Antichriſt workmeans are which might moſt effectually tend to the amenChriſtians, I ſhal need no farther to inter1. by ſubmitting it to Chriſts, who put the Keyes into the Apoſtles hands, on purpoſe as a means to exemplifie the end of his coming, 18.11. to ſave that which was loſt, not to uſurpe au1100 years, over Princes in their temporals; and the compoſition of the Anglican Church moſt perfectly, I had almoſt ſaid, peculiarly acknowledges it) nor again to give an office of ſplendor or grandeur to the Clergie, an authority valuable onely from the ability of hurting others, or magnifying our ſelves over them, (which where it is pretended to, is indeed ſomewhat of the making of the heathen 19. And 2. by minding my ſelf and others, what the Apoſtles ſay of this power, that it was given them Praeloquium is, to awaken (if it be poſsible) the drouſie world, and quicredeem
them from iniquity,
and purifie to himſelf a poſſeſſed purchaſed people (or the people which he had purzealous of good works. If this general propoſal, (ſo pertinaciouſly deChriſts peculiar way and method of workſolo Deo minores; or elſe ſuppoſe it a tyrannizing, or triumphing ocarnal or ſenſual pleaſure in the exerciſe of thoſe Keyes, in the uſing that ſharp engine of ſurgery, or ever draw it but in meer neceſſary charity, (to edification, and not to deſtruction) is one of the Iury, much leſſe advanced to be a ſpiritual Iudge) but as a moſt ſoveraigne mediciRecipe, that which hath the inſcription of Chriſt on it; not as of a Lord, but as a Ieſus; not as a Law-giver, but as a Saviour and a Phyſitian of ſouls. And this peculiar way is the power of binding and looſing, (the ſubject of this enſuing Diſcourſe) which that it may be reſtored to its full vigor in this Church again, and (where ever ſobriety ſhall adviſe) by addition of penitential Canons be reformed or regulated, and being put into the primative Channel, may there be permiChurch of England, as it hath been long, and as yet ſtands eſtabliſhed by Law, may juſtly be thought to ſtand in need of) ſhall be the prayer of him, who profeſſes to love and admire the beauFriends, or, for whom he daily prayes, moſt implacable Enemies, then (that of old Ba
for himſelf, Lord that they may receive their ſight) that the ſcales may fall off from all our eyes, that we may ſee and value what is ſo illuſtriouſly conſpicuous, and Prelacy, which is now ſo zealouſly contemned, and recover at once the Order and the Eſtimation of it, ſet more Saints on their knees in pereducing and reſtoring, then ever imployed their hands toward the ſuppreſſing of it. I ſhall no longer need to detain the Reader in his entrance, having no uſe of any popular topick to court, or get advantage on his affections, but deſiring only to treat with his reaſon (as that is elevated by Chriſt) his more noble maſculine faculty, and 1. From the inſtitution of Chriſt, to ſhew him the benefit that will accrew to that better part of him, by continuing within ſubjection to this government: and 2. By the peculiEngland, to challenge the moſt ſharp-ſighted oppoſition to ſhew where the due execution of this power according to
Law can provoke him to any thing, but charity and gratitude, both to the Saviour that deſigned, and to the Prelate that is his Angel in conveying this ſeaſonable mercy to him; and more generally, where, or in what point of connational Church in Europe, which hath any power either of repreſsing hereticks, or of reforming, or but of ſhaming notorious offenders, left in it. The Lord grant us unprejudicate honeſt hearts to judge uprightly of it, and every one of us, that pretious ornament, 1 Pet. 3.4. (in ſtead of that bravery of hell in Macarius, that the proud is ſo well pleaſed with) I mean that meekneſſe and quietneſſe of ſpirit, to think ſome others may poſſibly diſcern betwixt good and evil, as well as our ſelves; and when that prayer is once heard, I ſhal then ſuppoſe that Themiſtocles the judgement of all poſterity, (viz. that every man named him next after himſelf) will certainly end the preſent Church-controverſie of theſe ſad times. A moderate Epiſcopacy, with a ſtanding aſſiſtant Presbytery, and pag. 16.Chriſtianity attained to ſome meaſure of that grace which Ariſtonymus of old recites among the benefits of Philoſophy,
Presbyterian, and Independent, and Eraſtian will make no queſtion to chuſe and prefer before any of the other pretenders.
This, I conceive, is not by me magiſterially dictated, but already demonſtrated à poſteriori, by the experience which the few laſt moneths have yeelded us, ſince the pretenſions of the Prelacy grew weaker, and of the other three more flattering and hopeful one againſt the other. Where in eeradication of Prelacy, is not likely to be reà priori. I ſuppoſe it ſufficient, if it be but calmely conſidered, that the ſeveral excellencies of the other three, by which they ſet themPresbyterians ſharpneſſe and ſeverity againſt all ignorance and ſin, the Independent zeale againſt mixt Congregations, and the Eraſtians care that the civil power may not be entrencht on, and that they that might receive benefit by the Word and Sacrament, ſhould by no means be interdicted the uſe of them) may all and each of them be found (at leaſt, as in mixture, refracted &) comuſes and excellencies of this power, but what the propereſt ſeat, who the fitteſt to be intruſted with it.
viz. the Conſcience of Our Sovereigne, in order both to our common duty to Him, and to an honourable and durable peace, toward which how neer ſoever we conceive our ſelves advanced by providence, we cannot reaſonably expect the ſure bleſſing of God, to conſummate and crown our hopes, if we doe not Apoſtles phraſe, i. e. uſe all the expedients, that any ambitious man would employ to the attaining his worldly deſigne, I mean, all that prudence will ſuggeſt, and ſober Chriſtian conſcience not reject, to the making up a happy compliance with him; in a word, if we do not by all moderate lawfull means love and follow peace, and conſider them who have the legal power over us.
O that wee would know, at leaſt in this our day, the things belonging to our peace,before that fatal voice go out,But now are they hid from your eyes.
aſteriſme that hath any powerful influence upon it) the conjunction of the ſeverall paſſages in the New Teſtament about the donation and exerciſe of this power. For in matters of Chriſts inſtitution, which have no foundation in the Law of Nature, it muſt needs be improper for reaſon to interpoſe and aſſert, or define what that accounts moſt agreeable, (for that is to ſubject to our tribunal, not the acts of his juſtice, which God hath been willing to yeild us, Iſa. 5.3. and Ezek. 18.25. and in them to appeal to our own reaſon, but the acts of his wiſdome, (for ſuch are all his inſtitutions) which God will not allow us to judge, or diſpute, Rom. 9.20.) any farther then by diſcourſe to conclude from the context, and words of that inſtitution, what is moſt agreeable to the importance of thoſe words, and by way of advice to direct us to compare our conceipts with the doctrines of thoſe, who were neareſt to the times of that inſtitution, and might probably know more of it (and be more inſtrumental to us for the deciSacrament of the Lords Supper, the ſureſt courſe to compoſe the controverſies, and ſatisfie the ſcruples of men in that point, were to reduce it to its principles, and to reſolve by conſent to aſſert no more in that point (as matter of faith at leaſt) then
Scripture concerning the inſtitution, uſe, and nature of that Sacrament, or the antient primitive underſtanding of thoſe places, and naturall deductions from them (for the reducing of which operation to practice,
ANd then the firſt thing obſerveable will be, that the three onely places to be met with in the Goſpel concerninſtitution (Matth. 16.19. Matth. 18.18. Joh. 20.23.) are no two of them fully parallel to one another, or coinciChriſt, but (as by the occaſion and circumſtances of time and place it will appear) each delivered by Chriſt at a ſeveMatth. 16.19. was (upon occaſion of Peters confeſſion) a promiſe of what ſhould be conferred afterwards upon him by way of reward and encouragement [I will (not yet de preſenti, I do; but de futuro, I will) give thee the Keyes, &c. and then whatſoever thou ſhalt &c.] The ſecond Matth. 18.18. was an exemplifying of that glorious truth ver. 11. that Chriſt came to ſave that that was loſt: upon the heeles of which bare aſſertion, followes firſt a Parable, ver. 12.13.14. (a ſpeciall piece of Chriſts Logick and Rhetorick to prove popularly, and ſo to perſwade) and then v. 15. the inſtitution of a piece of diſcipline perpetually to continue in the Church of his plantation, as moſt eminently inſtrumentall to that deſigne, the reducing obſtinate ſinners to repentance. The conſideration of which one thing, that theſe Keyes, when Chriſt was gone, were to continue imployed on that ſame great work, or deſigne, which brought Chriſt into the world, the ſaving of ſuch as were loſt, will be able to ſet a competent value on this Inſtitution, and reſcue it from the contempts and ſcornes, which the impious world is pleaſed to make its portion; very agreeable to that greater ſtratagem
wiſhes and our intereſts, eaſily prevailes with vitious men, to believe neither reſurrection, nor judgement to come; and this, as it is noted by the Fathers, the the only beloved doctrine of the effeminate and voluptuous. The third place Joh. 20.23. is apparently part of Chriſts ſpeech to all his diſciples (after his reſurrection, and his having confirm'd them all but Thomas, in the truth of it, v. 20.) and was a kind of farewell to his Church, and an actuall inauguration, or conſecration of them from diſciples into Apoſtles, as ſent, v. 21. put together do import, (and the Luke 24.33. doth not contradict, for there is no mention of theſe words, of Binding and Looſing in that Goſpel, and if there were, it would not follow that the power of binding was delivered to that mixt company, any more then the power from on high was promiſed to them v. 49. which ſurely beApoſtles, as will appear by the words imbe ye witneſſes of theſe things] i. e. of his death and reApoſtles;) which being a ſolemne donation was ſet out by a ſpeciall ceremony, viz. that of Chriſts breathing upon them, a ſignificant one to expreſſe the eternall breath or Spirit of God, which he would ſuddenly poure on them, and for it Theoph. in Joh. 20. The words [receive the holy Ghoſtreceive the holy Ghoſt (which were the words annext to that ceremony, the words of Conſecration, the ſame that we now retain in the Ordination of a Prieſt) whoſe ſins you do remit, (or if you doe remit any mens ſins) they are remitted to them, and if you do retain any, they are retained.
From all which Three places thus compared, the firſt genebinding and looſing is a ſopriviledge or for priv
or right, or power.
Prerogative of the Church of Chriſt, thrice inSaviour. 1. By way of Prediction, that he would conferre it, Matth. 16. then ſecondly, by way of a more particular deſcription of the manner, and direction for the end and uſe of it, Matth. 18. And thirdly, by a preparatory
of inſtating them in this power, an initial inveſting them with this ſacred ghoſtly authority,
Theo. in Joh. 20. The perfect gift of the holy Ghoſt was diſtributed to them in the Pentecost, a preparative only adminithroughly perfected and compleated, when after his aſcenſion the holy Ghoſt did viſibly deſcend upon thoſe to whom theſe words were by Chriſt then delivered, [Receive the Holy Ghoſt, &c.] This formal compleat inſtating of this power (of binding and looſing) upon them, and not only the giving of thoſe gifts of tongues, &c. being a main branch and effect of this deſcending, and their receiving of the Holy Ghoſt, according to that of Iſa. 32. if you compare ver. 1. of the [King and Princes ruling in judgment, prophetically intimating Chriſt and his Apoſtles] with ver. 15. & 16. where the deſcent of the Spirit is mentioned as a preparative to the exerciſe of that judicative power. And ſo Epheſ. 4. He gave gifts unto men, v. 8. and gave ſome Apoſtles, &c. v. 11. And this I conceive will direct us to the importance of thoſe words, Luke 24.49. [I ſend the promiſe of my Father upon you] ſo as they may be parallel with this place, Joh. 20.23. receive the Holy Ghoſt. No doubt that promiſe of the Father was the Holy Ghoſt, Joh. 15.26. and the [I ſend upon you] (both as a verbum
I ſend, i. e. I inſtate on you; and that in the preſent, I ſend, not in the future, I will ſend) all one with the [receive him] and ſo the power from on high, in the end of the verſe, clearly ſignifies that viſible miſſion of the Holy Ghoſt, which they were to expect, as the means of compleating this donation: and ſo 'tis clear by comparing it with Act. 1.4. & 8. where the ſame phraſe are uſed. And therefore Joh. 20.21. imReceive the Holy Ghoſt] he ſaith, As my Father ſent me, ſo ſend I you; intimating that as at his miſſion to his office he was anointed with the Holy Ghoſt, Act. 10.38. viz. upon his Baptiſme, Luk. 3.23. (whereupon 'tis ſaid, that he by the Spirit caſt out devils, Mat. 12.18. which is clearly ſymbolical, and parallel to his looſing, or remiſſion of ſinnes) ſo the Apoſtles at their miſſion, or entrance on their power, ſhould be anointed alſo.
HAving proceeded thus far by way of generall precognition,
that which is behind, will, I conceive, be moſt intelligible, if it be reduced to theſe few heads. 1. On whom this power was beſtowed. 2. In what it conſiſts. 3. To what uſe 'tis deſigned, and to what ſort of men it belongs objectivè, or who are to be bound and looſed. 4. What is the reall effect of it, or what conjunction it hath with binding and looſing in Heaven.
For the firſt, though to him that conſidereth the place of
Matth. 18. alone by it ſelfe (which is an obſcure place) the matChriſt, and though thereupon ſome miſtakes have ariſen, and occaſion of conceiting this power of binding, &c. to be inſtated by Chriſt on the whole aggregate of any particular Church, yet ſurely the matobſcure place leave to borrow light from the two other moſt evident ones (and not obſcure the more evident by that:) and ſecondly (after we have brought that light to it) oblight we ſhall be able to diſcern (by that help) even in that obſcure place it ſelfe, which will (as the weak light of the Moon, with that treaſure of light, borrowed from the Sun, added to it) become by this meanes exceeding lightſome. For although theſe three places are not parallel one to the other, in reſpect of the times and occaſions of delivering them, and other circumſtances, yet there is no doubt, but they belong all to the ſame generall matter, the power of binding, &c. And that being (as it is apparent even by that of Matth. 18.18.) inſtated not on the whole world, or community of men, but determinated to ſome peculiar ſubject, there is all reaſon to reſolve that that ſubject, though diverſly expreſt, is yet the ſame in all thoſe places, unleſſe ſome evidence of Scripture or authentick teſtiantient Church, or practiſe ſhall demonſtrate the contraScripture, which deſerves our firſt ſearch) be thus cleared by conſidering the ſeverall places.
And firſt Matth. 16.19. which was occaſioned thus; Chriſt
Simon, that he was the Chriſt, the Meſſias, the Sonne of the living God, verſ. 16. upon which Chriſt pronounceth him a bleſſed perſon, as having received the ſupernatural gift of faith from God himſelfe, which no humane means could have helpt him to, and upon this, changes his name from Simon Bar-Jona (the only name he had, verſ. 17.) to Cephas in Syriack, that is Greek, or as Homer and other good Authors, and (which beares moſt affinitie with the dialect of this book) the Author of the ſecond book of Mac. cap. 4.31. uſed it in the maſculine rock or ſtone, to Intimate that he ſhould be (as a foundation or ſtrong rocky ſtone in a building is a principall ingredient in the building, and a meanes of the future ſtability of it, Matth. 7.25. the ſtorme and flouds and winds came upon it, and it fell not, becauſe it was founded on ſuch a firme rocky ſtone) a principal part, call it foundation, or rocke, or pillar of that Church of Chriſtians, which partly by this confeſſion of his, here recorded to all poſterity, and partly by his future teaching, he ſhould be a meanes to erect for Chriſts ſerInſtument of converting ſo many, Chriſt is pleaſed to give him the Keyes of this Kingdome;
in Mat. 16. authoritatively he gave him the keyes, as his Father had done the Revelation,
power of binding and looſing, &c. ſo the pardoning and puniſhing of ſinnes, in a word, is ſpirituall grace or power, or juriſdiction over theſe future Converts of his (as generally in the Apoſtles times, and after, he that converted any Country or chiefe City in his Apoſtleſhip, was ſetled as their Biſhop or Governour in ſpirituall matters, and ſo continued all his life, unleſſe having ſetled them, he thought good to commit that office, and power to ſome body elſe, that ſo he might be the more free to go and preach and convert more) though not as yet, becauſe they were not by him as yet converted, yet by way of promiſe in diem to be performed, when time ſhould ſerve; I will give thee the keyes, and whatſoever thou ſhalt bind, &c. the ſumme is, Peter was to be an Apoſtle, and to do wonders in converting whole Nations to Chriſt, and
converted, Chriſt promiſes that he ſhould have a Juriſdiction, a power to govern, and diſcipline, and cenſure, as there ſhould be occaſion in thoſe Churches.
This being thus promiſed to Peter, as a chiefe Apoſtle, and
Confeſſour of Chriſts, not excluſivè by way of excluſion, that none ſhould have this power but he, but honorificè by way of honour mentioned firſt to him by the priviledge of reward of his notable confeſſion, v. 16. is by Chriſt a little before his parting from the world, after his reſurrection Joh. 20.23. actually inſtated both on him, and &c. Theoph. in Matt. 16. p. 94. Though 'twere ſaid only to PeJoh. 21.
Apoſtles, who were to ioyne in the ſame office with him of begetting unto Chriſt, and educating thoſe which were ſo begotconverting and preſerving, or governing, and in order to that end were to have their ſeverall Provinces aſſigned them (Chryſ. every of them his diſtinct part) for Preaching firſt, as afterward for Juriſdiction, which I ſhall adventure to affirme not improbable to be the meaning of to go to his own place Act. 1.25. applying it not to Judas, but to Matthias, or the him that ſhould be choſen, and ſo againe moſt probably of the the part, or lot, or portion of Miniſtery and Apoſtleſhip, in the beginning of the verſe, (the former of them belonging to the office of preaching peculiarly, the latter to that of governing alſo) diſtributed to each, either by lot, or by joynt conſent, and deſignement of that great Colledge of the Apoſtles; It being moſt proper and according to analogy, that the laboured and toyl'd in the word and doctrine, for the converting and begetChriſt, ſhould be alſo thought worthy of the paternal power of chaſtiſements (i. e. diſcipline) and government for the keeping of them in ſome compaſſe, within the terms of a peaceable, holy, Chryſ. in Joh. 20. As a King that ſends out rulers over Provinces, gives them power to caſt in perſon, and to let out; ſo ſending the Apostles he endues them with this power.Congregation; and therefore after the (I ſend you) (the forme of words that made thApoſtles annuntio's, meſſengers among the Jewes, and not farre unlike to the Proconſuls ſent out, though on a quite diſtant arrant of ſecular power, among the Romans) immediatehe breathed on them (proportionable to God's courſe of making a living ſoul, Gen. 2. v. 2. by breathing on him the breath of life) and ſaid, Receive the Holy Ghoſt, If you remit any mens ſinnes, they are remitted; if you retain, they are retained; which words were apparently delivered, (and in them this power) to as many as were breathed on, i. e. to as many as were Theophyl. To all the ApostlesChriſt, and indeed to no more, unleſſe either firſt by way of Communication from them to their ſucceſſours, or ſecondbath col, as the Hebrewes phraſe is, the daughter of thunder, i. e. voice from heaven ſent to conſecrate them. Thus St
Paul who was none of the twelve, yet ſpeaking of the power of excommunicating, ſaith, it was given to him (to him not as a ſucceſſour of the Apoſtles, but to him as one called immediately from heaven) by the Lord, or by Chriſt, 2 Cor. 13.10. In a word, it was by Chriſt immediately then given to the Apoſtles all and each of them, and to none elſe, till Matthias was received into the place of Judas, and St
Paul was afterward extraordinarily deſigned, and called unto the ſame office, together with Barnabas, Act. 13.12. proportionably it may ſeem to what befell the twelve Patriarchs, Ephraim and Manaſſes being taken inJoſephs ſtead that died, as theſe two in the place of James the brother of John, who was cut off, before he came to do that work to which he was ſent, the preaching to all Nations.
Thoſe two places thus agreeing on the ſubjects of this power, or objects of this donation, 'tis already more then probable, that the third witneſſe producible will agree with thoſe two, or if it ſeem otherwiſe, ſure 'twill not be thought reaſonable, that theſe two ſhall be forced and violenced to conſent to that, which is but an alien ſenſe, by ſome Interpreters impoſed upon that third.
This third place I ſhall ſet down at large, becauſe I acknowdifficulty in it, Matt. 18.15. If thy brother ſhall
offend againſt thee, it ſeems the place belongs not (primarily, but onely paritate rationis, by analogie of reaſon) treſpaſſes or perſonal injuries done by one brother, one Chriſtian to another; as beſides the expreſſe words v. 15. (if thy brother treſpaſſe againſt thee) is more clear by S. Peters queſtion to the ſame purpoſe, v. 21. (How oft ſhall my brother treſpaſſe againſt me, and I forgive him?) Go and reprove him,
reprehend him for it, (as the word is uſed ſometimes when 'tis joyned with chaſten or diſcipline, Heb. 12.5. Apoc. 3.19. or again, Phavor. &
He that doth evil cometh not to the light, lest his deeds ſhould be reproved, in our margent: and therefore 1 Cor. 14.24. when 'tis ſaid of the unbeliever, that he is convinced of all, &c. 'tis added, v. 25. Thus are the ſecrets of his heart made manifeſt. ſo Epheſ. 5.13. All things that are reproved, or diſcovered, are made manifeſt by the light; for whatſoever doth make manifest, is light.make him ſenſible of the wrong he hath done thee, or as it may be rendred, aſhamed of his fact) betwixt thee and him alone, (i. e. do thy beſt by private admonitions to bring him to a ſenſe) If he heare thee (be thus wrought on) thou haſt gain'd thy brother, gain'd him, firſt to thy ſelf (gotten a friend in ſtead of an enemy:) and ſegained a Convert, a Proſelyte to him, and this alſo a great acquiſition to thee, to have had the honour of doreward of them, that convert any to righteouſneſſe.
But if he heare thee not, if this firſt method of thy charity, and diſcipline of this calmer making ſucceed not, another aſſay muſt be made, another artifice uſed, Take with thee (one, or two, that in the mouth of two or three witneſſes every word may be eſtabliſhed, i. e. that the thing which thou laiconfirmed; according to that, Joh. 8.17. The teſtimony of two men is true, i. e. of ſufficient authority in law (according to an Hebraiſme, whereby true, among the Greek tranſlators ſignifieth credited) that ſo either by the teſtimony of theſe as witneſſes, he may no longer be able to deny the fact (as Heb. 6.16. an oath is ſaid to be eſtabliſhing, or confirmation, in that it is end of affirming & denying. The thing ſo eſtabliſht (oath, cannot be denyed, or the parties denial will
Judge is on the accuſed, Deut. 10.19. Heb. 10.28.) to give ſentence on, to condemne himſelf; which if it may be obſight and ſhame, the beſt preparatives to reforTertullian, Apol. c. 39. Diſciplinam praeceptorum inculcationibus denſamus, We thicken the doctrine of precepts with waies of inculcating, i. e. preſſe them to reexhortationes, caſtigationes, cenſura; exhortations, and chaſtiſements, and then cenſure.
By what hath been ſaid of this place, and in it by obſerving the method of the firſt and ſecond admonition, you will by the way underſtand the meaning of that obſcure verſe in St
Paul, 2 Cor. 13.1. This third time I come unto you, in the mouth of two or three witneſſes ſhall every word be eſtabliſhed, &c. It refers clearly to this uſage of the ſecond admonition. St
Paul had written before, which was as it were the firſt ſingle admonition, which v. 2. he cals (I told you formerly;) but that prevailing not, at his third coming (which it ſeems was his ſecond medling with this matter, ſecond time, ver. 2. he doth that which is anſwerable to the taking with him
as appears by the addition of theſe very words which are in Matth. [in the mouth of two or three witneſſes, &c.] which is, you ſee, the ſtile and character of the ſecond admonition. This by the way.
But if he hear not them (non-conviction of the fact, or non-contrition for it) if this ſecond admonition be not in event Cor. 13.10 to edification, or inſtruction, if it work not on him, then tell it to the Church, (I ſhall tell you what that is preſently) and if he hear not the Church (continue his refractarineſſe ſtill) let him be unto thee as a heathen or a publican] which may poſſibly ſignifie, that in that caſe thou haſt liberty to implead him, as thou wouldſt do any heathen, in any foreign heathen Court, for that injury, that treſpaſſe done to thee, which was at the firſt mentioned. For certainly though it were unlawful for a Chriſtian, both here, and 1 Cor. 6.1. to implead a Chriſtian for a perſonall treſpaſſe beheathen tribunal, yet to deal thus with a heathen (or publican which was in account the ſame) was not either by Chriſt, or the Apoſtle counted unlawful (but only the i. e. Chriſtian with Chriſtian, v. 6.) and conſequently with a perverſe refractary brother, whom you ſee Chriſt gives leave to account and deal with, as with a heathen or publican, it would not be unlawinterpretation I ſhall not doubt to propoſe to you, that by heathen and publican may be meant a deſperate deplored ſinner, ſuch as the Rabbins call i. e.
as in the Goſpel ſinner; Thus in Muſar, If he will not then, (i. e. when two or three friends have been taken to be preſent at his admonition) be reconciled, go and leave him to himſelf; for ſuch an one is implacable, and is called Si nec hoc modo quicquam profecerit, i. e. adhibitis amicis, if this ſecond admonition doe no good, debet eum pudefacere coram multis, he muſt be aſhamed before many, (which may be the meaning of Dic Eccleſiae, Tell it to the Church, as will anon appear by 1 Tim. 5.10.) and this interpublicans and ſinners are frequently joyned together in the Goſpel, as once Publicans and harlots, thoſe ſinner-women. 2. That the heathen are call'd ſinners, as when 'tis ſaid that Chriſt was by the Jews delivered into the hands of ſinners, i. e. Romans heathen, and in St
Paul [not ſinners of the Gentiles:] and then thoſe words, [Let him be to thee a heathen and a publican] will ſound no more, but [give him over as a deſperate deplored ſinner,] to whom thoſe priviledges of a Chriſtian (viz. of not being impleaded before an heathen tribunal) &c. do not belong, i. e. leave him to himſelf. This ſure is the ſimpleſt rendring of the place; and then he that is ſuch, that is capable of that denomination, is certainly fit, and ripe for the cenſures of the Church, which follow in the next verſe, refractory incorrigible.
For ſo immediately it follows, Verily I ſay unto you: who are thoſe you? why 1. In the plurall number [to you diſciples (for ſo in the firſt verſe diſciples came to him with a queſtion, and v. 3. he ſaid, Verily I
you, i. e. to you diſciples, and v. 12. what do you think? asking the diſciples, or appealing to their own judgement, and ſo ſtill the ſame auditors continued, and his ſpeech adI ſay unto you diſciples) whatſoever you ſhall bind on earth, &c.
After this, it follows v. 19. again I ſay unto you, that if two of you ſhall agree upon earth, &c.] Many falſe illations are by men of different perſwaſions made from theſe words, which will all vaniſh, I conceive, and the truth be diſ-involved, if the Reader will not deſpiſe this one obſervation which I ſhall offer to him; and it is this, that the method oft-times uſed in Scripture is, (when it hath propoſed one or two ſeverals to ſpeak of) to reſume the laſt firſt, and ſo orderly to go back, till it come to the firſt, to which you may accommodate that expreſſion, and demethod in other things. Many that are laſt, are firſt (the laſt in propoſing, firſt in handling or reſuming,) and the firſt laſt.
If there be two things mentioned one after another, and any occaſion to adde any thing on each of them, then I ſay the obſervation is, that the Scripture ſometimes uſes to reſume the ſecond firſt, and the firſt after that. And ſo if there be more then two. I ſaid this was oft-times the manner and ſtile of Scripture, and to make good my obſervation, I am a little obliged to go out of my way, and preſent you with ſome examples. Three viſible ones I ſhall offer you out of one book, the Epiſtle to the Hebrews. Firſt, Chap. 5. where in the foure firſt verſes there are three things propounded of an High Prieſt, 1. That he offer for ſinne, and negotiate the cauſe of men with God. 2. That he be compaſſionate toward ſinners, and to that end he himſelf infirme, and offer for himſelfe as well as the people. 3. That he be called to this office by God himſelf. To theſe three the Author ſpeaks particularly (and applies them to Chriſt) in the remainder of the Chapter, by way of So likewiſe Chriſt glorified not himſelf to be made an high Prieſt, &c. To the ſewho in the dayes of his fleſh offered up prayers, and ſupplications, prayers, and the ceremonies of petitioners (for ſo olive branches, the embleme that petitioners uſed to have in their hands) with ſtrong crying and
teares to him that was able to deliver him out of death, (as when he commended his ſpirit into Gods hands, and cryed with a loud voice, Matth. 27.50. Mark 15.37. Luke 23.46. at the delivering theſe words) And
was heard, for, or by his piety, through the great ardency of that his prayer (expreſt both by the loud voice in three Evangeliſts, and by the bodily worſhip, bowing of his head, in the fourth, Joh. 19.30.) or as it may poſſibly ſignifie, He was delivered from his fear, i. e. from that which he feared and prayed againſt. And though he were a Son, yet from the things he ſuffered, he learnt obedience, (whether to God thus deſigning him to thoſe ſufferings, and to that office of hearing prayers, or to men, by giving them audience in their prayers, as heare, as to anſwer a requeſt.) And then the Author returns to the firſt, laſt, v. 9. Being made perfect he became the author of eternall ſalvation, &c.
Thus ſecondly, Heb. 9.1. the Author having named two things, the ordinances of worſhip, and the For there was a tabernacle made, the firſt, &c. and after the ſecond vaile, the tabernacle, &c. and over it the Cherubims of glory ſhadowing the mercy-ſeat, but) covering, and though the Greek be Ark in this place, it muſt be taken in the other ſenſe of the Hebrew, and rendred, as if it had been Hebrew
covering of the arke, &c. all theſe belonging to the ſecond particular, and then afterwards he comes back to the former, the ordinances of worſhip, v. 6. Now
&c.
So thirdly, Chap. 10.33. the Author having mentioned two acts of ſuffering in them, the firſt perſonall in themſelves, by reproaches, and afflictions, the ſecond by way of ſympathy with their Apoſtle, relievers of others that were ſo toſſed; in the next verſe he reſumes both again, but firſt the latter, For ye had compaſſion of me in my bands, ver. 34. and then ſecondly the former, took joyfully the ſpoyling of your goods.
This is farther evidenced by an example in this Goſpel,
Give not that which is holy unto dogs, neither caſt your pearls before ſwine, leſt they tread them under their feet, and turning again, tear and rend thee. Where there is no doubt, but the forper modum regreſſus, by way of going backward thus, Leſt the ſwine tread the pearls under their feet, and Leſt the dogs rend and tear thee. For it is not the manner of ſwine to fall upon men, and tear them, but of dogs it is; and it is not the manner of dogs to tread a thing under their feet, but of ſwine it is; So the 2 Cor. 2.15. St
Paul having mentioned the them that are ſaved, and them that periſh; he goes back, ver. 16. Firſt to the latter of them, to thoſe a ſavour of death unto death, but to theſe a ſavour of life unto life; So in the Epiſtle to Philemon v. 5. hearing of thy love, and faith which thou haſt towards the Lord Jeſus, and towards all the Saints; 'tis apparent that the Lord Jeſus is the object of the faith, and the [all Saints] the object of the love. So again Rom. 14. having ſet down two heads of diſcourſe, that the ſtrong ſhould not ſet at nought the weake; nor ſecondly the weake judge or condemne the ſtrong, v. 3. he reſumes the latter firſt, v. 4. who art thou that judgeſt? and then v, 10. returns to the former, and thou why doſt thou ſet at nought thy brother? So Matth. 23.25. Chriſt having mention'd firſt the outſide of the cup or platter, then the inſide, v. 26. he returns firſt to the cleanſing of the inſide, then the outſide of it. So 1 Cor. 6.11. after the generall of waſhing, which contains the two ſubſequent, ſanctifying and juſtifying; the mention of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, which is firſt nalatter of the two, that of juſtification; and the Spirit of our God to the former, that of ſanctifying.
Other examples of this obſervation I ſhall leave the Reader to obſerve, when he reads the Scripture more ponderingly, and only proceed to help him to take notice of it in the point in hand. Three caſes, it is apparent, are here mention'd orderly by our Saviour in the matter of treſpaſſe, 1. Telling the treſpaſſer of his fault between him and thee alone. Secondly, taking one or two with thee, to do it more convincingly, and with greater autelling the Church of it. Having ſaid ſomeApoſtles and their ſucceſſors are to doe, when the cognizance of this injury and conſecular tribuheathen, becauſe that ſuppoſition may perhaps be the ground of the ſit tibi Ethnicus, on which the other is ſuperexcommunicate ſuch a refractary till reformation, and then upon that, abſolve him again, and [verily I ſay unto you, whatſoever you ſhall bind on earth, &c.] From this view it is not irrational to conclude, that the Church and the diſciples (conſidered prophetically under the noApoſtles, i. e. Founders firſt, then Governours of Churches) may in that place ſignifie the ſame thing. So ſaith St
Chryſoſt. in Mat. Hom. 6. Tell it to the Church, i. e. to the Preſidents and Rulers of it; and Theophyl. in Mat. 18. Church for the Rulers of the Church; To which purpoſe it is obſervable, what Kimchi a Jewiſh learned Rabbi hath affirmed, that the Governours, and Rulers are oft meant by the word Congregation; and ſo Philo,
Congregation is the Prieſts. Agreeable to which is the inſcription of the ancient Apoſtolical Epiſtle of Clemens Romanus to the Corinthians,
The Church of God that dwels at Rome, meaning, I conceive by the title [the Church] himſelf (who wrote the Epiſtle, and was chief there, or Biſhop at that time) and the other Clergy with him; For ſo the other part of the inſcription [to the Church of God at Corinth] is after explained by him, in the words to the Biſhops, and Deacons; but if this will not be acknowledged, then by meeting or Congregation of pious men, either a conſeſſus Presbyterorum, a Colledge of Presbyters, which were ordinarily aſſiſtant to the Biſhop in the antient Church, or poſſibly the whole or any part of the people convened, whoſe authority or conſent may work ſomewhat upon the offender, as St
Paul conceives it were apt
Timothy,
i. e. in the preſence of the community of the people, 1 Tim. 5.20. and perhaps when he ſpeaks of the Cor. 2.6. the rebuke that was by or under the many, though it be not certain whether that ſignifie the chaſtiſement, (as our Engliſh reads) puniſhment and cenſure inflicted by the Presbyterie, or Canonical ſeverity, (which in caſe of ſorrow and relenting of the ofrebuke, or admonition before ejection out of the Church, were wont to be thought ſufficient without excommunication, and after excommunication, as in this place to the Corinthians, if they were ſubmitted to, were ſufficient, though not preſently to reſtore him to the communion, yet to make him capable of being prayed for by the Church, 1 Joh. 5.16. and to be delivered from the ſtripes of Satan, the diſeaſes that the delivering to Satan in the Apoſtles times brought upon them;) or whether, as the words may be rendred, it import the rebuke, or reproof, viz. the third admonition, (or the ſecond given by the Biſhop, which was equivalent to that) which was under, or in the preſence of many, viz. of the people or Congregation. The former of theſe ſenſes ſeems more agreeable to the place to the Cor. the latter rather to belong to that in the 1 Tim. and ſo that which even now in Muſar was coram multis, before many, and in S. Paul (if not under many, yet) in the preſence of all men, Chriſt may here expreſſe by the Church. This interpretation being admitted, or not rejected, it then follows commodiouſly, and reaſonably in the text of the Evangeliſt, that after the matter is brought to them (i. e. to thoſe many) or after this act of reproofe, or rebuke before them, & upon continued refractarineſſe to theſe laſt admonitions, then the Apoſtles or Governors of the Church, the Paſtors, (which cannot be in any reaſon excluded from unChurch, whatſoever it ſignifies) and thoſe already promiſed this power, chap. 16. may, or ſhall bind, or excommunicate them. And that is the ſumme of the 18. v. in reference to the 17. and then v. 19. Again I ſay unto you, (or as a very again verily I ſay unto you, that ſecond verily noting the ſpeech to be of a new matter) that if two of you ſhall agree upon the earth, or here below, (in reference to the ſetake with you one or two) concerning any thing, which they ſhall aske, it ſhall be done unto them of my Father, &c. For where two or three are gathered together in my Name, there am I in the midſt of them, which words are brought to give authority to the ſolemn admonitions of the ſecond order (adone or two aſſiſtants or witneſſes to inforce them) by telling them, that as the conſeſſus trium virorum, the aſſize of three men among the Jewes had ſome power; ſo ſhall any two or three Chriſtians be conſiderable in this matter, having the priviledge of Gods preſence, as in their prayers thus united, ſo alſo in this act of united admonition; for, firſt, God is to be thought to be in the midſt of them, (as that fourth perſon added to the three children in the furnace, and the face of that fourth like the Son of God) to be preſent with them (as it is 1 Cor. 5.4.) in this his ordinance, in this piece of Diſcipline apointed by him; whereupon the refractarineſſe of the tranſgreſſor is become ſo much the greater in this caſe; and beſides, ſecondly, if upon admonition, they ſhall be hearkned to, it will be in their power to pray for the penitent treſpaſſer, (as James 5.16.) and that prayer of theirs joyned with the injured perſon is likely to be more effectuall then a ſingle prayer, and ſo in both theſe reſpects a greater weight is ſet on the the taking of one, or two with him. Thus having returned to the ſecond of the three, in the ſecond place, and diſpatched that, the method would direct to go on to the firſt again in the third place; but in ſtead of that, St
Peter it ſeems asks again about it, how long a man is to forgive private injuries; and the anſwer in the following words ſupplieth the place of having proceeded to that, and ſerves for the concluſi
The reſult then of this whole Chapter is this, that of the three places of the Goſpel, concerning the donation of the power of binding, and looſing, two of them at the firſt ſight moſt clearly convince, this power to be given to the Apoſtles, as governors of the Church, (which will not be communicable to any, but either
office, imChriſt, or to their ſucceſſours,
in Mat. 18.) and the third upon a thorough conſideration doth the ſame alſo. For this we have the plain teſtimony of Theophylact on that place Mat. 18. The power of binding and looſing was given to all the Apoſtles; When? why, when he ſaid, Whoſe ſins ye remit, they are remitted, &c. i. e. in this place of St
John: and again, [and I will give] it ſignifies the future, i. e. the time after the reſurrection, which is that in S. John alſo; and again on Mat. 16. binding in S. Mat. and the remitting in S. John are put together, as belonging to the ſame matter: and it is confirm'd by no mean authority, that of S. Paul himſelf, of himſelf, 2 Cor. 13.10. where ſpeaking of theſe cenſures, (noted there by uſing exciſion, & Congregation;
) he addeth according to the power that Chriſt hath given me, (which ſure was not peculiar to him, but common to the reſt of the Apoſtles, which had it beChriſt ſpeaking in him, a high expreſſion, making every ſuch act of judicature in him, an act of Chriſt.
THe only difficulty remaining in the point, will be, who are the Apoſtles ſucceſſors in that power; and when the quepower, I muſt be underſtood of the power of governing the Church peculiarly (of which the power of the Keyes was, and is a principal branch) for it muſt again be remembred, that the Apoſtles are to be conſidered under a double notion: 1. As Planters, then as Governors of the Church. The title of Miſſus, ſent, (Embaſſadour or Meſſenger) belongs peculiarly to the former of theſe, and ſo though it have ſome extraordinary privileges annext to it, neplanting, (as the gift of tongues, the poworking miracles) which ennobles it beyond the order of Governours in the Churches ſince their plantation, yet in the perApoſtles, it was but a precedaneous power, preparatory to that other of ruling, or governing, which no doubt is the reaſon that Chryſoſt. calls Ignatius the martyr, both an Apoſtle and Biſhop, and perhaps is the meaning of that ſaying of an Anonymus writer, in Photius,
St
Paul ordained, and enthronized, or ſeated Biſhop of the Metropolis of the Epheſians, i. e. that he that had helped to plant Churches, and ſo was an Apoſtle ſent out to that purpoſe, was at length orBiſhop to govern that of Epheſus being planted. Which diApoſtles ſucceſſors in that power, which concerned the governing theſe Churches which they had planted] And 1. I anſwer, that it being a matter of fact, or ſtory, later then that the Scripture can univerſally reach to it, cannot be fully ſatisfied, or anſweTimothy or Titus, &c. and the ſeverall Angels of the Churches in the Apocalypſe (who are acknowledged by all the Antients to be ſingle perſons, that had power over all others in thoſe Churches,) but will in the full latitude through the univerſal Church in thoſe times, be made clear from the next evidences, that we have, viz. from the conſent of the Greek and Latine Fathers, who generally reBiſhops are thoſe ſucceſſors. This I ſhall not be ſo unreaſonable as to attempt to prove at large through the writings of thoſe Fathers, but content my ſelf with one or two of the firſt of them.
Of this number I conceive the teſtimony of Clemens Romanus
in his Epiſtle to the Corinth. (which hath been ſo often of late produced) might to any diſintereſſed perſon be allowed to have ſome force in it; where ſpeaking of the Apoſtles, he ſaith,p. 57.that they foreſeeing that there would be contention and emulation,
dignity of Biſhops or Epiſcopacy,
they ſet down a liſt, or continuation of ſucceſſors, (as when Heſychius, (and out of him Varinus) renders Analogy from thence will extend to this alſo, that as inheritance, or ſucceſſion) that when any dyed ſuch a certain perſon ſhould ſucceed him. To which affirmation of Clemens, when I have added (that which all Eccleſiaſticall Stories have made familiar to us) that there were preſerved in ſeveral Churches ſuch lib. 3. cap. 3. & ſucceſſioIb. lib. 4. cap. 63.
rols and catalogues of Biſhops beginning from the Apoſtles in each See, I ſhall conClemens was a pertinent teſtimony to this purpoſe; eſpecially when the voice of antiquity is ſo clear, that Iren. lib. 3. cap. 3.Clemens himſelf was one of thoſe Biſhops (an Adjutor of the Apoſtles in their life time, and after the departure of Linus, and Cletus, the onely one that retained the name of Biſhop in Rome, all others being ſtiled Presbyters only) that Vedelius at Geneva hath at large acknowledged it, Exercit. in Ignat. Ignat. Epiſt. ad Mar. Caſſabol. c. 3.
After Clemens (an aſſertor at once, and example of this truth) I muſt next appeal to the Martyr Ignatius himſelf alſo Biſhop of Antioch, that lived in the Apoſtles age, and is by the enemies of Epiſcopacy diſcerned to be ſo full a treaſure of this truth (and of others in this kind) in ſo many notable paſſages, that there hath been no way (imaginable by thoſe who reſolve to have it otherwiſe) to reſiſt the plainneſſe of his authorities; but firſt by p. 55.
p. 58. non eſſe Ignatium luce clarius eſt, &c. nemo mihi unquam perſuadebit, &c. p. 56.
volume of his Epiſtles, as ſpurious, and of a latter birth; and thirdly, by ſome very ſlender ſhewes of proof, that they are ſo. One ſpecial of this ſort (which I ſee
Salmaſius, and for which it Blondel. Apol.
Blundels book, not then printed) I ſhall mention to remove prejudices, and it is this; that in the Epiſtle to the Magneſians, he diſtinctly calls Epiſcopacy
learned Grammarian, ſignifies it to be a new Order, and he attempts to prove it, becauſe age; and novae, or novarum rerum cupiditates, new deſires, or of new things.
The dealing of this learned Grammarian in this buſineſſe will be ſufficiently ſtrange to him, that conſiders the whole matter. I ſhall only (in paſſing) give ſome few hints of judging it, by telling you firſt, that the generality of Copies read not the youth of the Biſhop (and no one of the Greek editions hath ſo much as mention'd any various lection in that place, till now the Florentine or Laurentian copy hath given us that variety.) Secondly, that the whole context of the Epiſtle drives to this of Biſhop, and give him honour, quamvis aetate juniori, though he were younger then they, and again that he goes on to tell them, that it becomes them not to be too familiar with the age of their Biſhop. But then beſides this, thirdGeneva edition reading Scripture pertinent only to that ſenſe, as that Wiſdome is not alwayes with the hoary hair, &c. Fourthly, that other reading is not avowed by, or cited from any Greek manuſcript, but onely that in the Laurentiana Bibliotheca, and the old Latine, made uſe of by the moſt Reverend Primate of Armach, which is directly tranſlated out of it, and ſo doth not at all adde to the authority. But then fifthly, if that reading of Biſhops in thoſe firſt times. For 1. what if it were a new Order in Ignatius his time? that were pretty antient, Ignatius living with the Apoſtles; for that it was written by ſome body elſe above 200. years after Chriſt, wil want ſome other probation. Secondly, there is no neceſſity
a new order, for although, as he ſaith, age, nor young, but may be interpreted new, &c. yet we are not bound to accept that interpretation of it, when the Context of the Epiſtle belongs to another matter, and when another interpretation of this phraſe may be given, which (if that reading were acknowledordination? and young man, and ſo it ſhall be the Ordination of a young man, or a young mans being Biſhop, which might have been apt to proMartyr had not fortiPaul to Timothy, it is ſo new, and ſo irprejudice, and willingneſſe to find an exnovelty, that made him think of this; for why ſhould not the luſts (there appointed to be avoided) be youthfull luſts, or ſuch as young men are ſubject to? why new luſts; or deſires of new things? were not the old ordinary luſts (ſo frequent among young men) fit enough to be avoided? might any other be enjoyed, ſo they were not new? I am ſorry I have inſiſted ſo long on ſo weak an objection, and yet it is the beſt that that learned man (ſo much looked on, and believed in this matter by thoſe who deſire change) hath produced, on which to build aEpiſtles are not Ignatius's: And 'tis a little ſtrange that another learned man And. Rivet ſhould ſpeak of Epiſcopacy as of a novell order, and adde [ſive
Ignatius Ignatius to ſay this, which if he doth, then is not only his Illuſtriſſ. Salmatius deceived, but alſo Epiſcopacy muſt be acknowledged in Ignatius's time, in which if it were acknowledged to be novel, it will ſtill be antient ePresbyters joyning with the Biſhop in impoſition of hands on a Presbyter (which ſure is to ſuppoſe, not to deny the office of Biſhops) ex veteris aevi reliquiis manſit, and ſpecifies what age he means, by [juxta illud Apoſtoli per impoſitionem manuum Preſbyterii] wherein yet it had been more ingenuous to have
cum, and not have chang'd it into per, quite conSalmaſius, that in that Epiſtle to the Magneſians there is mention of the word Chriſt was not, Epiſtle writen after Valentinus, whoſe Idiom that was; if the argumemt were concluding, (as Iſ. Voſſius in his late Edition hath ſufficently proved it is not) it cannot ſure be in force againſt us, who find no ſuch thing in our former Greek Copies; or, if we did, could readily acknowledge any ſuch paſſage to be ſuppoſititious, and thoſe few words taken into the text out of the margent, without caſting away the whole volume of Epiſtles in that fit of jealouſie, or rage; if I could diſcerne in that wriChriſtian world hath had of theſe Epiſtles, I ſhould proceed to the weighing of it. But now upon the Edition of Blondels book (out of which Salmaſius only brought us ſome gleanings) we find a great deale of paines taken to caſt off thoſe Epiſtles; and it is very obſervable firſt, that he that hath taken in all the antient Church-writers into his catalogue (even Hermas himſelfe, without any note or character of apocryphal ſet upon him) and out of each of them laboured (though very imt
Hierome, and, it ſeemes, had skill enough to make even Tertullian, Irenaeus, and Cyprian, (and maequality of Biſhops and Presbyters) inſtrumental to his deſigne, was not able to find one ſentence in Ignatius, which might be perſwaded to be uſefull to him, and therefore hath excounſels. The exceptions which this learned man hath made againſt Ignatius being the author of thoſe Epiſtles, are 1. Scriptionis genus affectatum, an affected kind of writing, pompous Epithets (which ſaith he, could not agree with an Apoſtle, panting in the chaines
of Martyrs) ſuch as t
Paul's Epiſtles are not) without the crime of affectation, as well as St
Paul might his holy Martyr in his chains may not be allowed the vanity of affectation as that hunts for glory from men, yet ſure he may be allowed to have elevated affections, and by the command of them, to uſe expreſſions which are not vulgar & ordinary. The ſecond is his barbarous words,
Latine words made Greek, but ſo there are many more in the New Teſtament, in ſtead of thoſe four charged on Ignatius as barbariſmes, theſe fifteen which are ready at hand to me, (I will not take the pains to ſeek for others) Latinizing (i. e. barbarous) phraſes,
Goſpel (naming only one of ſo great a number) and Hegeſippus: and for the excuſe of that one word in Hegeſippus,
he was at Rome from the year 150 to 170. whereas this liberty might be allowed either Ignatius, or Hegeſippus, without having been ſo long at Rome, as wel as the Writers of the New Teſtament, which have three times more of ſuch words then he cites out of both of them. The third is, ſeverall paſſages, quae incommodè dicta videri poſſunt, which may ſeem incommodiouſly ſpoken, (and if it be but [ſeem,] and that but [may ſeem,] and at laſt but [incommodiouſly ſpoken,] ſure this charge will not wound deep) & comparationes non exactae ad amuſſim, compariſons not drawn by the rule exactly, (and truly the Martyr that was not to be permitted to have the vanity to affect, might as well be thought not to have
line and the plummet, and delineate every expreſſion ſo exactly; But what are the miſcarriages, and defects in this kinde? why, that he calls the Spirit
cord, and Faith
Leader, whence, ſaith he, in Ignatius's eſteem, Fidei potior quàm Spiritus functio, Faith hath a nobler office then the Spirit. But why may not I more truly ſay, that the advantage in that compariſon is given to the Spirit, becauſe that is ſaid to draw, when Faith doth lead only? 'Tis certainly clear that his anger was very cauſleſſe, who could quarrell at that doWord of God apprehended by Faith doth lead us our way to heaven, and the Spirit of God is the cord to draw us thither. 2. That he calls his bands
in which he wiſhes he might riſe, whereas, ſaith Blondel, there is nothing properly ſpirituall in the bands which wicked men put on the body of a martyr, and no hope that he ſhould riſe in thoſe bands. But ſure his ſufferings may be called his bands, and thoſe be matter of joy, and Spirit, more then all the Gemmes to the moſt vain glorious worldling, and this be very commodiouſly expreſt by thoſe words, and then ſure he might wiſh, (though not hope) (and joy continued to him, and ſo that he might riſe with them. 3. That he uſes Martyr is this, not to give him leave to uſe ſuch frequent innocent words as theſe frequently, as well as St
Paul is allowed the very ſame, & &c. theſe are certainly ſtreined exceptions, the learned man was at great leaſure to quarel, when this provocation was accepted. 4. That when Baptiſme is called weapons, he calls Faith
what, ſaith he, doth faith and love, &c. confer to him that is already armed by baptiſme? and if patience be the Chriſtians compleat armour, what new advantage hath he by having a helmet from faith? but why may not Baptiſme be called weapons in the plurall, and every of thoſe graces profeſt and vowed in baptiſme, have their ſeverall uſes in the after life? and ſure the armour of baptiſme is not ſo perfectly of proof, but that there is need of the exerciſe of every one of thoſe Chriſtian
Satan, which are like to be ſo oft repeated; and if faith do not defend the head, and charity the heart, and patience and perſeverance every part of the body, i. e. every action of the future life, that ſubtle enemy may chance to wound us mortally. As for the new advantage of faith to him that hath the compleat armour of patience, the Author of that Epiſtle ſaith no ſuch thing, but on the other ſide firſt requires the helmet of faith, and then the patience, that ſure is the arming of all parts, which were not before armed, and that may go for an addition, as perſeverance is to ſanctity, and as our Saviour ſaith of his believers, that he that endureth to the end ſhall be ſaved. 5. That 'tis not likely that preſently after Ignatius comming into Aſia, Biſhops, Presbyters, and Deacons ſhould be ordained ejus rogatu, at his intreaty, qui ad Antiochinos Aſinorum gratulatorias Epiſtòlas deferrent, who ſhould carry the gratulatory Epiſtles of the Aſians to the Chriſtians of Antioch. I ſhall only ſay to this, 1. That they were ordained to ſome other end beſide this, yet might perform that task alſo, and that very ſolemnly. 2. That a probable argument, or a conceived improbability againſt a narration of a matter of fact (which reprobabilities, but only on the authority of the Relatour) is of all other the moſt unconvinimprobability in it, and the matter of fact being ſtill but one, when the poſſibilities which never did come to paſſe, are infinite, ſome one of thoſe poſſibilities may perhaps become at a diſtance, to him that knows nothing of the fact (but would perſwade others that 'twas never done) tolerably probable alſo. 3. That he bids follow the Biſhop as Chriſt did his Father; and the Presbytery, ut Apoſtolos, as the Apoſtles, and ſaith that he that doth any thing clancularly without the Biſhops knowledge, is to be thought
whereupon, ſaith he, An Epiſcopos ullos Prerbyterorum comparatione Dominos, imo Deos à Chriſti martyre habitos credere par eſt? Is it fit to believe that any Biſhops in compariſon to Presbyters ſhould be counted Lords, yea Gods by that Martyr of Chriſt? But ſure this is to pervert and torment the ſenſe of that Martyr; For to bid follow Biſhops as Chriſt did his Father, is far enough from making Lords or Gods
equality of Biſhops and Presbyters, for ſure Chriſt was equall with his Father: and 'tis obſervable that in the place of Polycarp ſet down by this learned man, p. 15. when obedience is required to Presbyters and Deacons as to God and Chriſt, he finds no fault with it, though that be the very thing actually ſaid by Polycarp of Presbyters and Deacons, that here he unjuſtly firſt impoſes on, then accuſes in Ignatius's words of Biſhops, which yet are, onely for the manBiſhops, as Chriſt obeyed his Father, and cannot be extended to any equalizing the Biſhop to God, or the leaſt appearance of doing ſo. 'Twere too long to go thorow, and render formal anſwers to the reſt of the heap of exceptions, which are every one ſingle ſo ſlight, and of no value (and conſequently the totall of them will not aprobables to become one demonſtration, or to be equipollent to one, much leſſe of a few ſlight improbables) that 'tis clear the number of the exceptions was the thing depended on, and not the weight of them: Witneſſe theſe four more, that ſhut up the rear; 1. That he ſaith that all pious men are changed
which he thinks inconvenient, when St
Paul calls the Godly
whereas Chriſt being by Ignatius in the next words expreſſed to be that new leaven; there is then nothing fit to be quarrel'd in it, unleſſe to grow in grace, and the practiſe of all Chriſtian duties (which is the meaning of that expreſſion) being an inconvenient adviſe. 2. That he bids fly to the Apoſtles
whereon having reſolved that by the Apoſtles he muſt mean the Apoſtles writings, (becauſe in the ninth of Trajan then paſt all the Apoſtles were dead) he concludes that the Author of that ſaying makes no more of the Apoſtles writings, then of the Congregations of men ſubject to error. Where in all ſober reaſon and equality, if the Apoſtles ſignifie the Apoſtles writings, then the Presbytery, but thoſe Apoſtles themſelve, who when they wrote thoſe writings, were the Chriſtian Sanhed
or Presbytery of the Church, which was to decide all their controverſies in Religion.
Polycarp, tanquam ad plebe
he ſaith, obſerve your Biſhop: as if forſooth the Epiſtle written to Polycarp might not be written to the Church under him alſo, to whom 'tis clear that plural precept [one man, though he were never ſuch a plebeian. 4. That he ſaith he will flatter, nay, if they will not, force the wild beaſts to kill him, which ſaith he is like the deſperabunda ſaeculi mancipia, the moſt deſperate ſlaves among the heathen. As if theſe fervent expreſChriſt were thus to be deformed, and charged againſt a pious man. After all this unprovoked ſeverity, one act of grace and mercy theſe Epiſtles are vouchſafed from this Authour, viz. that he contains himſelf from making uſe of one paſſage which ſuppoſitionis earum argumentum videri poſſit, might ſeem an argument of the ſuppoſititiouſneſſe of them; (and yet no greater an argument then that [multa quae incommodè dicta vider poſſunt] made up a great number of arguments even now) the paſſage is, that he diſputed profeſtly againſt the Chriſts, humanity to have been but an appearance, no reality; for ſaith he, whether you make Caſſ
having gone thus far, he comes off again, with a Volens hoc argumento abſtineo, he willingly abſtains from uſing this argument; becauſe ſaith he, Simon Magus was before Ignatius, and he, ſaith Irenaeus, taught this doctrine of Chriſts appearing only, not being a true man; and that Caſſan, &c. were call'd the chief of them, muſt ſignifie, not that they were the firſt broachers, but in their times the chief maintainers and abetters of that hereſie. This mercy, I confeſſe, was but ſeaſonable, and had much of Juſtice in it, and ſhews that that Author was able to have anſwered his other arguments, if he had ſo pleaſed, particularly that which is made uſe of ſo confidently both by him and Salmaſius of Valentian dialect, which is by Iſaacus Voſſius ſatisfied with this very anſwer which here Blondel gives to the uſe of the word Valentinus was not the firſt that ſaid ortion, but that 'tis agreed on by the Antients, that he was not the founder of a new, but reviver of
old opini
Irenaeus, and other Fathers to the ſame purIſaacus Voſſius hath collected their affirmation sin his Annot. on the place. Having gone thus far in rejecting theſe Epiſtles, he is at laſt at leaſure to remember and acknowledge, Plenom illis ipſis, quas confictas putamus Epiſtolis, fidem habere Patres, that the Fathers (indefinitely, if not univerſally, and it ſeems he had no one to produce to the contrary, if he had, he would certainly have produced it, and with reaſon have depended on it more, then all theſe other Topicks) afforded a full plenary belief to theſe very Epiſtles, which the two Champions of the age Salmaſius and he think to be ſuppoſititious, [putamus] is but a poor word, Salmaſius could ſpeak bigger on weaker or fewer arguments, [tam certò ſcio, quam me haec ſcribere.] To this authority of the Fathers againſt his opinion, his anſwer is ſhort, but hath much weight and aſperity in it (which they that have as ſtrong an appetite to lay the Presbyterians flat, as the Presbyterians have exBiſhops, they that have the ſame exceptions againſt all diſtinction, or diſcrimination of Lay and Clergy, as Blondel and Salmaſius have againſt the impariety and inequality of Biſhops and Presbyters, will, when they can hope to be heard, be ready enough to make uſe of, and muſt not be denied to have urged an argument ad homines unaſwerable, whenſoever they ſhall pleaſe to make uſe of it) and 'tis but this, Quid tum? What then? the authority of the Fathers in a matter of fact (as that Ignatius wrote theſe Epiſtles) caſt off without any ceremoQuàm multa minimè ſuſpicaces ac imparatos & fefellerunt ſemper, & quotidie fallunt? How many things have alwayes deceived, and daily do deceive men that are not ſuſpicious, nor upon their guard? And if all the Fathers of the Church, beginning from thoſe that were neareſt Ignatius's time, muſt be involved in the number of theſe incautious, cheatable men, I ſhall be afraid to mention the conCanon of Scripture? Nay, when the ſame current, and conſent of FaCanon of Scripture, for Canonicall, and Theopneuſt, ſhall be found at the ſame time to deliver down, and make uſe of theſe Epiſtles of Ignatius, onely with the diſtinction of Apocryphal, (and mean by that, not ſuppoſititious books, or books which are under ſuſpition that they are not their off-ſpring, whom they call Father, but only books of inferior authority, as Apocryphal is oppoſed divine Scripture, & legi Domini, to the Law or word of God, & to thoſe that are put in the Canon, and in a word, Nicephorus's Chronography, and in others; inter ſcripta novi Teſtamenti novi apocrypha, numbred among the apocryphal books, not of Ignatius, but of the New Teſtament, and appointed to be read by pious men, though not allowed that ſame authority and dignity, in which the books of Sacred Scripture have been juſtly eſtated) when, I ſay, the ſame hands of the antient Church ſhall deliver both the Epiſtles of St
Peter for Divine Scripture, and theſe Epiſtles of Ignatius for the Epiſtles of Ignatius, though not for Divine Scripture, who can ſay that Salmaſius when he had thus confidently thrown off theſe Epiſtles from being written by Ignatius, did not conſequently, and agreeably to his t
Peters Epiſtles alſo? And who can think it reaſonable that our waSalmaſius? who in the controverſie about the parts of the Croſſe, i. e. when he conceiv'd antiquity to be favourable to that opinion which he defended, hath made this argumentative againſt his adverſaries, An credibile eſt Gregorium qui vixit tanto tempore poſtquam crucis ſupplicio nemo amplius afficebatur, certiorem eſſe teſtem de habitu crucis totius, &c. quàm eos authores qui ſcripſere cùm adhuc paſſim in uſu eſſet communiſſimo nocentum crucifixio? Is it credible, that he that lived ſo long after the uſe of that kind of death was left off, ſhould be a ſurer witneſſe of any thing that belongs to it, then thoſe Authors that wrote when it
was in uſe? De Cruce, p. 255. And again, if Blondel may ſay withFathers were incautious in general, and thence conclude, that they were actually deceived in this parBlondel is too cenſorious, and partial, and willing to bring all to the cauſe he hath eſpouſed, and thence conclude (knowing how contrary theſe Epiſtles are to his intereſts) that he hath actually expreſt his paſſion, and intheſe Epiſtles? I have done with this learned mans obſervations in this matter, and when I ſhall hear of any other argument which can ſeem of force againſt theſe Epiſtles, I ſhall be glad to conſider it, profeſſing my ſelf to conceive, that as long as that one Author ſtands in the Church in his juſt value, the cauſe of Prelacy and Hierarchy canEpiſtles being ſufficient (which the adverſaries acknowledge in ſaying he doth in ſeaſon and out of ſeaſon, at all turns aſſert Epiſcopacy) to interpret the obſcurer veſtigia in the New Teſtament, and to aſſure us what was the practiſe and doctrine of the Apoſtles and Primitive Churches in that point; and that is the reaſon I have inſiſted ſo long on a thing which may ſeem ſo extrinſecall to my firſt undertaking, and ſhall not think my ſelf out of my way, if I be content to return to this controt
Peter upon a bare affirmation in a Parentheſis (quae ſola planè genuina eſt) ſo will it be in a lower degree, but in like manner, to deal with a moſt antient Apoſtolical-ſpirited volume, upon ſuch unproved cenſures as theſe; and it is obſervable, that the firſt writer that ever undertook to be thus ſevere aEpiſtles, did with as much confiCanonical Scripture. This I thought not amiſſe here to inſert, to vindicate the writings of that antient Martyr, though it may be taken for a parergon in this place.
Suppoſing then this writer to ſtand in the ſame repute in
Church of God, in which he did, before he was obſerved to be unreconcileable with the deſigns of the new Reformers, I ſhall proceed to make uſe of his teſtimony. He commands obeBiſhops
Apoſtles; to the Presbyters as to the Seventy, to the Deacons, as to the Deacons in the Acts. The paſſage is known, and although in another place, he makes the Presbyters parallel to the Apoſtles, and the Biſhops to Chriſt, yet theſe places are eaſily reconciled, it being clear, that that latter place conſiders the Apoſtles at the time, when Chriſt was here on earth, at which time they were inOrigen ſaith, Tr. in Mat. 24. Propriè Epiſcopus Dominus Jeſus eſt, Presbyteri Apoſtoli, Chriſt is properly the Biſhop, and the Apoſtles Presbyters) but the former place conſidering that after Chriſts departure, is that which more properly belongs to this matter; this power (though promiſed before) being not yet inſtated on them, till after his reſurrection, immediately before his leaving of this world (or indeed till the coming of the Holy Ghoſt) at which time they were left the Governors of the Church, as Chriſt had been before, and the Biſhops, their ſucceſſors ever ſince. To which purpoſe St
Cyprian, Ep. 65. Apoſtolos, i. e. Epiſcopos & Praepoſitos Dominus elegit, the Lord choſe Apoſtles, i. e. Biſhops and Governors. So Judas's Apoſtolical function is called Biſhoprick Act. 1.29 ſo Theodoret thinks Epaphroditus was Biſhop of the Philipians, becauſe he is called Apoſtle, and on 1 Tim. 3. ſaith thus, thoſe that are now call'd Biſhops, they then call'd Apoſtles, ſo Titus, ſaith he, and ſo Apollos, and ſo (ſaith Remig. on 1 Cor. 4.) Soſthenes alſo. Thus St
Hilary frequently calls St
Paul Epiſcopum, Biſhop. And Hilarius Sardus in Eph. Apoſtoli Epiſcopi ſunt, the Apoſtles are Biſhops. So the Scriptor qu. in vet. & nov. Teſt. qu. 27. Nemo ignorat Epiſcopos Servatorem Eccleſ
So ſaith Rabanus Maur. in 1 Tim. 4.14. of the Apoſtles times, Epiſcopi provincias integras regebant, Apoſtolorum nomine nun cupati. The Biſhops were call'd Apoſtles.
Blondel himſelf confeſſe not only out of Gildas, that St
Matthew Epiſcopatum ſortitus eſt, was Biſhop, but acknowt
James the brother of the Lord, as the voice of all antiquity, that he was Biſhop of Jeruſalem. Jacobum Hieroſol. Eccleſiae Epiſcopatum conſtanter aſſerunt veteres omnes. Apol. pro Sent. Hieron. p. 50. And if it be ſaid, that he meant by the word Epiſcopus Biſhop, no more then a Presbyter, one of many; I ſhall only then put him or the Reader in minde, what the ſame Blondel in his cenſure of the Pontif. Epiſtles (when they ſay he was not ſo ſevere againſt Biſhops) hath put together of St
James. Hieroſol. Eccleſiam rexiſſe ſtatuunt veteres, & à Chriſto Epiſcopale munus accepiſſe, ait Hegeſippus apud Hieron. in Cat. Epiphan. haer. 78. Hieron. in Gal. c. 1. Greg. Turon. l. 1. c. 17. Nic. Methon. de pane conſecr. à Chriſto & Apoſtolis. Euſ. l. f. 7. c. 19. Conſtit. l. 8. c. 35. Ab Apoſtolis, Conſtit. l. 7. c. 48. l. 8. c. ult. Clem. Alexand. apud
43. afi. e. the very next year in his acEuſeb. l. 2. c. 1. Athanaſ. in Synop. Euſeb. l. 2. c. 2. Hieronymus de Script. Eccl. Beda de 6. aetat. & Martyrl. ad Cal. Maii. & Chron. Gr. anon. Scriptor.
Biſhop he governed that Church, as a ſingle perſon, ſa
or throne; all the difference between the Antients being, whether by Chriſt or the Apoſtles, or both, or by St
Peter only, he was ordained Biſhop.
Thus, ſaith S. Chryſ. did Chriſt inveſt the Apoſtles with this power of retaining and remitting ſins,
as when a King ſends Governors over Provinces, he gives them power of impriſoning and releaſing, intimating the Rulers of the Church to be the men that are here reApoſtles, and ſo in L. 3. Biſhops (to excuſe himſelf who had fled from it) he principally inſiſts on the power which is intruſted to them, and in that reſpect applies to them the ſtyle of the faithfull and wiſe Servant, whom God makes Ruler over his houſehold. So Theophylact on Matth. 18. They that after the manner of St
Peter, are vouchſafed the honor of being Biſhops, have the power of binding and looſing. So again appears by the forecited Teſtimonies of the Preſidents in St
Chryſ. and the Praefects of the Church, in Theophylact. And ſo
Greek Church, Gabriel of Philadelphia,
i. e. Biſhops, are the ſucceſſors of the Apoſtles, and in plain words, So that 'tis manifeſt, that the Apoſtles were Biſhops, and applies to them that of the Pſalmiſt, Pſal. 45.16. of Gods conſtituting them rulers over all the earth, and names the ſeverall Churches wherein the ſeveral Apoſtles ordain'd Biſhops, St
John in Aſia, St
Andrew in Achaia, St
Thomas in India, &c.
Thus alſo among the Latines St
Jerome who was not very favourable to Biſhops, ſaith expreſly that they were the Apoſtles ſucceſſors, Epiſcopi omnes Apoſtolorum ſucceſſores ſunt. Ep. 83. ad Evagrium. So St
Ambroſe, Claves illas regni coelorum in beato Petro Apoſtolo cuncti ſuſcepimus ſacerdotes. All we, that are ſtiled Sacerdotes, in the bleſſed Apoſtle St
Peter received the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven. And what Sacerdos ſignifies among the Writers of that time, and particularly in St
Ambroſe, the obſerviz. that which the [ſuſcepimus] applyed to St
Ambroſe's perſon, will inforce, he being Biſhop of Millain at that time, (and this is aSacerdos and Pontifex promiſcuouſly; witneſſe Servius in Aen. 3.) So de dignitate Sacerd. c. 2. he ſhews out of Scripture, that the ſheep are delivered Sacerdotibus, I ſhall render it to Biſhops, beand ſo muſt be ſubject to thoſe Rulers. So in St
Chryſ. in the fore-cited l. 2. The word Paſtor in Latine, is ordinarily the Biſhops Title, in order to the Shepherds office of ruling, and governing, as well as feeding the flock) and Sacerdos, are promiſcuouſly taken, and the latter by the Interpreter there rendred Epiſcopus, Biſhop.
And to the ſame purpoſe moſt clearly St
Cyprian, Ep. 12. ſpeaking of the Lapſi, thoſe who having fallen were under the cenſures of the Church, and how the Presbyters had preſumed to reconcile, or abſolve them, he concludes that they did not (Reſervare Epiſcopo honorem Sacerdotii ſui, & Cathedrae (reſerve
to the Biſhop the honour of his Prieſthood, and chaire, ſhewing the inEpiſcopus and Sacerdos, at that time and that in oppoſition to Presbytery, appropriating to the one the Power of the Keyes, excluſively to the other. This he had ſet down more plainly before Epiſt. 10. ſhewing and aggravaPresbyters that had taKeyes
Praepoſitum ſibi Epiſcopum non cogitantes, not thinking that there was a Biſhop ſet over them; quod nunquam omnino ſub anteceſſoribus factum eſt, reſolving that it was a fact without any precedent in the Church; and again, L. 1. Epiſt. 3. having proved the Epiſcopal power to be immediateSacerdotalis authoritas & poteſtas divinâ dignatione firmatur, The Sacerdotall power is ſetled by divine dignation, and addes the occaſion of all Schiſmes in the Church to be, quod Sacerdoti Dei non obtemperatur, that the Biſhop is not obeyed: Nec unus in Eccleſia ad tempus Sacerdos, & ad tempus Judex, vice Chriſti cogitatur; and that 'tis not conſidered, that the one Prieſt, i. e. Biſhop, and Judge, is for the time in the Church in Chriſts ſtead; which is yet more clear by his making Sacerdotum Collegium, The Colledge of Prieſts, all one with Coepiſcoporum conſenſus, The conſent of Fellow-biſhops, and preſently adding, that he that ſets himſelfe above this unus Sacerdos, one Prieſt, ſe non Epiſcopi, ſed Dei Judicem faceret, makes himſelf Judge not of the Biſhop, but of God. And therefore 'tis a ſtrange proofe of Blondels, that Epiſcopacy and Presbytery is all one, from that ſpeech of Pontius Diaconus concerning this Cyprian,
Sent. Hieron.Quod ad officium Sacerdotii & Epiſcopatus gradum novellus electus eſt, having before ſaid, Presbyterium & Sacerdotium ſtatim accepiſſe. Whereas the equipollence of the word Sacerdos and Epiſcopus being obPresbyter from them, doth clearly infer the contrary; and that is apparent by the very place, Multa ſunt quae jam Presbyter fecit; ad probationem bonorum operum ſatis eſt, quod ad officium Sacerdotii & Epiſcopatus gradum adhuc novellus electus eſt. He was it ſeems a Presbyter firſt, and did many things in that ſtate, and a proof that he did ſo, was his election to the office of Sacerdos or Biſhop, when he was a novice, then preſently or ſoon after his converſion, where the difference of his being a Presbyter and a Biſhop is moſt manifeſt. So when St
Hilarius Pictav.
Aarone Sacerdotes ſignificari non ambiguum, in Levi, miniſtros oſtendi; the ſame Blondel concludes, Sacerdotes ſive praepoſitos, & ſeniores to be all one, not knowing or obſerving again that that Sacerdos ſignifies Biſhop, who is there ſet parallel to Aaron, in lege primus Sacerdos, the firſt Prieſt in the law.
Many other evidences might be produced out of thoſe and after times, as in the Councel of Taurinum ſpeaking of Palladius; A Triferio ſacerdote fuerat mulctatus, he was puniſhed by Triferius, who, that he was a Biſhop, (if it were doubted) would appear by the acts of that Councel, and particularly by his exExuperantius, a Presbyter, Can. 4. which ſure none but a Summus Sacerdos, a High Prieſt, or Biſhop could doe.
But there can be no need of more proofs in this matter, and if there were now any more doubt, that the Biſhops were the confeſt ſucceſſors of the Apoſtles in this Priviledge or PrerogaCanon of the Apoſtles might ſatisfie it, Let not the Preſbyters, or Deacons do any thing without the conſent of the Biſhop, for he hath the people of the Lord intruſted to him, and ſhall one day be required an account of their ſouls: which beſides that it is evidenced to belong to this power of the Keyes, by the uſefulneſſe of that to the diſcharging the truſt about ſouls, appears further by the the prohibiting of Presbyters to do any thing without him.
A ſaying, which whatſoever is thought of it, is the voice of the firſt Antiquity. Ignatius muſt begin the number in Epiſt. ad Trall.
And if, becauſe it follows immediately, obey the Presbyters, as the Apoſtles. it be conceived, that that precept belongs to the people onely, and not to the Presbyters, it will then be eaſily replyed, that to the whole matter the ſame Ignatius in Epiſt. ad Magn. hath given it in a latitude, which had prevented this ſcruple As the Lord Chriſt doth
nothing without the Father, ſo you alſo without the Biſhop; You, whether Presbyter, or Deacon, or Laick. Once more in Epiſt. ad Smyrn.
And the Councel of Laodicea hath (almoſt in Ignatius's words) commanded the ſame. Can. 56. The Presbyters muſt do nothing without the conſent of the Biſhop; and many more acts and Canons might be produced to the ſame purpoſe.
And if againſt all theſe, this exception be made, that by the force of ſuch Rules not only the power of the Keyes, but alſo all other power belonging to the Church is appropriated to Biſhops: to this the Anſwer (as it will be eaſie, ſo it) will tend much to the clearing, and ſerve for the ſhutting up of this whole matter; That indeed there is great truth in the objectipower in all matters Eccleſiaſtical did primarily beBiſhop, and no others, even Presbyters themſelves; but as it was by the Biſhop communicated to them, not only by that firſt act of Ordination, in giving them the power, but alſo by a ſecond act neceſſary to give them that other power to uſe or exerciſe that power, when they have it.
This is the plain ſenſe of the Canon of the Councel of Arles,
Can. 19. nec Presbyteris civitatis ſine Epiſcopi praecepto amplius aliquid imperare, vel ſine authoritate literarum ejus in unaquaque Parochia aliquid agere. The Presbyters of any City muſt not command any thing without the precept of the Biſhop, nor do any thing in any Pariſh, without authority of the Biſhops letters licenſing them to do it. Thus, I ſay, it is not only for the power of the Keyes, but even for the Sacraments. Ignatius's ſaying laſt produced in Epiſt. ad Smyrn is by him thus in larged, Let that Euchariſt be reputed firm (or rightly celebrated) which is done by the Biſhop, or by him to whom he ſhall give leave; and for Baptiſme, and that toIt is not lawfull without the Biſhop, i. e. without his leave, either to baptize, or adminiſter the Sacrament,
It ſeems the conſent of the Biſhop was thought neceſſary to make it ſafe for any Presbyter to doe any Eccleſiaſtical act, or to give validity to it, when 'twas done by him. So Tertull. de cor. mil. Non de aliorum quàm de praeſidentium manu Euchariſtiam ſumimus, We receive the Euchariſt from none but the Preſidents or Governors. They are all one with the Juſt. Mart. Apol. 2. to whom that whole buſineſſe is there reTertul. de bapt. Dandi baptiſmum jus habet Summus Sacerdos qui eſt Epiſcopus, dehinc Presbyteri & Diaconi, non tamen ſine Epiſcopi authoritate, propter Eccleſiae honorem, quo ſalvo ſalva pax eſt. The Chief Prieſt who is the Biſhop, hath the power of giving baptiſme, after him the Presbyters and Deacons, yet not without the authority of the Biſhop, for the honor of the Church, which as long as it is preſerved, the peace of the Church will be preſerved alſo. So when the Scriptor. anon. quaeſt. in V. & Nov. Teſt. which is thought to be Hilary, ſaith, In Alexandriâ & per totum Aegyptum, ſi deſit Epiſcopus, conſecrat Presbyter; that in Alexandria and Aegypt, if there be no Biſhop, the Presbyter conſecrates, 'tis clear by the mention of that liberty in the Presbyter, as of a thing peculiar to Aegypt, and that too, only when there is no Biſhop preſent, that regularBiſhops, and to thoſe Presbyters to whom he gave it. Where by the way will appear a great miſtake of Blondel and (I ſuppoſe out of him, as his maNotes in his apparatus againſt Biſhops) of Salmaſius, who in another place of Hilary in Eph. 4. cited by both of them, [apud Aegyptum Presbyteri conſignant, ſi praeſens non ſit Epiſcopus, In Aegypt the Presbyters conſigne, if the Biſhop be not preſent] inconſigning, either to be 57. & Salmaſ. in appar. ad l. de Prim. Papae.confirmation or bleſſing (I ſupabſolving) of penitents, or ordination. It being clear by the other place, juſt now cited, that conſignatio ſignifies there conſecrating of the Sacrament, which is peculiarly call'd conſecration, that of giving orders being ordination, not as he calls it ordinandorum conſecratio (which what it would grammatically ſignifie I know not, unleſſe ſome benediction of them that are after to be ordain'd) and it ſeems Blondel himſelf, p. 61. thinks it poſſible that conſignatio may ſignifie the conſecrating the Elements, and by what follows, I conceive him to uſe it in that ſenſe, ſaying, quod antiquis per ſolam Epiſcoporum abſentiam licuit, omnibus
nunc abſolutè licet, that which antiently was made lawful to all (i. e. to Presbyters) onely by the Biſhops abſence, is now abſolutely lawfull to all: Which I ſuppoſe he muſt mean of conſecrating the Sacrament, and I am ſure could not reaſonably believe of ordination. But this by the way, in paſſage, to confirm that aſſertion of Ignatius ſufficiently, that the Church was by the Apoſtles put into the hands of Biſhops, that ordinarily the conſent of the Biſhop was required to enable a Presbyter for any Eccleſiaſtical act, the plenitude of power being by Chriſt delivered down to the Apoſtles, and through them to their ſucceſſor-biſhops, and by them diſpenſt out to others in that meaſure, and thoſe porti
And if it be demanded here, What it is which in our Church
is given to Presbyters in their Ordination, as the full importance of the form then uſed [Receive the Holy Ghoſt:] I anſwer, not all that is at any time contained under that phraſe, when it is uſed in the conſecration, but only the particulars which are after mentioned; and ſo diſtinctly not the power of ordaining, which is not mentioned, and which is a particular, that never was regular for any Presbyter in the antient Church to aſſume to himſelf, or to any number of that order without a Biſhop over them (and it would not be hard to give an account of all that hath been produced of late by Salmaſius, or any other from the origines Alexandrini, or any other record of antiquity to the contrary, but that it is Proteſtant Churches in this laſt Century be oppoſed againſt it; then 1. I ſhal conceive thoſe very unfit to be confronted againſt the
Ʋniverſal for 1500 years; and therefore ſecondly, I ſhall not doubt to affirm, that want is not only a defect, but a corruption among them. Thirdly, it will be obſervable, that even thoſe that want it among them, have formerly thought fit to excuſe it by the caſe of neceſſity, and to acknowledge it their infelicity, but not their fault, (their ſuperiors in the State not permitting them to have Biſhops to ordain them;) and to give their judgements freeEpiſcopacy is, it is to be preſerv'd; and where it is not, it is to be wiſht for; which is a ſufficient expreſſion of their ſenſe of it. And if the improſperouſneſſe of the cauſe of late in this
change their ſtyle, I ſuppoſe there is no greater reaſon to depend on their judgeextrinſecal arH. Grotius, Ego non probo prudentiam minùs felicem. He lik'd not the choice of that ſide which was not proſperous. And then fourthly, that this cannot be applicable by way of excuſe to thoſe who deſire to caſt out Biſhops where they are, on purpoſe that Presbyters may uſurp the power which belongs to them. Secondly, not al power of binding and looſing, retaining or remitting, though thoſe words are there added (whoſe ſins you do remit, &c.) but ſo much as the Biſhops or Governours are preſumed to have thought fit to impart to them, and what that is, will appear by other acts of our Church, eſpecially by the Liturgy: as 1. The declaring of abſolution in the Church after the Confeſſion of ſins; 2. The abſolving them by way of prayer before the Sacrament (in caſe the Biſhop be not preſent) and 3. in Baptiſmal waſhing, and 4. upon ſpeciall Confeſſion on the ſickremitting of ſins is allowed among us to a bare Presbyter, not only by way of pronouncing, or declaring of abſolution, but (as a miniſterial act) actually abſolving him, (by Chriſts authority committed to the Presbyters) from all his ſins.
All which yet will not extend to the abſolving from the band of Excommunication, or proportionably to ſuch power of binding, any further (at moſt) then to confer the firſt power of it, which if it be then given, doth yet remain (as the other power of Preaching, and adminiſtring the Sacraments) bound and reſtrained from being exerciſed, till they be further looſed by the donation of a ſecond power, as Luke 24.49. when Chriſt ſent them the Promiſe of his Father, which was at the time of his breathing on them, Joh. 20.22. and gave them a grace, or firſt power of it, he yet reſtrains the exerciſe of it, till the actuall deſcent of the Holy Ghoſt, (but tarry you in Jeruſalem till you be indued with power from above) and that is not done in this Church as it ſtands eſtabliſhed by Law, (in this particular
Keys) till he become a ruling Elder, whether by being made Biſhop, or otherwiſe by having Juriſdiction veſted on him: and thus much will ſerve turn for the firſt enquiry, on whom the power of the Keyes was beſtowed.
I Come now to the ſecond general enquiry, in what this power conſiſts, and ſhews it ſelf: which I ſhall make no ſtay, or ſcruple to define in this propoſition, That the power of binding and looſing in theſe places of the Goſpels, is
Chryſ. in Jo. 20. Theoph. in Joh. 20. &c. Ibſpiritual gift, or grace, and belongs to the Theoph. in Mat. 16. the pardoning or puniſhing of faults, the former to the Cenſures of the Church, the Eccleſiaſtical puniſhments of Excommunication, and the later, the power of looſing, to that of abſolving from them.
This poſition I muſt vindicate from the contrary interpreTexts from concluding or countenaning any ſuch Cenſures. And of theſe, though they are not all to one ſenſe, yet one interpretaTalmudiſts, and from them concludes (I ſhall give it you in the learned writers own words) that the power of binding and looſing is facultas decernendi, explicandi, interpretandi, declarandi de ligato & ſoluto, quod planè millies in Talmudicis ex vetuſtiſſimae Eccleſiae illius uſu denotat, quid vetitum ex lege ſacrâ, quid permiſſum (quemadmodum & Graecis
1
ſcimus
&c. mafaculty of explicating, or interpreting what is lawful, what not, &c. in a word, no more then the power of deciding caſes of conſcience, ſeu ſic de jure publicè reſpondendi
illúdque dicendi, &c. The truth of which, I ſhall, with all due reoffice or power among the Jews intruſted to ſome ſelect Elders of the people, of teaching and giving publique reſponſes (by way of deciding caſes of Conſcience, though not by way of Judicature) what was to be accounted lawful, what not, both by the Law of God, and the Tradition of the Antients; which yet being ſuppoTalmud, or by any of thoſe writers, the power of binding and looſing, (or that the power of binding and looſing, is by them ſo deſcribed) but (which is quite another thing) a power of teaching or inſtructing, &c. what is lawful, what forbidden. Nor will it be a proof of any force to conclude (that which we have no reaſon to believe withviz.) that this power of binding is that power of teaching, and no more, only becauſe there was ſuch a power of teaching among the Jews. For if we will judge à pari, experience proves the contrary, in this Church of ours; where though there be a power of binding, and a munus docendi, an office of teaching, &c. yet no man is bound from thence to acknowledge theſe two to be all one, but we have long believed them to be two faculties, or offices, the one given the Apoſtles in the donation of the Keys, the other in the miſſion to preach; (and though it were granted that we were miſtaken in affirming them to be two ſuch diſtinct faculties, yet would not that hinder the truth of this aſſertion, that in our books they are ſo diſtinguiſhed, the queſtion being now of the fact, & not of the right, and it being clear that in our practice our Preaching is one thing, and our Excommunicating is anoJews, one of declaring in foro, as well as the other extra forum, one judicial, as well as the other doctrinal; and ſure it would be but a poore ſuperſedeas, or prohibition to keep the Sanhedrin among them from judging and puniſhing any offender brought before them, by telling them that there was among the Jews a a licence or faculty of declaring what was lawful, without any power of puniſhing; For
power (and not by that of declaring) that they undertook thus to judge and puniſh: and let me add that although the power aJews were acknowledged only to be a civil power, yet might Chriſt in his Church ſet up an Eccleſiaſtical power proporſacred, which they uſed onely in civil judicatures, as anon we ſhall have occaſion to defacultas, faculty, or power of binding, but the donation of Keyes, and with that, Chriſts Promiſe, that whatſoever they ſhall bind on earth, ſhall be bound in heaven: and therefore I conceive this will not be a convincing way of inferring this concluſion.
We muſt therefore in the next place proceed to examine the reaſons, or arguments produced to perſwade us, that the power of binding and looſing is no more then the power of declaring, &c. what is prohibited, what is permitted, the office of the Caſuiſt only. And theſe reaſons I can finde to be but two.
1. That ligatum & ſolutum planè millies in Talmudicis ex vetuſtiſſimo Eccleſiae illius uſu denotat quid vetitum, quid permiſſum. 2. That in ſome places of Greek Authors,
bind and looſe are uſed alſo.
For the firſt of theſe, I ſhall firſt ſay, that if it were true, that the Idiom of the Talmudiſts were ex vetuſtiſſimo Eccleſiae illius uſu, out of the moſt antient uſe of that Church the Law of Moſes, and the Scriptures of the Old Teſtament, being the Records of the moſt antient Church, ſome footſteps of it might be expected there; but I ſhall ſuppoſe there are no ſuch to be found, not onely becauſe I have there ſought them in vain, but becauſe I preTeſtimony from thence to be more Authentick then the Talmud, and ſo would certainly have produced them, if there had been any. Secondly, for the Talmudiſts acception of the phraſes; firſt I might ſay, that we are no way obliged to interpret Greek words in the New Teſtament by the uſe of the Talmudiſts, becauſe though the traditions concerning Hebrew cuſtomes mentioned in the Talmud may reaſonably be thought antienter then Chriſts time (and ſo the Teſtimonies brought thence be worth the heeding for
ſuch, and fit ſometimes to be uſed for the explaining the like cuſtoms mentioned in the New Teſtament) yet the booke it ſelf, and conſequently the word in it (which only we have now to conſider) was written, and ſet out long after the New TeſtaMiſnaioth, or firſt Text of the Talmud, being ſet forth by the Tannaim, or Doctores Miſchinici, about the year 150 after Chriſt, who as they profeſſe to have had their beginning per continuam ſucceſſionem acceptionis legis oralis à Moſe, ſaith Buxtorf, by a continual ſucceſſion of tradition of the oral law from the times of Moſes, ſo they acknowledge to end in R. Jehudah hakkàdoſch, (ſtiled Hannaſi, the Chief or Prince, and by way of eminence Rabbi, when he is cited in the Gemara) who lived under Antoninus in the midſt of the ſecond Century. After theſe Tannaim, are the Amoriam whom Scaliger cals Gemara, and of that Gemara, i. e. thoſe diſputations, and deciſions of thoſe learned men at Jeruſalem together with the Miſchna forementioned, doth the Jeruſalem-Talmud conſiſt, and was ſet forth 283.
an. 230. as the collection of the like diſputations and deciſions on the Miſchna, which were had in Academiis Pombedithana, Soriah, and Nahardeah, make up the Talmud Babylonicum, which was compleated an. 500. This will be ſufficient to ſhew that the words of Chriſt, either as they were ſpoken by him, or repeated by the Evangeliſts, ought not to be conceived to have imitated the phraſes of the Talmudiſts ſo long after them; and there will be as little reaſon to believe (what is left the only poſſible) that the Writers of the Talmuds have imitated the phraſes in the Goſpel, being themſelves both Jews and enemies to the Chriſtian Religion; and beſides, if the Idiom of the Talmudiſts were of any weight in this matter, yet ſure it is not ſufficient to weigh down the contrary InterpreChriſtian Fathers, (who are to us in all reaſon to be heeded, as the veryer Talmudiſts of the two, the Traditors and deliverers of our Goſpel, and Creed unto us) or the uſe of it among the Jews that have written in Greek, particularly of the Author of Eccleſiaſticus, who is conceived to be the famous Ben-Sira, and with him to forgive ſins, c. 28.2. however no way able to extend it ſelf to that
t
John, where the phraſe is varyed, and the [power of remitting and retaining of ſins] is given to the Diſciples, which will have no analogy with that which is here pretenligatum & ſolutum, bprohibited, &c. the retaining or remitting of ſins, will be diſtant from it, for ſure that will not be, to declare one mans ſins unlawfull, anothers lawful, which it muſt do, if this interpretation be applyed to that place alſo.
This being premiſed as an Anſwer ſufficient to take away the force, or convincingneſſe of this interpretation, I ſhall ex abundanti ſuperadd, that I have uſed ſom care to examine thoſe words, and to obſerve their importance in thoſe, and other Jewiſh writings: I ſhall give you an account of it.
The Hebrew word for binding is Talmud many times ſignifie to forbid and prohibit; and from thence forbidden, prohibited, unlawful; onely by the way I ſhal crave leave to ſhew you by what degrees it comes to ſignifie thus. The word in the Old Teſtament ſignifies to bind, (and ſure that is the beſt interpreter of Idioms in the New) and accordingly is rendred by binding with cords, and ſometimes for that band, or obligation, that proceeds from having made a vow as Numb. 30.4. and is then rendred definition or decree, becauſe by that vow I bind, or define, or determine my ſelf to ſuch a performance; Farther then this, 'tis true this word is rendred by our Tranſlators, Num. 11.28. to [forbid] Lord Moſes forbid them, where yet 'tis obſervable that the forbiding there, which Joſhua deſires, is applied to the perſons, and and not to the thing, and ſignifies a checking, repreſſing, [Lord Moſes ſuffered them not, cohibeto eos] as when by chiding, or diſciplining, a ſuperior reſtrains another; according to which uſe of the word it is, that Philip de Aquin. makes it agree in ſenſe with prohibuit and cohibuit, forbidding, and repreſſing: and thus it will be very agreebinding, as that ſignifies Church-cenſure,
offenders by that means. In the whole Scripture I believe there will not one place be found where that word is rendred by the 72. by any word ſigniprohibit, or the like, unleſſe you will ſay it doth Dan. 6.7, 8, 9. where the word decree, and yet if you examine that place, and the nadecree, you ſhall finde, that it was not a bare prohibition, but a binding to puniſhment upon non-performance (for the decree was there, v. 7. that whoſoever ſhall ask any petition from either God or man, but of thee, O King, ſhall be caſt into the den of lions) and ſo the decree is that deſignation to the puniſhment of caſting into the den, which is there call'd binding, as when the Jugde decrees the Offender to be Excommunicated, that act of judicature is a decree, yet nevertheleſſe a binding, (this binding bejudicial act, and from thence receiving its force of obligation) and è converſo in that a binding, or obligation to puniſhment; that it is ſuch a decree, to wit, a decree ſub poenâ, that ſuch a thing ſhall be done, ſo ſaith Schindler, that the Chaldee
obligavit ad obedientiam, aut poenam, binding to obedience, or penalty, and Elias Levita, that Every thing from which either ſinne or puniſhment commeth unto him that doth it
or is call'd Aſſur; and therefore Munſter giving an acCommentaries of the Rabbins, ſaith edictum aut ſententiam, quâ quis tenetur, &c. by which any man is bound to puniſhment, if he obey it not. In like manner as he that vows, binds, (and the word vowing he doth either by words of execration explicitly, or elſe by intimation implicitly, call puniſhment upon himſelf, if he perform not his vow, and ſo binds himſelf to that puniſhment. And ſo ſtill the word [binding] by denoting a decree in this kinde, doth not at all vary from our preſent ſenſe of binding by way of cenſure, which now we contend for, but rather confirm and concurre with it; and ſo I conceive (in thoſe excerpta about excommunication,
J. Coch hath ſet down in Latine out of Maimonides) thoſe words of Maimonides do import, Quod totus Iſrael decrevit, non obſervat Princeps, &c. What all Iſrael decreed, the Prince obſerves not: he ſpeaks of inflicting anathema's, and I ſhall grant that the word rendred decrevit, is in the original binding (in reference to which it follows in the next words, by him ſet down, remittitur à laeſo, ſi ei ſatisfecerit, &c.
The injur'd perſon remits, if ſatisfaction be made him) and from thence ſhall conclude, that even when it is to be rendred decrevit, it may yet note puniſhment, particularly that of excommunication, or decree ad excommunicandum, ſentence to puniſhment beLegiſlation, and all binding to that, an act of Command or power.
Having thus conſidered the verb Rabbins or Talmudiſts, ſignifie very often a thing forbidden, prohibited, unlawfull (though in the Old Teſtaband, and ordinance or decree, and bound or impriſon'd, and the like, and not the thing unlawfull or prohibited) which yet being granted and added to what was before granted of the Talmudical uſe of the Verb, comes not home to prove the objecters concluſion, wch is this, that the verb Talmudiſts, decernere, explicare, interpretari, declarare, de ligato, vel quid ligatum ſit, i. e. quid vetitum: to decern, explicat, interpret, declare concerning a thing bound, or what is bound, i. e. what is forbidden: for to prove this ſenſe of the verb, that other ſuppoſed uſe of the participle is not ſufficient, any more then my confeſſing amatum to ſignifie a thing loved, will conclude me to affirm, that amo ſignifies to declare a thing to be loved, which we know ſignifies formally to love, and nothing elſe.
That the verb ſignifies to forbid, or decree, per modum legiſlationis
(which is all that could be deduced from theſe premiſes, (though ſuppoſed true) of ligatum in the Talmud ſignifying noillicitum) 'tis acknowledged, but that will not ſerve the turn, thereby wholly to evacuate & nullifie the power of the Keyes, which is pretended to belong to the Church from theſe texts; If the Apoſtles had this power to forbid or decree, this were 1. more then to interpret or declare a thing to be unlawful, the office of making laws is more then that of the Caſuiſt, or Coundecrees backt with ſome power of cenſures againſt reſiſters, and ſo indeed the word imports, to decree
ſub poenâ under penalty, and not ſimply to decree. But the thing for which this Talmudical interpretation contends, and which we oppoſe, is that this power of binding is onely a power of declaring, and explaining a thing to be unlawful; and for this from all that is pretended, or offer'd to our view, I have after all my ſearch no temptation to ſuſpect, that even the Talmudiſts themverb with them may ſignifie [to prohibit] and the nouns, and participle, a thing prohibited, or unlawful, and that is the utmoſt that Buxtorf could obſerve of the words among the Talmudiſts, or that the author of the interligatum & ſolutum, i. e. millies in Talmudicis vetitum lege ſa
;] and if theſe notions will be taken, then the meaning of [whatſoever yee ſhall bind on earth ſhall be bound in heaven] will be, that whatſoever they ſhall by decree prohibit on earth, ſhall be prohibited, or unlawfull in heaven; which were onely to exchange the power of Cenſures, for the power of giving Laws, which, as it is more then that of the Caſuiſt, ſo, I conceive, is never to be found any where without power of puniſhing alſo.
This I conceive to be anſwer ſufficient to all that is produTalmud were the umpire, or the uſe of words there the beſt Nomenclature for the New Teſtament. But then over and above, we muſt again remember, that this Talmudical obſervation will be but little conviction to us, who finde that the writers of the New Teſtament have no ſympathy with the Talmud in this matter, but uſe variety of other words to expreſſe [commanding, or decreeing, or forbidding;] ſuch are unlawful, or forbidden
petitio principii, when 'tis made uſe of to confute him that concludes the Cenſures from thence.
Talmud it ſelf the word binding too, and that not only in the obvious vulgar ſenſes, but in that alſo which we here contend for, of binding by cenſures, or binding over to puniſhment, (obſtrinxit ad poenam, as Schindler renders the Chaldee, and as Elias Levita the Rabbinical word, be bound over to puniſhment) and ſo with great reaſon may be reſolved (even when it ſignifies to prohibite) to belong only to ſuch penal prohibitions, or at leaſt, (belonging at firſt to ſuch only) to have fallen after in common uſe (which ſure hath been obſerv'd to bend words from their primitive ſenſe) to ſignifie decrees or prohibitions: which ſurely will not exclude, but contain under it that which we now contend for.
I ſhall ſhew the ſtrength of this argument by a parallel, as I conceive, exactly proportion'd to it. Arabick ſignimillies, very ordinarily [to forbid, or reſolve any thing to be unlawful, from thence the noun vetitum, any thing prohibited or forbidden, and prohibition; Suppoſe now in ſome diſcourſes concerning the kinds or degrees of excommunication among the Iews, or of the power of the Sanhedrin, or indifferently in any Jewiſh writing, I ſhould meet with the word prohibuit, interdixit, and a friend ingenuouſly admoniſh me that it ought to be rendred anathematizavit, devovit; would it be thought reaſon or ingenuity in me to reply to my admoniſher, No, but I have rendred it aright, for in Arabick
prohibuit, and therefore 'tis but an ignorance in the Arabick dialect, to render the Hebrew anathematizavit, and but a popular error (to be reform'd from hence) in them, that conceive there was any kind of excommunication among the Iewes, meant by that word prohibition, and therefore belongs among the Jews only ad Theologiae praeceptivae munus, or to the office of teaching and interpreting, what is [vetitum, vel interdictum lege ſacrâ.] If, I ſay, I ſhould deal thus with any peece of plain Hebrew, my firſt queſtion would be, whether this account of my rendring that word would be accepted; and if not, my ſecond now is, whether the
This wilbe yet clearer, by proceeding to conſider the words which are oppoſite to it, (and to which this Author refers when he ſaith, Solutum millies in Talmudicis licitum aut permiſſum; A thing looſed is taken a thouſand times in the Talmud for lawful or permitted) ſuch are Talmudiſts for licitum & permiſſum, lawful and unforbidden.
Of which yet ſomewhat muſt be further obſerved, 1. That hiphil ſignifies ſolvere, to looſe; (as indeed that which hath no obligation laid on it, which is looſe from all band to obedience, or obligation to puniſhment, is properly reſolv'd to be lawful) but then this hinders not, but that the verb in hiphil may ſtill ſignifie, (and indeed even aRabbins ordinarily doth) to looſe, both properly & metaphorically; properly, as to looſe or unty thoſe that are bound with cords, or ſuch like bands, properly ſo called, as Pſ. 146.7. ſolvite vinctos, looſe thoſe that are bound, & Pſ. 105.20. the king ſent
Chaldee paraphraſe reads & ſolvit eum, and the 72 Pſal. 146.7. Dominus
or metaphorically, and that in a double ſenſe, either as it is apdoubts, or difficulties, and then 'tis to diſſolve them; or to perſons, and then 'tis to let looſe or unoblige, and in this latter ſenſe J. Coch cites it ex cap. 1. Nedarim, that on whom the anathema or cherem is inflicted coram, or in his preſence
where this word ſignifies clearly remiſſion or abſolution, and that from a ſentence of excommunication; ſo again in that conſtitution of the law cited by Buxtorf,
57.
Niddui 30 dayes and deſires not to have it looſed, they ſeparate him, or put him under Niddui again, & if he continue ſo 30 dayes more,
(or as he renders it, relaxate) they excommunicate, or put him under cherem; & therefore Schindler mentioning ſolutio, looſing; and there is a ſaying in If any man ſwear in this form, [If this be true, let me be excommunicate in this world, and in the other] and be perjured, he cannot be abſolved by any.
Another word ſynonymous to this, and ordinarily uſed by the Talmudiſts is looſe or diſſolve, as to looſe cords which tye, or Camels which are tyed with them, is by the Talmudiſts taken for abſolving, remitting, forgiving, pardoning; ſo ſaith Elias Levita in Thiſby, it is uſed by the Rabbins for pardoning and remitting, as,
and in the prayer that begins, All ſhall be remitted, or pardon'd. So in a place cited by Coch out of Gem. Moed. Caton. c. 3. Quid remedii? age cum ipſo ut remittat tibi, that he may looſe you from the excommunication: and again, adi principem,
So c. 1. Nedarim, Steti coram R. Huna, cum audiens quandam nomen Dei in vanum proferre, eam excommunicaret, & ſtatim eâ praeſente anathema relaxaret; there the word looſing in our ſenſe, relaxating of, or freeing from a cenſure of excommunication, directly all one with remittatur ipſi, following in the ſame place, which even now we produced.
A third word there is ordinarily uſed to this purpoſe, of the ſame importance, and that is 2465.
Moed Katon, Sapiens poteſt ſeipſum excommunicare, a wiſeman may excommunicate himſelf
free or looſe himſelf again: and ſo in that out of 1. Nedarim, in J. Coch, excommunicationem poſſe è veſtigio reſcindi, there the word is excommunication.
By the little that hath been ſaid, it may ſufficiently appear, that to bind and to looſe may be found even among the Talmudiſts to ſignifie ſomewhat beſide interpreting or declaring, quid vetitum, quid permiſſum ſacrâ lege, what is forbidden, what permitted by the law of God, as that referres ſimply ad ſolum docendi, & interpretandi, vel Theologiae praeceptivae munus, onely to the office of teaching, and interpreting, and of preceptive Divinity, &c. and that 'tis no way contrary to the ſtile or idiom of thoſe writers to affirm, that binding and looſing belongs to Cenſures, (and not only to ſtating of Caſes of Conſcience) even if the Talmud were
judge: for ſure there is nothing more ordinary in that, then to heare of looſing them who are excommunicate; which muſt needs imply, that they which were ſo excommunicate, till they were looſed, were ſuppoſed bound alſo.
And therefore it may be obſerved (in paſſing) that the learnH. Grotius having in his Notes on Matth. 16.19. made this Talmudical obſervation, that to looſe, are by the Hebrewes attributed to the interpreters of the law, (which ſeems ſomething agreeable to this obſervaKeyes there ſpoken of, to be the keyes of knowledge, Luk. 11.52. doth yet on Matth. 16.19. interpret binding and looſing there, by retaining and remitting, Joh. 20.23. and in his notes on that third place acknowledges, that thus the Apoſtles did remit, either when by Baptiſme they received into the Church thoſe that proteſtimony of ſerious repentance they received into their communion thoſe that had been lapſt or fallen, and applies to it that of the 2 Cor. 2.10. To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive alſo, (which belongs clearly to the excommunicate, inceſtuous perſon, in the former Epiſtle, who was it ſeems by this Eccleſiaſtical courſe brought to a capacity of remiſſion, and abſolution by that time, and now abſolved by St. P
) and for the conjunction of both theſe ſenſes in the interCyprians authority, Ep. 73. To which I ſhall only adde, that in another part of his Notes upon the Goſpels, Luk. 6.22. this very Judicious man (whoſe education might have given him as great prejuExcommunication, or Cenſures; And at laſt reſolves out of St. Cyprians Epiſtles, Totum ferme Chriſtianae diſciplinae vigorem in iſtis judiciis conſtitiſſe, &c. that well nigh all the vigor of Chriſtian diſcipline conſiſted in thoſe judgments of the Church. Quem morem qui ex Eccleſiâ ſublatum volunt, graviſſimum infligunt vulnus diſciplinae, quam corruptis adeò Chriſtianorum moribus ad veterem ſeveritatem reduci maximum ſit operae pretium,
p. 680.tantùm abeſt, ut ulla ejus pars reliqua laxari debeat, &c. Which cuſtome they which would remove out of the church, inflict a moſt grievous wound on diſcipline, which (now in
this notable corruption of the manners of Chriſtians) it were moſt excellently worth any mans pains to have reduced to its antient ſeverity, ſo far is it from being fit, that any remaining member or part of it ſhould be looſed, or put out of joynt; and in another place, Diſciplinam morum ego non refugio, ut modò pax coeat, nulla futura ſit tam ſevera, cui non libenter me meoſque ſim ſubjecturus. For the diſcipline in order to manners, I would willingly ſubject my ſelf, and all that belong to me, to the ſevereſt that could be brought into the Church. But this by the way.
For the perfecting of this anſwer, and ſatisfying all the conTalmud are utterly invalid and unconcluding, and that one thing not at all to be granted by us, being indeed, as I contruth. It is this; that by the particle whatſoever ye ſhall bind, &c.] is noted the thing, and not the perſon, for ſo that interpretation requires [what thing ſoever ye ſhall declare to be unlawful, &c.] whereas it's no new thing in all languages and dialects to put the neuter for the maſculine gender, things for perſons, and that in the New Teſtament, is not without example; as Joh. 17.7. 'tis our Saviours dialect (and it is the very word whatſoever, i. e. all thoſe men, v. 6. and ſo 1 Joh. 5.4. every thing, i. e. every one, that is born of God. Thus when S. John, Apoc. 21.27. ſpeaketh of man, and other the like inhabitants of the new Jeruſalem, he ſaith, there ſhall not enter in there any thing that defileth, or that worketh abomination, or a lye; neuter, which is, no doubt, no unclean abominable perſon, &c. So 2 Theſſ. 2.4. the Apoſtle ſpeakAntichriſt, ſaith, that he exalteth himſelf above all that is called God; where the [all] in the neuter, ſure ſignifies in the maſc
every perſon that partakes of that name, the King and Potentates of the Earth; ſo Heb. 7.7. the leſſer or inferior perſon, v. 19. no man; and Ch. 12, 13. him that is lame: With which Examples the phraſe in this text beaneuters here may
maſculine alſo; which very poſſibility were enough to evacuate the Talmudical obſervation, the accommodation of which to this place ſuppoſes the neutral ſenſe of the Maſculine. For to ſay [Whomſoever you ſhall declare to be unlawful or prohibited, &c were not ſenſe; whereas on the other ſide, the granting the neutral ſenſe, would not ſo neceſſarily deſtroy our pretenſions, this rendring of the words being proper ewhatſoever yee ſhall bind on earth, i. e. whatever ſins of any treſpaſſer ye ſhall conclude under the Cenſures] or again, whatſoever puniſhment you ſhall bind on mens ſhoulders (the ſpeech being ſtill limited to this one ſort of pubound or ratified in heaven: though the truth is, the perſonal notion of the whatſoever, i. e. whomſoever you ſhall bind on earth, by the power of the Keyes, ſhut out of this lower kingdom of heaven, conclude under the Eccleſiaſtical bands, or cenſures, &c. ſhall be bound in heaven, &c.] i. e. by God ratified there, (ſuppoſing that what they do, they do according to the rule,) this is moſt commodious & agreeable to the menKeyes (to which 'tis annext, Matt. 16.) which cerpower of receiving, or excluding not ſome thing, but ſome perſon, & to the treſpaſſing brother ſuppoſed to become refractary (to which 'tis annext, Matth. 18.) who is ſtill a perſon alſo; to which I will onely add that in the beginning of that diſcourſe, Matth. 18.11. there is another manifeſt example of a neuter word in a maſculine ſenſe, The Sonne of man came to ſave,
i. e. thoſe little ones, v. 10. of whom God would not that one ſhould periſh, v. 14.
To this account of that firſt argument (ſufficient I conceive to prove that this interpretation hanging thus looſe from the Talmudical uſe of the word, is not in the rendring this text of the New Teſtament, neceſſary to be received) I ſhal yet farther add theſe two obſervations more, 1. That the Talmudical ſenſe cannot have place in the latter part of Chriſts ſpeech [ſhall be bound in heaven] and therefore will be improbable in the former. For ſure the binding in heaven] is ſomeGods interpretation or declaration of the lawfulneſſe of any thing; and if the Church ſhould be thought unfit to have any kind of power, yet heaven is acknowledged capable of it; beſides, the form and compoſure of the words will enforce, that if that pretended Talmudical ſenſe were admitted in both places, Gods declaring any thing to be lawful, or unlawful, muſt be conſequent to the Miniſters declaration here, which will be very unreaſonable; for though Gods Cenſures may by vertue of his promiſe follow the Cenſures of the Church, yet Gods Laws (for ſuch are his declarations of what is law) ſure cannot, or if they do, this will be a great aſſurance that there is ſome power in the Church, when it is ſo backt by God.
A ſecond argument to this purpoſe may be taken from the
Analogy of Scripture, or comparing the two places in Matth. of binding and looſing, with that third in John of remitting and retaining; which I conceive is proved to belong to the ſame matter, whatſoever that ſhould prove to be, but then will not be ſo capable of the Talmudical interpretation, for ſure that will not be ſo clear from thoſe writers alſo, that to retain, hath that ſenſe among the Talmudiſts, which was impoſed upon to bind, which for the preſent I ſhall take for grantpower of the Church, (ſuppoſing it were not deduciMatthew) and then by analogie of thoſe places in S. Matthew, with this in S. John, apply it to thoſe places alſo.
Now for the ſecond proof which is offer'd by the ſame hand againſt the received interpretation, the places in Greek authors where the word binding is vouched to ſignifie forbidding onely, though I might juſtly ſay, that forbidding is much more then declaring, or interpreting a thing to be forbidden, that an act of power, and not onely of doctrine, of a Magiſtrate, and not onely of a Caſuiſt; and ſecondly, that we are not wont to require the dictions of the New Teſtament, which have ſo much of the Old Teſtament Hebrew idiom in them, to be tryed by Attical heathen Greek writers, yEuſtathius and Didymus in Hom. II. Inſcription. Iſidis ap. Diod. Sic. l. 1. Theſe two places I have with all attention conſidered, and ſhall truly re
Euſtathius brings ſeveral interpretations of theſe words in Hom. the firſt of which is, that Homers ſpeech, it was this; Patroclus was ſlain, and Achilles knew not how to help him, or avenge his death, for which he hath very paſſionate ſorrow, even to wiſh he were dead himſelf, becauſe he could not avenge that death of his, this he thus expreſſes in Homers language:
I would, or, O that I might preſently dye, in that I was not able to avenge the death of my Companion! He dyed far from his countrey, and Mars, or the Fate of war hath bound, or hindred, or reſtrained me from being avenger of his blood: where it muſt be obſerved, that Mars did not give any precept or interdict to Achilles not to avenge Patroclus, or declare that it was unlawful, but only that the fate of the war had not ſo far favour'd him, as that he could find any means to do it, which he calls binding or hindring him; and therefore Didymus, to whom we are referred, renders it hindred, and explains the whole matter by this paraphraſe:
; and ſo it ſeems the forbidding, by which they render hindring or ſtopping (which is a natural effect of the vulgar notion of the word, as it ſignifies hinding, he that is bound being hindred or ſtopt from his courſe or action) not of prohibiting or interdicting. But then moreover you muſt conſider, that the ſame Euſtathius and Didymus obſerve in that laſt verſe many different lections, as for example, one eſpecially, in ſtead
Mars in the Nominative caſe,
or miſchief in the Genitive, which reading they reject not, but accordingly exdamni averruncatorem
Patroclus had need of me, to avert that miſchief from him; and this, ſaith Euſtathius, the antients thus paraphraſe Mars wanted my action, or the help which might have come by me; and Ariſtarchus ſomewhat to the ſame purhe wanted me to avert the danger of the warre; and agreeably Didymus,
binding ſignifies prohibiting, or interdicting in that place, but onely ſtanding in need of, which is another ſenſe of the word binding, and that be rento forbid, that yet it muſt not be taken in that ſenſe, that forbidding ſignifies preceptive interdiction, eſpecially not the bare pronouncing a thing unlawfull, (the ſenſe which 'tis brought to prove, and which alone is againſt our pretenſions) but only forbidding, as when the matter forbids, hindring, or reſtraining, or binding from a poſſibility of doing it, and juſt ſo the Hebr. Philip de Aquin. renders binding, ordinarily ſignihinder.
As for the other place referr'd to, the Inſcription of Iſis, thus it lies in Diodorus Siculus, l. 1. p. 16. of Stephanus's Edition.
What advantage can be taken at theſe words thus lying (& not reſtrained, by either antecedents, or conſequents) toward the juſtifying or approving of the foremention'd interdeclaring, or pronouncing of the unlawfulneſſe of a thing, I do not fully diſcern; for why may not the later words paſſe for an interpretation of the former, and ſo the ſenſe be, that ſhe being Queen of the whole region had all power in her hands, to do, or conſtitute (not onely
lawes, but) what puniſhments ſhe would, and then, that no body had power to undo whatſoever ſhe thus did, to reſcind, or looſe, or abſolve what ſhe ſo bound? In as wide a ſenſe as this, I could produce many places in Greek Authors, particularly a paſſage of Proclus out of Plato in his ſixth Diſcourſe about the Eternity of the world; where to prove the world cannot be diſbinding, the compocompages of the world, and by looſing the deſtroydiſſolution of it: this, I confeſſe, is nothing to our ſenſe of the words, (and as little to that other) and yet very neer as much as the place now cited. Being left to gueſſe what was the occaſion of producing this place to that other purpoſe, I ſhall think it poſſible that it was occaſion'd by this, that in the margent Stephanus hath ſet Scholion, might be taken to be a teſtimony, that binding ſignifies making of lawes, as far as that Scholiaſts authority would reach. For the preſent, I ſhall ſuppoſe that this is it, becauſe I cannot think of any other way to help this medium to inferre the deſired concluſion in any degree, and yet make no queſtion but there was ſome: But then, if that be it, I muſt interpoſe, 1. That that in the margent is not a Scholion, but an emendation, or various lection, as the mark prefixed ſignifies; and then ſeeing 'tis aſſured, that Diod. Sic. or the inſcription it ſelf which he ſets down, had not both theſe readings, it will thence follow, that either it was truly dilemma be accepted.
But having ſaid this, I ſhall ſuperadde ex abundanti my opiviz. that Iſis the Queen of that region, was taught or inſtructed by Mercury in the hidden philoſophy ▪
mention'd by
354. B.
and that no body was able to reveale, or expound her riddles or myſteries. The ground of this my interpretainſcription of Iſis's temple mention'd by Plutarch, imThe temple of Minerva (which they take for Iſis) in Saos had ſuch an inſcription (not literally this, but ſuch an one, or to this purpoſe) I am every thing that hath been, and that is, and that ſhall be, and my vaile (or what I ſhall think fit to conceale) no mortall hath ever been able to diſcover. This ſeems to be a paraphraſe of that other inſcription in Diodorus, and then though the words differ (which the very ſame, but ſuch an one] intimates) yet the ſenſe of the one ſeems to be fully expreſt by the other, & then the conDiodorus, ſignifying no more then to reveale in Plutarch (as to looſe a riddle, a ſeKey of Knowledge in the Scripdeclaring a thing to be lawfull, ſo the contrary forbidding, or declaring a thing to be forbidden
To all this which hath been ſaid the Reader may farther add, that Suidas, Heſychius, and Phavorinus have no other notion of binding in bands, and therefore render it by Heſychius in one place I find theſe words, emendation (as a very great part of that book doth) & may be thus ſet right, A man bound by law, i. e. a priſoner; or bound, i. e. a priſoner of the law; or elſe this ſeems to be the deſigne of them, that the word law, is a band, as indeed every law is a band to all thoſe that are under it: but then you may obſerve, that this is a very diſtant ſenſe of the word from that which was cited from the Talmudiſts, (where the thing bound is ſaid to be forbidden,) for here bound, or commanded, and ſo this (beſide that it gives the Church a power from Chriſt, of commanding and
laws, to which in any probability the power of puniſhing would be conſequent) is little to our preſent diſ
I cannot ſatisfie my ſelf, that I have vindicated my poſition ſufficiently, unleſſe unto the conſideration of the former objections, I add alſo ſome few words in taking notice of what the Socinians have reſolved to this matter; which I ſhall tranVolkelius, de ver. cel. l. 6. c. 4. Where having exbinding and looſing, to be the power, Alios quidem reatu peccatorum quodammodo conſtringendi, alios verò ab illo abſolvendi; of binding ſome in ſome manner under the guilt of ſins, but of abſolving others, he reſolves this to conſiſt in this onely, ut pro authoritate muneris, quod tanquam Chriſti ligatus ſuſtinebat, aliis quidem nempe omnibus in Chriſtum credentibus, atque ex animo ei obtemperantibus, remiſſionem peccatorum, ipſius nomine offerret, aliis verò poenas ſempiternas denunciaret. That by authority of that office which he ſuſtains as an Embaſſador of Chriſt, he ſhould offer in his Name remiſſion of ſins to ſome, to wit, to all that believe in Chriſt, and cordially obey him, but denounce unto others eternall puniſhments. So that in effect the power of binding and looſing ſhould be onely the power of offering remiſſion of ſins to penitents, that is, preaching the Goſpel, and no more.
This magiſterial affirmation having no tender or offer of proof annext to it, will need no long ſtay to conſider it; what ever is in it of poyſon, or danger, will eaſily be diſpell'd by an antidote, which the very ſame ſhop in another box will yield us, and that is another very diſtant interpretation of that power of binding and looſing, c. 15. of that book (how faln from the ſame pen of him that had before ſaid in eo tantum fuiſſe conſtitutam, ut remiſſionem offerret, &c. that it conſiſted onely in the offering of remiſſion, &c. or, by what means reconcilable with that ſenſe, I will not go about to conjecture) where affirming the power of exterminating impious Chriſtians, to be intruſted to the Church, he proves it, 1. from the words of St. Paul about the excommunicating the inceſtuous Corinthian; then from this, that Chriſt ſpeakrefuſing to obey the Church, and thereupon commanding him to be accounted as a heathen, and a publican, in coelo ratum eſſe dicit, quicquid Eccleſia in terris ligat,
aut ſolvit, affirms that to be ratified in heaven, whatſoever it is the Church on earth bindes or looſes, i. e. quoſcunque vel à fidelium commercio ſegregat, vel in eorum numerum reponit, whomſever the Church ſeparates from the commerce of the faithfull, or reſtores to the number of them: where I conceive it apparent, (unleſſe ſome veſophiſme lye hid under plain words) that binding ſignidiſterminating, excommunicating, ſegregating from the commerce of the faithfull, which I willingly embrace, as the conceſſion of that man, and the ſenſe of his fellows, very fit to be confronPaul forbidding Timothy, to lay hands ſuddenly on any man, 1 Tim. 5.22. leſt he partake of other mens ſins, refers to the reception of penitents that had been formerly excommunicate. For ſuch, he truly ſaith, were wont to be received into the Church again by impoſition of hands.
Evidences of that cuſtome he brings from the narrations of
Victor, about the Vandalick perſecution, l. 2. Qui nobis poenitentiae manus collaturi ſunt, & reconciliationis indulgentiam, obſtrictos peccato peccatorum vinculis ſoluturi: Who confer on us the hands of penitence, and favour of reconciliation, looſing from the bands of ſinnes, thoſe which are bound by ſin. Where the poenitentiae manus, the hands of penitence, and looſing from bands of ſin, belong to thoſe which were bound, but now are reconciled: and the like from the 5th
Canon of the Councell of Carthage, diſt. 50. Presbyteris ac Diaconis, ſi quando de gravi aliquâ culpâ convicti à miniſterio remoti fuiſſent manus non imponerentur, ut poenitentibus, vel aliis ex fidelium laicis. That Presbyters and Deacons, when upon conviction of any grievous fault they are removed from the Miniſtry, ſhould not have impoſition of hands, as penitents, &c. and out of Fulgentius, Ep. 1. de conjug. Illâ aegrotâ acceptâ manus impoſitione poenitentiam ſecundum morem, quem habet Chriſtiana religio, peregit; ſhe performed her penance by receiving impoſition of hands according to the manner obſerved in the Chriſtian Religion. To theſe you may add that of Alcimus Ep. 24. Manus impoſitionem adhibete converſo ab haereſi; They that were recover'd from hereſie, were to have impoſition of hands, a ſigne of abſolution. Interdictâ nominis ejus in poſterum, ſi ex corde convertitur, mentione; and his name no longer to be mention'd in the bedrole
of the hereticks.
p. 148.contra Praedeſtin. l. 3. Non auſi ſunt Eccleſiarum Pontifices manum imponere poenitenti, niſi confeſſionem voluntariam oſtendenti. The Biſhops durſt not impoſe hands on the penitent, unleſſe he expreſt a voluntary confeſſion; and many the like. And in the Chron. of Jo. Gerundenſ. ſpeaking of the Arrians Synod of Toledo, congregated by Leovigildus, one of the Canons is, De Romanâ religione ad noſtram Catholicam fidem venientes non debere baptizari, ſed tantummodo per manus impoſitionem & communionis perceptionem ablui. They which came over to them from that which they counted hereſie, ſhould only have impoſition of hands, &c. and not baptiſm anew, and many other paſſages there are of that kind. This is a very probable interpretation, as anCyprian, and may, by the way, farther be atteſted not only by the analogy between abſolution, and healing diſeaſes, of which Impoſition was the ceremony, but alſo by the context it ſelf, where v. 19. is ſet down the proceeding, by way of Cenſure, againſt a Presbyter, and the publike checking of ſinners, v. 20. a charge to do all prejudging, and nothing by favour or inclination; and then imlay hands on no man ſuddenly; Abſolution very properly annext to Cenſures, (and I conceive a caution, that by knowing mens ſinnes, he be not brought to partake with them, but that he keep himſelf unpolluted, in the remainder of that verſe, upparentheſis, that Timothy may drink a little wine for his health, and not incurre that danger of partaking of other mens ſinnes) and then v. 24. a rule of direction for that whole matter, that as ſome mens ſins are conſpicuous before-hand, and ſo bring them per modum meriti praecedentis, by way of precedent merit, to cenſure; and in ſome other men the ſins follow after cenſure alſo, as when there is no reformation upon cenſures, (in which caſe there muſt be no abſolution) ſo in like manner alſo mens good works (in caſe they do reform upon cenſure) are, or muſt be manifeſt before abſolution, (and therefore the antient Canons require the good works or almeſ-deeds in the penitent to prepare for abſolution) and thoſe that are not ſo, (i. e. their not bringing forth ſuch worthy fruits of repentance) cannot be concealed, and ſo by that means Timothy may diſcern who are fit to be abſolved, who not, and ſo all the
Onely having ſo pregnant an opportunity, I ſhall add what I conceive concerning the impoſition of hands, Heb. 6.2. joyned there with the doctrine of Baptiſmes. The Apoſtle there had mention'd the diſcourſe of the beginning of Chriſt, i. e. the firſt things that we read of in the Goſpel; and he refers them, as I conceive, to four heads, 1. Repentance, or change from dead works; 2. Faith on God: Theſe two he calls the Doctrine of Baptiſmes, & of the Impoſition of hands, either by way of Cap. 1. ſec. 10.Doctrine of Baptiſmes will be appropriated to Faith on God, unto which men are baptiz'd, and the doctrine of Impoſition of hands to repentance, which is the preparatory to abſolution; or elſe both of theſe together, Faith and Repentance, muſt be affirmed to be the doctrine both of Baptiſmes in the plural, and of Impoſition of hands too, and that both as it denotes confirmation, Act. 15.41. parallel to Chriſts bleſſing (of thoſe which had been baptized before) with laying his hands on them, and abſolution too, parallel to his laying hands on the ſick, Luke 4. when he healed them, which is called looſing
Luk. 13.16. and all this will be proper: for both the Baptiſme of John, and of Chriſt, required of them that came to it, Repentance and Faith; and Confirmation being but a kind of ſealing, and repetition of the Covenant, and the promiſes made in baptiſme, (without water, onely by laying on of hands) was ſo too; and Abſolution, though it peculiarly required Repentance, yet it included alſo Faith on God, and peculiarly that branch of it, the believing remiſſion of ſins upon repentance. Beſides theſe, there follow two doctrines more, the Reſurrection, and Eternal judgment, which may be alſo reduced to theſe two heads, The Reſurrection to that of Faith in Baptiſme, of which it was a peculiar part, (the trina immerſio, the three dippings, ſo antient in the Church, referring diſtinctly to his riſing the third day, and ſo perhaps the i. e. in S. Chryſoſtomes opinion, bebaptized into the Faith, or belief of that Article, intimated, or briefly expreſt by Everlaſting judgment to that of Repentance from dead works, which if not repented
from, i. e. forſaken, would bring that judgement upon men. But this by the way, and a
I have thus far proceeded in this matter for the removing of prejudices, & vindicating our poſition from two ſorts of obviz. of Eraſtus's ſtructure, and all that he hath ſaid of this matter; but this would require ſo intolerable a length, that if I ſhould apply my ſelf to it, I ſhould both tire the moſt patient Reader, and leave the reſt which I have to ſay on the other points at firſt propoſed, to be overwhelmed or loſt under the ſhade of ſo vaſt a compounding of this buſineſſe, that I may neither too much deſpiſe, nor too largely proſecute this objecter: And the moſt convenient middle betwixt theſe two extremities, I ſuppoſe, will be, 1. To bring you acquainted with the Perſon, 2. To give you an account how he fell out, or on what occaſion his quarrell to Excommunication began. 3. To view the place, and the weapons, at which we are likely to meet, i. e. to follow him ſtate of the queſtion is, wherein the point of the difference between us conſiſts; and then to put off the combat, till the ſpectators are ready to call for it, and ſhall profeſſe themſelves armed with patience to fit it out.
For the firſt of theſe, the view of the perſon, I ſhall ſay no more, then that he was a Dr. of Phyſick in Geneva, who having fallen on an age when novelties were in faſhion, (the Biſhop turn'd out, and a Government brought in, which within few years before was acknowledg'd ſo new, that Calvin was fain to write to the Proteſtants in Helvetia, that they would but ſignifie their approbation of it, and could not obtain that neither, though ſoon after, it undertook to be the only divine Modell in the world ſince Chriſts time) thought it not unreaſonable to ſtep out of his profeſſion, and offer to the world his novelty too; and having in his own profeſſion expreſt in ſome particulars, a zeale, which others of his faculty will affirm to have been withStibium,
crocus metallorum, and the Antinomian receits, he reſalvâ conſcientiâ, with a ſafe Conſcience adminiſter them, which yet every Phyſitian knows now by daiExcommunication (a medicine more out of the proper rode of his ſtudies) and conceived that poyſonous noxious recipe in the Church, (judging, it ſeems, at a firſt view, that they which were moſt wicked needed rather to be invited to the Church, then driven from it) which the experience of all Chriſtian Churches, and the advice of Chriſt himſelfe, as a Phyſitian of Souls, have concluded to be very harmleſſe and medicinal. I ſhall ſay no more of his perſon, but that he doth not ſeem by his book to have conſidered much of Divinity, ſave only of this one head, and in order to that preſent controverſie. And then though I ſhould not make an objection againſt an Author, that his book and he were of divers Profeſſions, and faculties, beDivine by profeſſion, may yet, if he have no calling, have ſpent his whole time on Divinity, and if he have undertaken another profeſſion, may yet neglect that, that he may ſpend his time in this nobler faculty, or may have thoſe excellent abilities, that he may attain to as great an height in two faculties, as others of meaner parts may do in one, yet, if it appear by any ſure Phyſitian which writes in Divinity, hath ſtudied little more Divinity then at that time a few moneths could help him to, and thinks this proviſion ſuffiChurch before him, I may as ſafely commend a Divine, that when he is ſick firſt of a diſeaſe, then, through impatience of his Phyſitian, ſhall by looking over ſome Phyſick-hooks take confidence to control his Phyſitian, and that he may do ſo the more authoritatively, caſt off all the antient Maſters of that faculty before him, or affirm that in them he finds nothing conDoctor makes his complaint of the oppoſition, and contempt,
affronts put upon him by thoſe friends, to whom before the ſetobject to him. And if civilities be apt to be thus miſtaken, the truth is, a little plain dealing were a more friendly office. I ſhall thereScrutamini Scripturas] and [Probate ſpiritualia] [Search the Scriptures] and [Try the things that are ſpiritual] were a ſufficient comminſſion to him for that attempt, eſpecially if 'twere true which he addes, that if he had had a ſtipend to read Divinity, this fact of his would then have nothing in it, in their opinion aliene from his office or duty. Where yet, I ſuppoſe, the office might be diſtinguiſht from the ſtipend; and though the money be not apt to inſpire, as a grace, yet ſure the mun
or calling to the office may go for a Gods bleſſing, more then to the meddling in faculties, or ſtudies that belong not to us,) we have any promiſe to authorize us to expect.
2. For the occaſion of his quarrel againſt Excommunication, I ſhall give you no other account, then what from himſelf I have received (who, I ſuppoſe, was able to ſpeak the bottom of the truth, and nothing elſe) and while I do ſo, ſhall deſire the Reafabrick of the Church of England, I mean the antient ſtructure, as it ſtands by Law, and the doctrines thereof, would never have provoked him to this enmity, if he had lived here under the beſt, or perhaps worſt daies of our Epiſcopacy; and then as his Hippocrates in his excelplace, the air, or ſome ſuch accidentall circumbodies firſt, and through them, the minds of men, ſo will the Readchang'd
air, had been excellent effectuall Phyſick for him, and in all probability, might have made a ſhift to have changed his opi
The firſt thing, which, ſaith he, caſt him on thoſe conſideraExcommunication, was the unſeaſonableneſſe of the time for the adminiſtring of ſuch purging Phyſick. There was then ſaith he, a great paucity of Proteſtant Profeſſors, and the number of Papiſts extremely overtopt them in thoſe parts; and of the Proteſtants ſcarce the thirtieth part underſtood, and approved the doctrine; and therefore it muſt be, in his opinion, a ſtrange improper ſeaſon for the ſetting up this courſe of ſevere ruggid diſcipline, which would exclude from the Sacrament ſo many of the few Proteſtants, that it would both unpeople their aſſemblies, and neceſſarily cauſe a dangerous ſciſſure in the multitude.
The ſecond thing was his having obſerv'd the unfitneſſe of the perſons, that were imploy'd and preſided in this matter (their Minifit, ſaith he, neither for age, nor experience, nor wit, nor judgement, nor manners, nor authority, to be eſteem'd able to ſuſtain ſo great an office with dignity.
The third thing (and that which advanced him in his conceit that he had faln upon the right ſenſe of the Scriptures produſtate of the Commonwealth and Church among the Jews, God having ſaid, Deut. 4. that that people had Laws and Statutes ſo juſt and wiſe, that the inſtitutions of no Nations, the ſanctions of no Commonwealth, no Ordinances, though never ſo wiſely thought on, could compare with them, and therefore that that Church muſt needs be beſt, and moſt wiſely diſpoſed, which came neareſt to the Jewiſh form. A conDeut. was made onJewiſh, and other heathen nations of the world at that time, and only in relation to their preſent ſtate, and not to the prejudice of Chriſts inſtitutions after, when that nation and religion was deſtroyed; and that if that argument were of weight, (beſides that he muſt be bound to prove his Modell out of the Moſaicall Law) he muſt be obliged alſo to bring back all the Sacrifices, Paſſeover, Circumciſion, Ceremonies of the Jews into the Chriſtian Church, and turn both the Lords Day, the Sacraments,
Religion of Chriſt the Law of Faith, out of it.
The fourth thing, ſaith he, and that which ſet him on wriAn Engliſh man which at that time had quitted this Kingdome on the diſlike of Ceremonies, and came to Geneva, and propoſed his Theſis there de adiaphoris & veſtibus, of things indifferent, and of veſtments; particularly, the Surplice, &c. he was, ſaith he, not permitted to maintain them publickly, ne Anglos offenderent, that they might not offend the Engliſh; This man therefore changing his purpoſe, choſe a new Theſis, In quavis rectè inſtitutâ Eccleſiâ hanc ſervari procurationem, in quâ miniſtri c
and this Theſis, ſaith he, he was permitted to maintain. I hope, he did not beleeve, that the Engliſh would be better pleaſed, or leſſe offended with it, then with that other about Surplices, but only that 'twat a doctrine, wherein that Common-wealth of Geneva was more concern'd, and ſo did not ſo much conſider how the Engliſh might take it from them, as in the other, where they were leſſe intereſſed, they had leaſure to do. That the doctrine of the Anglican Church, and conſtant practiſe of it, is utterly abhorrent from this danſacrilegious exceſſe, I ſhall not be ſo wary or humble, as to think it neceſſary to demonſtrate, but confeſſe that he which ſaw that doctrine ſo confidently, and ſo early avow'd by the Diſciplinarians, had a great temptation to write againſt their Excommunication, though no ground of aſſurance, that all which he ſhould ſay againſt that ſubject, would therefore prove true, ber
Hooker hath given a very good judgement of his enterpriſe; that Beza and he divided the truth betwixt them, neither of them ſaying all truth, nor all falſhood, each of them Eraſtus hath more to impute to Beza's and the Genevan's errors, and innovations, and exceſſes and extravagances (which upon inquiry into the antient Church records, he truly ſaith, he could not find avowed, or authorized) then to his own grounds, or arguments againſt Excommunication.
The laſt motive, which, he confeſſes, perfected the work, and put him upon the Preſſe, was the contempts and affronts of his friends, i. e. in effect, the opinions and good adviſes of all men that ſaw his Theſes, and could by no means like them: but this hath been occaſionally mentioned already, and only gives the Reader occaſion to admire, and bewail the infelicity of paſſionate men, who cannot receive any benefit by their friends, are in the unluckieſt condition of all men living, (beyond which no enemy can wiſh them a greater curſe) ſure to be the worſe for that, which God meant us for the moſt ineſtimable bleſſing, I mean thtelling us truth, and (out of deſire of doing us good) admoniſhing us of our miſcarriages; which he that cannot make any other uſe of, then to interpret thoſe hugeſt obligations for affronts, thoſe friendſhips for rudeneſſes, and therefore reſolves to publiſh his conceits, becauſe all his friends to whom he communicates them, adviſe him by all means to ſuppreſſe them, may well be allowed to write a voExcommunication, being already, it apPhyſick, that the moſt private prudent, firſt, or ſecond admonition of ſingle perſons, or College of friends and Phyſitians do but make him more incurable.
I come now to my third undertaking, i. e. to view his Theſes of Excommunication, and follow him ſtep by ſtep, till we have ſprang the point of the difficulty between us; and, I think, that part of the progreſſe will ſufficiently diſcover the weakneſſe of his fabrick; at leaſt how little appearance of advantage he hath againſt us, that are not for the Geneva-Presbytery, how well ſoever ad homines he may be thought to have diſputed.
His Th. 1. Excom1 Cor. 10. deſumptum eſſe, atque amotionem ſignificare à communione illâ, quae ibidem corpus Chriſti nominatur.firſt Theſis layes the ground of his diſcourſe, and of his miſtake. The word [Excommunication] he will have taken from
Cor. 10. which is falſe, and not endeavored to be proved, and upon the back of that errour, another falſity, viz. that Communion is there call'd Corpus Chriſti, The body of Chriſt; all that is there ſaid toward that matter, is, that the wine is The Communication (not Communion) of the bloud of Chriſt, the beſtowing his bloud upon us, a means or a pledge of making us partakers of that rich mercy, that bloud that was ſhed for us. That that is the right rendring of Sacrament, and needs no further to be repeated here, the notion of the word Excommunication being moſt clear and uncontroverſequeſtring of an offender from the Communion, i. e. the viſible Society of Chriſtians, without ever thinkinviſible, and then alſo again into the Church, the viſible (but myſtical) body of Chriſt. And therefore,
For the diſtinction of that Communion in the Th. 2. Est auTheſis, into internall and externall, viſible and inviſible, we ſay that one onely member of the diſtinction belongs to the point in hand according to our ſtating of it. (And if the adverſary of Geneva did preſſe the other, we do not defend him in it) viz. the exterSociety of Beleevers or Chriſtian Profeſſors, from which onely we affirm any man to be cut off by the act of Excommunication; and if he that is ſo cut off from that, be alſo finally cut off from the other, this is but accidentall, and very extrinſecall to that act, and diſtant from the deſign and end of it, being the effect onely of his ſin, which, before he was excommunicated for it, is ſuppoſed to have concluded him under the wrath of God and of his Contumacy, which will not permit this moſt fatherly puniſhment of the Church to work any good upon him; to which though it be conſequent indeed, that this cenſure obtaining not the deſired effect, ſhall tend to his greater condemnation, yet will this conſequent no more be chargeable on that cenſure, then on any other the methods of mercy or chaſtiſement, by God uſed on purpoſe for his Reformation.
Th. 3. Tantum verò inter utramTheſis it is by us acknowledged true, that internall and externall ſociety go not alwayes together; and the conſequents which Eraſtus builds on that, are true, and acknowin an unjuſt Excommunication, but theſe belong nothing at all to a juſt, nor conſequently infer any thing againſt the inſtitution, which giving rules that it may, and commands that it ſhould be alwaies exerciſed juſtly, may be permitexclude him from that inward Communion, that was not before excluded, (ſuppoſing that he behave himſelf meekly and Chriſtianly under that unjuſt cenexcommunicated, be firſt excluded from the inward communion or no, yet will not this conclude the cenſures unlawfull, becauſe if he be not quite out before, this puts him not out (nor is occaſion of doing ſo, any more then chaſtiſement from God, which may poſſibly work impatience and blaſphemy in the perſon, but is not of neceſſity, or in any propriety of cauſation to do ſo) but rather is a means of keeping him in, of ſetting him upon his guard, of awaking or reſcuing him from the danger of falling out of it, (and then abundans cautela non nocet, he that is awake already will be never the worſe for calling) and withall of exerciſing ſome Chriſtian virtues in him, which might poſſibly lye uſe
To the Th. 4. Memi. e. interTheſis we ſay, that No man thinks, or accorinternal Communion of Chriſt and the faithful, i. e. beget faith in any (nor conſequently cut off any from it) unleſſe miniſterially, as workers under, and with Chriſt, and ſo only by power dcenſures is done toward it.
Th. 5. ExterTheſis, we anſwer that there is a miſtake, for we are made conſortes externae & viſibilis Eccleſiae, Partakers of the external and viſible Church, not onely by thoſe three as they are the acts of the man who is ſo partaker, but to thoſe three muſt be added a ſecond notion of the third of theſe, which ſeems not here to be taken notice of, (though alſo the words are ſo ſet, that 'tis not excluded) and that is the act of the Church, firſt according to Chriſt's commiſſion to the Apoſtles, in receiving them into the Church by Baptiſme, and when for lapſes and reabſolution, and at all fit times allowing them the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, in charity ſuppoſing them (as long as they are in the Church) ſuch members as ought not to be denied that priviledge, and if they be not unworthy, effectually ſealing to them the benefits of Chriſtianity. From whence 'tis clear that ſuch the uſurpatio Sacramentorum may be, (viz. if he receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper that is Sacramentorum uſurpatio, in proper ſpeaking, ſuppoſe Baptiſme, which is one of thoſe Sacraments; yet Sacramentorum participatio, Theſ. 6. ſignifying only receiving the Lords Supbaptized, or that is juſtly excommunicate) that 'twill be perfectly an uſurpation, and not ſufficient to give him right to be reckon'd inter membra externi fidelium coetus, among the members of a viſible Church.
Th. 6. Th. 6. Ergo qui ex Eccleſiae communione externi. e. qui excommuniConfeſſion of Faith, and approbation of Chriſtian Doctrine may be 1. Either Cordial, or Hypocritical. 2. Either Private or Publike. If it be Cordial, then 1. it makes me partaker of the inward Communion with Chriſt and his members, and ſuppoſes a man to be in that ſtate, in which he that is, ought not to be Excommunicate, and ſo 'tis not belongs not to this matter. If it be Hypocritimouth, denies it with his actions) then is it fit to bring the cenſure upon him, which he moſt hates and fears, to caſt him out of
Church, which is onely his diſguiſe and vizard, or turn him out of that hypocriticall confeſſion of Chriſt, to diſplay and lay open his hypocriſie, that he may be aſham'd, and think good to reform, and to that end, to deny him the publick hearing of the Word, which it ſeems hath wrought ſo little good upon him, and to aſſure him that he ſhall not be accounted a Chriconfeſſion and approbation, (which belongs more to the internall communion again, then to the externall) we drive no man from that by Excommunicatio
the publick hearing of the Word read or preach'd is contained.) And by ſo doing we ſeparate him from that viſible Church on that charitable one purpoſe, that he may ſee how he hath abuſed that benefit, and timely learn to make betapprobation, which his hands, i. e. his actions confute, or that unprofitable hearing, which will onely heap judgement on him; yet on the other ſide are fconfeſſion, &c. but by thus dealing with him we ſhew him the neceſſity of it, and ſo by beating him out of his falſe holds, which will do him no good, drive (which is more then inviting) him to the true refuge or Sanctuary, the reall confeſſion, the effectuall approbation, & profitable hearing. To which head I muſt add, that I much wonder why all this while in the number of the conſtitutives of external communion, publick prayer is not menhearing of the Word is:) This ought to have been added, and then I ſhall add of it, that though that be a duty that men would be invited to, as vehemently as to any, yet 'tis lawfull to exclude any from this benefit in publick, when that excluſion may be a means moſt probable to awake a lethargick ſinner.
By this it appears how groundleſſe the laſt part of the ſixt
Th. is, That excommunication is only excluding from the Sacrament; for 'tis alſo from prayer, and hearing, (viz. in publike) as well as
Sacrament: when that is thought expedient to reform any. Thus Tertul. mentions excluſion à communicatione orationis, & conventus, & omnis ſancti commercii, Apol. c. 39. from partaking of Prayer and all ſacred commerce: and generally the penitents being firſt by admitting them to hearing, and then to parprayers, which were before thoſe that are joyn'd with the communion; and after, to thoſe prayers alſo, and in time to the Communion it ſelf) it was after thought fit that ſome of the cenſures ſhould not be totall to the excluding from all, but only ſetting them inter audientes, or Catechumenos, which were not yet admitted to the Sacrament, of which only the practiſe which he ſets himſelf againſt ſeems to be an imitation. What follows therefore in the concluſion of that Theſis, that, [quod aliae poenae non pertinent ad ſubſtantiam excommunicationis certum eſt. 'Tis certain that other penalties belong not to the ſubſtance of excommunication] is very falſe, and proceeds from an ignorance, or willingneſſe to deceive, as if the word Excommunication denoted only the keeping from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper (to which end, it now ſeems, it was, that the firſt Theſis was deexciſion from all, or any deCommunion in ſacris, and is a generical word, of which there be different ſpecies according to the ſeveral kinds of holy things (the Word, the Prayers, the Sacraments) from which one may be excommunicate; And that of excluſion from the Sacrament is one degree of excluſion, and the excluſion from either or both of the other alſo is an addition to that, never inflicted upon any but thoſe to whom the Sacrament was denied. So far from truth is that which is added, that thoſe other puniſhpoſſunt non excommunicatis infligi, may be inflicted upon thoſe that are not excommunicate in his ſenſe of excommunicatus, for one excluded from the Sacrament: for no man was denyed prayers and hearing, that was admitted to the Sacrament, (nor is it rationall that one ſhould, for ſure he that is thought worChurch, muſt be wronprayers & hearing, may ſometimes excommunicatis non infligi, be not inflicted upon them that are excommunicate; as he that is thought unworthy the Prieſts ofNethinim or door-keepChurch, he that was ſuſpended from the ſacerdotal function was yet ſuffer'd to communicate, ut Laicus, as a Laick.
By which the anſwer is clear to the Th. 7. Malè Pontificii propter hanc ex1 Cor. 14. palàm oſtendit neTheſis as far as concerns the interdictio templorum, excluſion out of the Church (and for the other two, that of the private commerce, & actus cujuſvis liciti, of doing any lawful act, we interpoſe not) i. e. from all the parts of the publick ſervice, which that it was brought into the Church by the Pontificians, or that it is contra apertam Scripturam, againſt manifeſt Scripture, is certainly ſo very far from truth, that no man that hath read any part of antiquity, can doubt of this practiſe and uſage, before the tyranny of Popery is affirm'd by any to have come into the world; and for the ſecond, what that aperta Scriptura is, I ſhall not divine, but reſolve that if it be that which is named in the end of the Theſis, 1 Cor. 14. there is nothing at all concverſe that ſeems to be referred to (for we are left to divine) is v. 23. or 24. where the ſpeaking in the Church, praying or prophecying, &c. in an unknown tongue, is by St
Paul proedification, becauſe propheſying, i. e. explaining of Scripture, praying, ſinging of Pſalmes, &c. being deſigned for the uſe of the beleevers, and no others, are in any reaſon to be in a known tongue, that they may underſtand. and joyn in them, v. 16. the unknown tongues being deſigned, either only as a ſign, v. 22. i. e. a miracle to convert unbeleevers to the faith, when they ſJews ſpeak all kinds of languages, or as a means of preaching to men of every country in their own language, from whence, ſaith the Apoſtle, 'tis conſequent that if unknown tongues were uſed in a congregaunlearned men that underſtand not thoſe tongues, or unbelievers that have no reverence to the Congregamiracle in their ſpeaking with
tongues, but look only upon the ridiculouſneſſe of the action, as of a gabbling of that which no man underſtands, wil reſolve that this is a direct madneſſe thus to do. Whereas on the other ſide that of Propheſying, interpreting of the doctrine of Chriſt intelligibly, and the other parts of the Church-Service in a known language, will be apt to convince, or inſtruct thoſe unbeleevers or ignorants; This, and no more but this, is the direct rationall importance of thoſe verſes; wherein though there be mention of unbeleevers coming in, yet that being only by way of ſuppoſition [if they come in, &c.] I might juſtly ſay, that that is no plain affirmation of Scripture, that heathens, & alii quilibet, any others that will, are not prohibited the hearing of Gods word, &c. For, 1. 'tis an old rule, that ſuppoſitio non ponit, the ſuppoſing (if they do) doth not ſuppoſe they do, much leſſe that lawfully they may: and 2. that text names only ethnicks and ignorants, and belongs not at all to the alii quivis, any other that will, as that contains the impenitent Chriſtians, which are the only perſons, to which our Excommunication belongs; and of them the Apoſtle is far from affirming or ſuppoſing, that they might not be ſo excluded, and if they ſhould by way of reduction be forced into that verſe, the Apoſtles reaſons would be ſpoiled, for they being ſuppoſeable to underſtand that unknown tongue (as they may do for all their impenitence) at leaſt to know what belongs to the gift of tongues, and to what uſe they were deſigned, would not think them mad preſently that uſed it; which being ſaid, I may further add, that thoſe heathens coming into the Church, or the not prohibiting them to enter, is a very diſtinct thing from the admiſſion of the impenitent Chriſtians, when they are by Church cenſures prohibited, becauſe the Apoſtle himſelf which prohibits Communion with the brother (that is, the Chriſtian) which is a fornicator, doth yet not prohibit it with an heathen or fornicator of this world; and the end of Excommunication being only on deſign of charity, to make the Chriſtian offender by that means aſhamed, and reformable, would be utterly caſt away upon an heathen, who would rather be made obdurate by that means; and indeed 'twere ridiculous to turn out them who are not ſo forward to come in, and are not by St
Paul here ſuppoſed ſo, unleſſe tanquam exploratores, to ſee how Chriſtians behave
madneſſe at
Auſtin was by St
Ambroſes Sermon, though he came thither on a quite dApoſtolicall practiſe to be contrary to the excluà Verbi Divini auditione, &c. from prayer, or from hearing the Word in publick, the place being quite extrinſecal to this matter, and ſaying nothing at all to it.
That which hath been ſaid, ſufficiently arms us againſt the concludency of that which Th. 8. Ex dictis liquet excommuniTh. 8. is inferr'd from the premiſes, and therefore there is no need of ſaying more to it; ſave onely this, that in this Theſis there are ſome little mimentioned and is by us anſwered beTh.) that (Cor. 10. ſignifies Communion, whereas, I ſay, it ſignifies indeed (from communico) communicatio, and ſo belongs there (quite to another matter then that, to which it is here applyed) only to the affirming the wine, &c. in the Sacrament to be the communication, or the making us partakers of the bloud of Chriſt, not to our Communion one with another in ſacris, which is the thing from which excommunication cuts us off, as is noted by that deTheſ. 1. is by the author produced, that 'tis excluſio à ſocietate & communione fidelium, an excluſion from the ſociety of beleevers. A ſecond miſtake (beſides that which is conSacramentorum interdictio, Interdiction of, or excluſion from the Sacraments, which ſhould more unlimitedly have been Sacrorum, from holy things) that Sacramentorum is put in the plurall number, which muſt needs be either not like a Divine, or not like a Proteſtant; for if it note Baptiſme as well as the Lords Supper, then
Divine, for no Divine would ſay that Excommunication is an Interdiction of Baptiſme; for till they are once baptiChurch, are not capable of Excommunication; and when they are once baptized, though they were not excommunicate, they ſhould be baptized no more. But if by that plurall, he mean any other Sacraments beſides theſe two, that is not like a Proteſtant, for ſuch acknowledge no more. Having mention'd theſe two miſtakes, I ſhall not add a third, that in this interdiction, the perſons to whom this cognizance beEpiſcopall audience, that ſhould have had this cognizance, he had never written this book, nor been put upon thoſe arts to evaChurch-cenſures. One thing only I may have leaſure to commend in that Theſis, that he defines Excommunication by publica & ſolennis interdictio, a publick ſolemne Interdiction, & praeeunte cognitione (I ſuppoſe he means legitimâ) with a legall cognizance preceding it, and ſhall add, that they quite deform the Primitive Inſtitution, who deny the Sacrament to whole ConCongregation, wherein there are ſome evil men, which yet is not legally proved neicognizance of their crime, or proceſſe of admonition firſt, and ſecond, or that deſign that excluſion to any other end, then ut peccantes reſipiſcant, the reducing ſinners to repentance: and therefore no ſmall petty trifle is a ſufficient matter for this, but contumacious continuing in ſome ſcanda
Th. 9. Hìcjam o5. poſuimus) ſed in ſolâ Th. 9. is the propoſing of the queſtion in the termes, wherein it is to be handled, wherein I ſhal only interpoſe for perſpicuian removendus ſit?] may have a little ambiguity in it, for perhaps it may (though leſſe properly) be ſet to ſignifie this, Whether it be lawfull to remove ſuch an one? (for if it be but ſo, then he that pretends to write againſt excommunication, and to pretend it unlawfull, will be ſufficiently concluGovernor of the Church, to whom the cognizance of his ill life belongs, and who hath had a legal cognizance of it, and proceeded legally by the ſeverall degrees of Eccleſiaſtical proceſſe againſt him, it is not lawfull: but for the Biſhop, or Praefect, or lawfull Governour ſucChriſt gave his Apoſtles with the Keyes of the Kingdome of heaven, it is lawfull, and by the commiſEgo dabo] and afterwards [ego mitto] they are ſufficientAn ſit removendus) may perhaps (and to that the words more incline) demuſt be removed? To which I then anſwer, that there lies not any ſuch neceſſity on this, as ariſes from any pollution that will accrue to others that communicate with him, if he be not prohibited, any further then the example of his ſin, and the imNova
Nor thirdly, any neceſſity lying on the Miniſter that adminiſters, for he having admoniſhed (according to our Church Orders in our Liturgy) every ſuch ſinner to go home, and repent, and not to approach to that table, is in charity to believe (being not able to ſearch the heart) that he, that after that ſo comes, is a true penitent. Only if in prudence he think it unlikely, and therefore out of care to a poor mans ſoul, and for the preventing of the ſin of unworthy receiving, he think fit to admoniſh him more privately, or particularly to that end, or to do any thing elſe, which in prudence may contribute to it, this is but his duty to an erring brother, and when that is done, any farther emergent guilt lies upon the receiver, and he is not (in caſe of the mans unworthy receiving) partaker of that ſin.
All the neceſſity then that is in this matter, lies firſt upon the receiver himſelf, that he be wary, that he come not till he be prepared (and that belongs not to our preſent conſideraton)
Biſhops, or Governours of the Church, that when charity to ſouls requires it of them, they fail not thus to proceed, that when mercy and friendly admonitions prevail not, they then take in ſeverity, the Apoſtles rod in the ſeaſon for a rod, in ſtead of his Spirit of mercy, and meekneſſe, and to that end be watchfull over the flock, that they fall not into ſuch dangers, and infections, by their neglect or mercifulneſſe.
As for the qualifying of the perſons, of whom this queſtion is ask'd, I ſhall not differ with the Propoſer, but reſolve, as anon we ſhall ſhew, that he that is thus, may (and ought in the ſenſe that I mention) be thus dealt with, and we ſhall joyn iſſue with him for the precept and examples of Scripture com
And having now, as I conceive, ſo eaſie a task before me, and ſuch an army of ſeconds on my ſide (the conſent and practiſe of the whole Chriſtian world for 1500 years) againſt one ſingle combetant, walking in a melancholy poſture by himſelf (till after ſo many years, the concurrence of ſome accidentall conceived conveniences have at laſt helpt him to ſome company) And him again not very much uſed to the weapon (I mean Divinity) which he hath undertaken to truſt to, and beſide having an advantage againſt him, which he did not foreſee, we of this Church being not the men againſt whom his reaſons were fraBeza and his Presbyterians being utterly uncon
It will be a more moderate excurſion, and more reconcilep. 369.Gentleman, who though he ſtrive not to take Excommunication out of the Church
Baptiſme, but moreover acknowledges alſo,p. 363.Paſtors as well as to the then preſent Apoſtles; yet having firſt reſolved,p. 357.Eccleſia & civitas Chriſtianorum are all one, he then concludes that the cognizance, and judgment of any fault, whether it be ſuch or no,p. 367.Church in that notion of his, i. e. to the City or Commoncivil Magiſtrate, or, as he ſaith, judicem ſummum, the ſupreme judge;) and that the power of binding and looſing (as that alſo of baptizing, which ſaith he,p. 369.Paſtor, then that he eject thoſe out of the Church, whom the Church in his notion hath condemned; and receive into it, whom the Church judges worthy of abſolution. I ſhall not labour to multiply differences, but at this time make my exceptions onely to one part of this Scheme, viz. that the Church in his notion, i. e. the judex ſummus, the civil Magiſtrate, hath the power of judging who are to be excommunicated, who abſolved. The proofs that I can collect from him of that aſſertion, are only two; Firſt, that Mat. 18. Chriſt bids,p. 367.the treſpaſſer hear not the two or three, (i. e. ſaith he, either deny the fact, or confeſſing it deny it to be a treſpaſſe) then dic Eccleſiae, that it ſhould be told the Church; [Quare autem Eccleſiae, niſi ut ipſa judicet an peccatum ſit, necne? Why ſhould the Church be told it, but that that may judge whether that be a ſin or no?] and if he obeyed not, then let him be to thee a Publican, &c. Non dicit, Dic Apoſtolis, It is not, ſaith he, Tell the Apoſtles, to note that the ſentence or judgement, whether it be a ſinne or no, belongs not to them, but to the Church; and conſethat this power was no more, then to bind thoſe whom the Church had before judged impenitent.p. 368.t
Paul, who asks the Corinthians [Do you not judge them that are within?] yet himſelf pronounces the fornicator excommunicate. To the former of theſe, I ſhall anſwer only this one thing, that there are other reaſons very prompt, & pertinent, why the matter ſhould be told the Church, though the Church be taken in a notion wherein it is not ſuppoſed to judge of it: as either, 1. the [denſare inculcationibus] in Tertullians phraſe, the fortifying the former ſucceſsleſſe reprehenſions with this addition of authority from the number, that as the two or three might be more likely to work upon the offender, then
the many, or the Church in the looſeſt notion of it, for any aſſembly or meeting of many Chriſtians together, (ſuppoſing that it do not ſignifie the Governors of the Church, as the Antients yet ſay it doth, and is far more probable, and aſſerted on ſtronger grounds, then that it ſhould ſignifie the Civitas or ſummus judex) might probably be more effectuall; or 2. The [pudefacere coram multis] formerly cited out of the Rabbins, the making the offenaſhamed when his fact is thus publiſht, and to do that is by us acknowledged the end of the admonitions, and cenſures; or 3. If there be need, the uſing the multitude as a cloud of witneſſes to convince him of the fact, or ſinfulneſſe of it, which the text refers to before, (that in the mouth of two or three witneſſes every word may be eſtabliſhed) and in all reaſon may be a commodious ſenſe here alſo, this third being but the aſcending to an higher, and more probable convincing courſe, when the former had miſcarried. Either of theſe three, much more altogether, will be a ſufficient ground of Telling it to the Church, and ſo from thence there is no neceſſity to conclude that the judgement is the act of the Church, or Civil Magiſtrate in that place. And indeed it will be hard to ſuppoſe that poſſible at that time, when 'tis clear the Civil Magiſtrate was not Chriſtian, and therefore unfit not only for the title of the Church, but much more to be appealed to as the judge by Chriſtians, who, 'tis certain, are bound by Chriſt to uſe all other means poſſible (and telling it to the Church in our notion is one of thoſe poſſibles) to get ſatisfaction for treſpaſſes, before they proceed to any heathen tribunal, to implead their fellow-Chriſtian there. Nor will it, I conceive, be reaſonable to reply, that Chriſts ſpeech belongs to aftertimes, when the Magiſtrate ſhould be Chriſtian; For then, 1. he muſt acknowledge that till then, it was to be in the Church in our notion, and conEccleſiaſtical Governors were the Judge at that time, and then by his own doctrine (that data eſt poteſtas ligandi,
p. 363.futuris paſtoribus eodem modo quo praeſentibus Apoſtolis) it will ſtill belong to the Eccleſiaſtical Superior. And 2. though it may very juſtly be extended to that future ſtate, (as what was ſaid to the Apoſtles was not perſonal, but belonged to their ſucceſſors alſo) yet there will be no probable argument that
Apoſtles then preſent ſhould be themſelves excluded. For, beSucceſſors, not to the Apoſtles, as a Propheſie onEvangelical inſtating on theſe to whom he ſpake. This I ſuppoſe a ſufficient anſwer to this proof, withviz. that the Church ſignifies the Summus judex, which yet is as far from being forantient Church have uniChriſt did not take upon him to be a Judge, or introduce any change in civil Government, as it is by us acknowbinding, &c. which is but a ſpiritual, not civil puniſhment, only a denying them that, which Chriſt brought into the world, and gave thoſe Meſſengers of his the ſole power of diſpoſing it, and indow'd them with power from on high, particularly for the exerciſe of it. As for the ſecond argument, 'tis certainly a miſtake, if it be thought to conclude that the Apoſtle did but pronounce the judgement of the Church in that matter of the inceſtuous, or that the judgement of the civil ſtate was preparative to his. For ſure the Apoſtle had, (before the uſing of thoſe words of [Do not you judge them that are within?
Chapt.) paſt his ſentence definiinceſtuous in the beginning of it, ver. 3. For I have already (not ego autem, but as abſent in body, but preſent in ſpirit, judg'd him that hath thus done this thing
I ſay, and what is the ſentence? Why, In the Name of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, you and my ſpirit being met together (the Apoſtle and his Presbytery, or he in the face of the Church) with the power of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, to deliver ſuch an one to Satan, &c. And this at a time when 'tis clear, the Church had not paſs'd ſentence on him, for v. 2. They were puft up, as he complains, and through an opinion of their own deeper wiſdome (a leaven, v. 6. i. e. a doctrine either of the heathen philoſophers, or of the Gnoſticks among them) took it for
indifferent thing, and did not mourn for him that had done it, The ceremony uſed by the Church, when any was to be excommourning, in complaining to the Apoſtle, and prayer to Chriſt, that this cenſure might paſſe on ſuch an one, but that they did not do it, nay, it ſeems proceeded not ſo far as to fraternal correption which was infallibly their duty toward him. As for the words cited, [Nonne vos judicatis?] they come in no another incidenChriſtian and heathen fornicators; the Apoſtle reſtraining his preſcription of not converfornicators, v. 9. to the Chriſtian fornicator, whom, ſaith he being within the Church, 'tis reaſonable to conclude within the Churches cenſures,
not you emphatically or in oppoſition to the Apoſtle, but you
Chriſtians, who uſe not to judge any but Chriſtians, all other being left to Gods judgement, the Church having nothing to do with them. It is clear enough, that the context looketh wholly that wChurch judgeth, Chriſtian not heathens; and the Church in the notion only wherein 'tis oppoſed to God, not in which 'tis oppoſed to St
Paul, but in which in any reaſon it includes the Apoſtle or Governor of it; For ſure he may judge them that are within the Church, (for ſo he doth, v. 3. and no part of the context of that Ch. ſeems to ſay any thing to the contrary) though them that are without he cannot; which is the only thing the Apoſtle had in hand to ſay at that time.
Having briefly anſwered the reaſons, I ſhall by way of comControverſie with this Gentleman, moſt willingly acknowledge, that ſomewhat the Church in his notion, or more clearly the ſupreme Magiſtrate, being ſuppoſed Chriſtian, may have to do in this buſineſſe of Cenſures, praecedaneous to the judgement of the Apoſtle, or before the Paſtor or Eccleſiaſtical Governor proceed to them, As 1. in the chooſing or nominating him to that office; 2. In the ſetting of rules, or laws by which he ought to proceed in hearing or judging: No queſtion, this may and in Chriſtian Common-wealths very reaſonably ought to
Civil Magiſtrate; and truly this diſcouſe doth not pretend to, or deſire any unlimited, or arbitrary power in the Biſhop, but only that, the rules being prudently ſet by thoſe to whom the power of making laws belongs in every Common-wealth, he ſhould have the cognizance in ſuch cauſes, as reguſentence on the offenderturn'd out of Chriſtian ſociety, or received into it again: (which, beſide that this is, and hath alwayes been taken for an inſtitution of Chriſts, which 'tis reaſonable we ſhould obey, and not diſpute, is alſo in it ſelf ſimply conſidered, far from any degree of unreaſonable, no man in ordinary reaſon being more fit to judge who is fit to enjoy the privileges of the Church, who likely to be reformed by being deprived of them, then he that hath ſtudied that great skill of winning ſouls, and is intruſted by Chriſt with the charge of them.) Again 3. it will be granted that the Church in the ordinary notion, as it ſignifies the whole diffuſive Chriſtian Society in any place, may ſo far be intereſſed in this matter, as that theſe only ſhall be liable to theſe Cenſures, who have offended others by their notorious ſins, and are by the Proxyes, as it were of thoſe others, I mean, by their choſen officers, or by the publick fame, the voyce again and interpreter of their ſenſe, delated, or complain'd of to the Governours of the Church, as thoſe that have wrong'd the Church, and defamed that Chriſtian Profeſſion, to which they had given up their names; and this is a kind of judging (in large or looſe ſpeaking, as to be infamous offenders ſignifies to be conceiv'd and judg'd ſuch by the community among whom they live, for otherwiſe they are not infamous) but yet in ſtrict propriety, is only a preparative to the ſentence of the Judge, and an accuſing or impleading rather, and is not, I ſuppoſe, the thing for which this Author doth pretend, or if it were, would not to us be matter of contention with him.
The truth is, the power of binding, &c. which we contend for, as the office more then privilege of Biſhops, (in the careful excharitably to the good of the ſouls intruſted to them) is another manner of thing, then what this Gentleman ſeems to have conceived it (both here, and eſpe
Ʋnuſquiſque ſi mentis compos ſit obediat in omnibus ſimpliciter ei,
p. 407.cujus arbitrio credit ſe ſalvandum aut damnandum eſſe.) God knows they pretend to no ſuch arbitrium in the ſaving or damning of any man; It is only an engine of Chriſts invention to make a battery and an impreſſion on the obdurate ſinner to win him to himſelf to bleſſe, not to triumph over him, (which very thing he hath in one place excellently expreſt, 407.
The end of this diſcipline, ſaith he, is by depriving men for a time of the favour and ſpiritual privileges of the Church, to humble them to ſalvation,) much leſſe to invade any part of civil JudicaKeyes in his Church. And therefore, when in an Annotation affixt to his laſt Edition he was pleaſed to extend his obſervation of the 101.
Doctrines that might diſturb Government, not only to that power which many attribute to the Pope of Rome in other mens dominions, and to the liberty uſurpt by the ciunder pretence of Religion, but alſo to that which alicubi extra Eccleſiam Romanam Epiſcopi in civitate ſuâ ſibi poſtulant, I muſt hope that it was a miſtake, or which I rather think (being perſwaded of the uprightneſs of his affections to our eſtabliſht Government) that his [alicubi] did not in any wiſe refer (as I was apt to fear it did) to the conſtitution of Epiſcopacy in this native Kingdome of his and mine. For that this, ſince it deparRoman Church, hath been perfectly free from any degree of that guilt, is that of which we are ſo far perſwaded, that we neither fear, nor deprecate any Hiſtorians inſtance, nor can imagine what one particle of the doctrine, or conſtitution of our Church there is, on which a rational man can by any con102.
charge; Of which nothing can make
Ʋs capable, but leaving the [non] out of it; and that makes me a little confident, that either [Epiſcopi] in that place ſignifies not in the known vulgar Chriſtian ſenſe, or that the [alicubi] lookt not on this Kingdome or Church of ours (as it hath long ſtood eſtabliſht by Law) which moſt cheerfully acknowledges the truth of his many other obſervations, (particularly that of Obedience due to the Moſes's,p. 190.not Aarons chair, of Abi
p. 192. p. 371 372.Excommunication, that neither the Common-wealth, nor the ſupreme Magiſtrate, nor all the perſons in any Common-wealth can be excommunicate) and reſolves that no man ſhall ever deprive her of this glorying, that ſhe is pure from the bloud of all men, hath entertain'd no one principle, or doctrine in any degree incompetible with the civil power, or peace in the utmoſt extent, in which the moſt loyal author haArminianiſm (as one hath lately confuted it under that title) to teach the Eccleſiaſtical power is ſubjected to the Civil Magiſtrate, who in all cauſes over all perſons is acknowledged by us ſupreme under Chriſt, we muſt be content to lye down under that envie, and not excuſe or renounce that piece of Loyal Arminianiſm.
I have thus far proceeded in this matter for the removing of prejudices, and vindicating our propoſition from three ſorts of objecters: 'tis now time to advance a little toward the poſitive aſſertive part, and to that end (the knowledge of looſing depenbinding) I ſhall in the firſt place examine what images of binding we have in the Scripture, and thoſe we ſhall refer to two heads: firſt, thoſe that belong to the power, and practiſe Apoſtolical, (in the time and perſons of the Apoſtles;) ſecondly, thoſe that after the Apoſtles perſons, (and ever ſince) were to continue in the Church, which we ſhall call Eccleſiaſtical Diſcipline (as diſtant from Apoſtolical) exerpublick and ſcandalous, or whoſe crimes otherwiſe came unto their cogniſeparating and removing to ſome diſtance, or in caſting them totally out of the Church, or Congregation of viſible Profeſſors here on earth; anſwerable unto which, [looſing] muſt conſequently be a delivering from thoſe cenſures, the abſolving of him, who was formerly ſeparated, or excommunicated, reſtoring him to the viſible Church; or any part thereof (to the privileges of a Chriſtian, and the comforts of the Word, and Services, and Sacraments) who was before legally caſt ou
For the underſtanding of which, and ſpecially of the former, the Apoſtolical power and practiſe (or as it was diſcernable
Apoſtles) it will not be amiſſe to do theſe three things: 1. To give you a view of the ſeveral ſorts of Excommunication among the Jews, to which ſome phraſes in the New Teſtament refer: (becauſe I ſee there is ſome controverſie raipurely Chriſtian, i. e. which more diſtinctly and peculiarly reſpect the uſe of theſe Cenſures among Chriſtians.
For the firſt, I am ſure, 'twill be no news to ſay that there were three degrees of Excommunication among the Jews; the firſt called Execration, a more ſolemn Excommunication (with curſes out of Moſes Law and execrations added to it, a Act. 8.20.) inflicted on him who after the Niddui they did. The third is Proſcription and delivering to deſolaanathema) Oriental tongues ſignifying Dominus; whence in Etruria the Kings are called Murani, ſaith Servius in Aen. 12. and the Syrians now Maranitae, becauſe they call Chriſt Lord Agreeable to which it is, that in Epiphanius, GOD is by the Gazari call'd Marnas, and by the Cretians their virgins
Ladies, as among the Spaniards the form hath been uſed, Sit anathema Marano, & excommunicatus, or Let him be excommunicate from the hope of the Lord: (and though he that loves not the Lord Jeſus Chriſt be not 1 Cor. 16.22. appointed to be excommunicated by that phraſe, yet doth it referre to the uſe of the phraſe among the Jews, though there it be by way of accommodation ſet to ſignifie another matter, that higher more direful ſentence of (Go you curſed, &c.) Of theſe three ſpecies thus ſet down Author, contrary to what
bring ſinners to heaven, and which we deſire ſhould be uſed onely to that end. They are theſe, 1. That there are but two ſpecies of Excommunication among the Jews, Niddui and Cherem, and that Schammatha is all one with Niddui. 2. That theſe puniſhments among the Jews belonged not to excluſion from ſacred, but only from civil ſociety.
For the firſt of theſe, that which I find produced to diſprove thoſe three ſpecies, is, 1. The promiſcuous uſe of Niddui and Schammatha among the Talmudical writings. Secondly, the deSchammatha from ſeparate and to abdicate: and thirdly, that Elias Levita, and David de Pomis, which are for theſe three ſpecies, were not Lawyers, but Grammarians, and ſo did oſcitanter negligently and drowſily make three ſpecies of Excommunication, when they ſhould have made but two. To all which I anſwer, that thoſe learned men which maintain the three ſpecies may very well do it for ought theſe objections enforce to the contrary. For it will not be neceſſary for us to affirm that the Talmucritical importance; there is noin foro to loſe their native proper ſignifications, and to be uſed Schammatha in the Talmud is ſometimes taken only for ſeparation (which is the reaſon that they which are againſt the three ſpecies make Schammatha to be all one with Niddui, and to ſet down Niddui and Cherem for the two:) So in other places Niddui is ſet to deSchammatha as a higher degree then Cherem,
p. 2467.Buxtorf hath produced in his Rabbinical Lexicon, which ſhew clearly that Schammatha is a heavier degree of Excommunication, and yet that Niddui is by them put for Schammatha, which indeed will be a proof that Niddui and Schammatha are uſed promiſcuouſly, & ſine diſcrimine among thoſe wridegrees or ſpecies, Niddui and Cherem, but clearly the contrary, that Cherem is a midſpecies, beyond which there is Schamatha, (which they ſomeNiddui) as wel as below it Niddui, which they ſometimes call Schammatha; and therefore Jo. Coch which is cited to prove that Niddui & Schammatha are all one, ſaith withall, that non tantum de leviori, ſed & de graviori indifferenter uſurpantur, ex
146. both uſed for the greater, as well as both for the lighter Excommunication. To which I ſhall add, that the Hebr. writers are ſo far from ſpeaking conſtantly, and exactly, & critically in this matter, that they ſometimes put Cherem, or anathema loweſt, and ad Schammatha to that, and then ſet Niddui as the laſt of the three, as in Jelammedenu ſect.
Samaritans
ſpecies of Exthey anathematized, and ſchammatized and excommunicated him, by which it will appear, how promiſcuouſly thoſe words have been uſed among Hebr. writers, (to which purpoſe may be again remembred, what was even now produced of the phraſe in Spain, Sit anathema marano, & excommunicatus, excommunicatus after the higheſt anathema) but it will not be a proof of any validity, againſt the three ſpecies of Excommunication, or the order or difference of them, when they do ſpeak exactly.
For the ſecond proof taken from the derivation of Schammatha from ſeparate or abdicate, I deſire this may be noted, that there is no ſuch ancient Hebrew word as Rabbins, and Talmudiſts, which to me is an argument converb may come from Schammatha, and not Schammatha from the verb; and therefore Buxtorf, when he meets with it, renders it Schammatizare, as a verbal from that noun, not willing to affix any other Interpretation to it, but this, that ſo he might leave it to ſignifie in the ſame latitude (as a verb) that belongs to ſchammatha, as a ſubſtan
i. e ſomſpecies, ſometimes improperly, to be all one with Niddui, or the firſt ſpecies.
For the confirming of what I now ſay, I ſhal premiſe what
compound or derivative Hebrew word, is to be reduced to ſome original Hebrew root or roots, from which it is derived, or of which compounded conſequently that the ſame muſt be reſolved of authentick Hebrew writing (which he that will not truſt his own obſervation, but ſurvey Schindler and Buxtorf, will acknowledge with me) but only among the Rabbins and Talmudiſts, and may rather be thought to come from Schammatha from that; this is not my conjecture, but the direct words of the learned Buxtorf, in his inſtitution of Hebrew Epiſtles p. 58. in theſe words, Talmudiei ex nomine
&c. and though Buxtorf in his Rabbinical Lexicon place the verb before the noun, yet is that no argument of diſlitteral method of ſetting the verb of the three letters before the noun of one letter more.
If it be demanded of me from whence then the noun comes, (ſeeing I make the verb come from that) I anſwer that learned Jews have given it ſeveral originations, ſome bringing it from Dominus venit, the Lord comes, making it all one with ibi mors, there is death; others from deſolatio erit, there ſhall be deſolation. Of theſe two latter I know not which to chooſe, 1. having little objection aginſt either of them, and 2. finding them both avowed in the Gemara Moed Katon, in theſe words, what is Schammatha? Rab anſwered
and Samuel ſaid, there ſhall be deſolation, &c. and 3. finding the ſenſe of both thoſe originations to come to the ſame purpoſe of death, or deſolation, or deſtruction, noting that kinde of offender to be by that cenſure given up to divine vengeance, which is generally the notion of that 3 degree of ExMa
in the Apoſtle, that God comes as a judge or avenger
Jews at Chriſts time, was proper to him, that under Moſes Law had deſerved death, but by reaſon that the power of capital puniſhments was taken from the Jews, could not by them be ſo puniſhed, and therefore was by this way thus delivered up to Gods hands, to inflict vengeance upon him, which they ſay did very frequentAuſtins obſervaquaeſt. ſuper Deu. l. 5. c. 38. Hoc nunc agit in Eccleſiâ excommunicatio, quod agebat tunc interfectio. Excommunication doth the ſame among Chriſtians, that killing did among the Jews. As for the third proof of the objection, taken from the leſſenElias Levita, and David de Pomis, it will be ſufficient to ſay, 1. That to make that argumentative, it ought to have been (but is not) proved, that others which have call'd the three ſpecies in queſtion, are of greater authority then theſe. 2. That Grammarians (if they be ſuch indeed, as thoſe have been allowed that reputation) are Criticks alſo, and ſo as fit to be hearkned unto in ſuch a matter of ancient cuſtome among the Jews, as if they had been Lawyers, they would have been; more, I am ſure, then any other Lawyers, which had not been ſo good Grammarians; and yet that any Jewiſh Lawyer hath avowed the contrary opinion, is not, that I know of, as yet pretended: And 3. For the negligence or oſcitance of theſe Grammarians, that hath not with any proof or confirmation been laid to their charge, and if it were, 'tis as poſſible that Jewiſh Lawyers might have been guilty of it as they, nay it were more reaſonable to accuſe them of oſcitancy, that make but two, and them of double diligence that have diſcerned one ſpecies more then they. To this Topick ab authoritate I ſhall add only, that Aloyſius (whom the Reader is by this Gentleman adviſed to turn to Sched. ſacro prof. l. 7. c. 10.) doth affirm in theſe direct words, Sunt apud Hebraeos plures excommunicationis gradus, Niddui, Cherem, Schamatha; there are ſeveral degrees of excommmunication among the Hebrews, thoſe three by name, though he inlarge not to explain the third, as he doth theſe two former: and ſo much for the firſt particular.
Now for the ſecond thing, that theſe ſpecies of excommunication among the Jews were only to exclude from civil ſociety, and
ſacred, I ſhal venture it to the judgment of intelligent indifferent men, who ſhall but examine what they meet with on this ſubject, if it be but at ſecond hand in p. 55.Buxtorf, &c. out of the Hebrew writers. It is his obſervation of Niddui the loweſt ſpecies, that it is remotio ab aliorum congreſſu quàm ſacro, quàm politico, & domeſtico, ad 4 paſſus; ſeparation not onely from civil commerce, but from ſacred alſo. Now that which I conNiddui, was allowed to come to the ſacred meetings, to be preſent at Common-prayers, to teach othersauthor affirms; but then this concludeth not againſt us, for the ſame Buxtorf ſtill adds, ſed ſemper ſub dictâ lege remotionis, alwayes under the forementioned law of remotion, and diſtance. And ſo theſe two Niddui is not a totall remotion or ſeparation neither from ſacred, nor from civil ſociety, (beſpecies) but onely ad 4 paſſus, that none can come within the diſtance of foure paces of him that is under the cenſure; and this degree of ſeparation being extended to ſacred as well as civil aſſemblies, yet excluded him not either from praying with the Congregation, or learning, or (if he were a Doctor) teaching in it; onely a mark was ſet updiſcriminate him from others, which were under no cenſure; this is deſcribed in R. Eliezer, c. 17. King Solomon, ſaith he, when he built the houſe of the Sanctuary, made two gates, one for bridegrooms, another for mourners and excommunicate perſons, by which they went into the Temple.
And to theſe two gates and ſorts of men the Apoſtle may ſeem to allude Rom. 12.15. & 1 Cor. 7.30. when he ſpeaks of weeping with them that weep, & rejoycing with them that rejoyce; and no quebewayling, 1 Cor. 5.2. refers to that ſtile of mourners, and denotes the ſolemnity uſual among the Jews of putting on mourning habit, and wailing over them that were excommunicate, according to that of the author of the Conſtitutions under Clements name, Let the incurable be put out of the Church with ſorrow and wailing. Theſe mourners, or excommuniRabbi were thoſe under Niddui, who it ſeems were admitted to the temple, but appointed to come in at a doore peculiar to them, and with ſome ſuch mark of diſcrimination, that they that ſaw them might pray for them in this form, Qui inhabitat domum hanc, conſoletur te, indátque animo tuo ut obtemperes, &c. He that dwels in this houſe, comfort thee, and give thee a heart to obey; by which I am forced to confeſſe, that Niddui did not ſepaſacris, but only remove to ſuch a diſtance; and yet the Reader will be forced to confeſſe alſo, that this ſeparation or rather remotion belonged ad ſacra, as well as ad politica, and in the ſame degree that it reſtrain'd the one kind of ſociety, it reſtrain'd the other alſo; and ſo ſaith Jo. Mich. Dilherr. Elector. l. 2. c. 10. having premiſed that Niddui eſt hominis ab aliorum conventu tam ſacro, quam politico, & domeſtico, ad 4 uſque cubitus ſive paſſus per dies 30 remotio, &c. A remotion from ſacred, civil, domeſtick commerce, to the diſtance of foure paces for 30 dayes, a deprivation of the marriage bed, of ſhaving, and waſhing, and ſuch other commodities, he adds that cenſure, may be preſent at ſacred meetings, but ſo many paces off from the reſt of the company.
And therefore whereas this author affirmeth that by Niddui is not meant an ejection out of the Church, but only a deprivafour paces, & applies to it that ſenſe, wherein the Poet cals the Britains, toto diviſos orbe, divided from the whol world, not that they are totally divipeculiar ſituation of thoſe Iſlands in the Ocean, I ſhal acknowledge the obſervation ſo far as it denies a totall ſeparation, but not as it intimates a greater ſeparation in civilibus, then in ſacris, as the words [peculiari illâ civilis inter ſuos conſortii libertatis deprivation?] would ſeem to import, and as the intention of the writer is by himſelf deNiddui is but a lighter cenſure, remotion or reſtraint for ſuch a degree, but not a total ſeparation either from ſacred, or civil ſociety, yet ſtil as much from ſacred as from civil, in both limitedly 30 dayes, and for the diſtance of four Cubits.
But then for Cherem the ſecond degree, that is defin'd by 827.
Buxtorf, excluſion from the ſacred aſſemblies, caſting out of the Synagogue
with all the curſes of Deut. 28. (to which, ſay 2.
Ceremony of putting out the Candles, to ſignifie him deprived of the light of heaven) and he hath proof for it out of Maimonides in Madda, c. 7. Muchram non docet néque diſcit cum aliis. He that is under the ſecond cenſure, is excluded from hearing the law in publick; And, as 56.
Buxtorf elſwhere adds, ò Synagogâ, conventibus, negotiis, publicis, ſacris, & politicis omnibus excluſus, donec reſipiſcat; which may further appear by the form of this anathema, which he brings out of an antient Hebr. manuſcript. Sit in anathemate ſanctorum excelſorum, in anathemate, Seraphim, & Ophunnim, in anathemate totius Eccleſiae, &c. Now from this, the third ſpecies differs onely in this, that as that was a total ſeparation, donec reſipiſcat, til he repent, but reverſible upon repentance, total for the preſent, but not irremiſſible, ſo this was both total and final too, & ſo undoubtedly (not remitting of the ſeverity of the ſecond but adding to it) extended to the ſeparation in ſacris alſo; and therefore whatſoever may be ſaid of Schammatha in the wide Rabbinical acception of it, as it goes indifferently for Niddui, there wil be little doubt, but the Schammatha peculiarly ſo calSchammatha of the Lord, or of the God of Iſrael, is, as the learEa quâ quis totaliter & finaliter ab Eccleſiâ (as that notes coetum ſacrum, as well as civilem) ſegregatus, divino judicio ſit devotus, & cum eâ mors & exitium; ſo Dilherr. l. 2. of Maranatha (which he ſuppoſes to be al one with it) Eſt proſcriptio extrema, & abſque ſpe veniae irrogata, quâ reus omnibus humanae ſocietatis juribus, legibus, & officiis excluſus, judicio divino committitur, & ad extremam deſolationem condemnatur. A perfect proſcription, without hope of pardon, by which the offender is excluded from all privileges, and offices of humane ſociety, and committed to the judgement of God, and condemned to extream deſolation. I ſhal abſtain from adding more to the proof of this truth in the ſeveral ſpecies, conceiving that I have ſufficiently proved or vindicated in the loweſt, & ſhewed the the cauſe or the occaſion of their miſtake, who deny it; and then there will be little need to confirm it any further in the other two degrees, which do adde to that loweſt, but cannot be thought to come ſhort of it.
And having thus clear'd the firſt thing which we propoſed,
Excommunication among the Jews, I proceed now to the ſecond, to thoſe places of the New TeſtaLuk. 6.22. doth appear to belong to Excommunication among the Jews, but whether to one only or more ſpecies of it, I am uncertain; Niddui, which cannot be more literally renGreek then by ſeparation, or remotion, 4 paces off, and perhaps that with contumeliouſly; But yet becauſe 'tis poſſible, that curſing and execration, not only in this but in other places of the Goſpel, therefore I conceive that word (ſet immediately after ſecond degree, that of Cherem, & then to the ſame wil belong that third phraſe alſo of to caſt out your name as evil, for an Hebraiſm there is in theſe words, which though a very learned man conceive to conſiſt in this; 1. that is to bring up an evil report,
for bringing up an evil report, Num. 14.36. is, old, or writers of the new Teſtament, for bringing up an evil report. 2. That to caſt out your name as evil; 1. [to bring up an evil name or report] is in our language a very indefaming, but [to bring up your name or report as evil] is not ſo; and therefore I ſhall venture to propoſe my conjecture, that the Hebraiſm is not in the word [perſons, or you (as Mat. 1.23. [he (as Act. 1.15. ſignifies perſons of men) ſhall be (not he ſhall be named by that name) a God
God incarnate) and then ſcandalous] or offenſive, or abominable, as baſhful and abaſh) ſometimes abominate, ſometimes to be evil or wicked, Gen. 34.24. Eſd. 4.12. and ſo [to caſt out your names as evil] will clearly ſignifie to caſt you out as wicked, ſhameful, abominable perſons, a denotation of the ſeparating or removing to a diſtance, but total caſting out, and that with reproaches, curſes, and execrations, ſuch as in Moſes are denounced againſt greater maleconjecture, but that the Niddui and Cherem I doubt not, nor if you marke it, doth H. Grotius who hath enlarged on that ſubject of ExcommuAnnotations on that verſe.
No more do I find my ſelf moved by the arguments of that learned Gentleman to doubt, but that to be turned out of the Synagogue, Joh. 9.22.12.42.16.2. refers to the ſecond of theſe ſpecies among the Jewes, for that civil Congregation or aſſembly, and not alwayes a ſacred (as when the hypocrite is ſaid to pray ſtanding,
publike concourſe and corners of the ſtreets, as the moſt viſible places, Matth. 6.) I ſhall eaſily grant, & yet not think my ſelf thereby concluded, or obliged to yeeld, but that it may alſo, at other times, note the holy aſſembly, or meeting for the performance of ſacred duties, out of which it was ſure no news for the Jews (after that capital judgements were taken away from them) to eject notorious malefactors, particularly hereticks, falſe prophets, or their ſectators, and diſciples, as theſe here for preaching of Chriſt, whom the Jews acknowledged not; in like manner as in the time of the Captivity, Eſd. 10.8. the order is given, that whoſoall his eſtate ſhall be (forfeited we render, the word is Cherem which we now ſpeak of) devoted, anathematized, as an evidence of that kinde of Excommunication which followes in
he ſhall be ſeparated from the Church or Congregation of the captivity, not only from Civil, but Eccleſiaſtical ſociety with them, for ſo Cherem was formerly demonſtrated to ſignifie; nay, it may with ſome reaſon be conceived in that place from Eccleſiaſtical only, in caſe of Cherem or total ejection; for 'tis more probable, that the King under whom they were captive, allowing them ſome liberty for the exerciſe of their religion, but in civil matters keeping them as captives and ſervants, ſhould permit them to puniſh one another by that way of caſting out of their Eccleſiaſtical Aſſemblies, then by that other of civil interdict, eſpecibaniſhment, &c. which would intrench upon his Prerogative, and be a kind of turning the captive out of his captivity.
That ſecond ſpecies, and ſo to caſting out of the ſociety in ſacris, is the diſtinct affirmation of the learned p. 56.Buxtorf in theſe words, Haec eſt illa excommunicatio (ſpeaking of Cherem) de qua in Evangelio Iohannis, cap. 9.22.12.42. etſi ab eo tempore Rabbini quaedam ipſi adjecerint: and the intimation of c. 1. p. 149.John Coch alſo in theſe words, Qui ſimpliciter excommunicatus eſt,
From which words of that very learned man, I obſerve theſe two things contrary to what I ſee lately affirm'd. 1. That Niddui, but to Cherem. 2. That it is an ejection not only ab Eccleſiâ, Synagogâ, as that notes rempublicam Judaicam, but from ſacred Aſſemblies, noted by doctrinae particeps, accordMaimonides. Devotus nec docet nee docetur, ſuch an one is excluded from both, it ſeems, and ſo from thoſe holy Aſſemblies, where that was wont to be done.
To this phraſe of [Jo. 16.2. but (or yea) the hour cometh that every man that killeth you ſhall ſeem, or be thought to do God ſervice, or to offer a ſacrifice to him; whereon I ſhall interpoſe a conjecture, that thoſe words may poſſibly denote the third degree, that of Schammatha, at leaſt a conſequent of it, for ſo ſaith p. 58.Buxtorf
ſpecies, Mortem dicit, quia cujuſvis manibus ejus vita expoſita eſt, & euilibet eum interficiendi libera poteſtas: It is ſo call'd, becauſe ſuch a mans life is expoſed to any ones hands, every one having a free power of killing him: & ſo to that he applies the Maranatha which is added to Anathema, 1 Cor. 16.22. a forme of extreme proſcription, delivering up the ſinner to divine revenge, in which caſe whoſoever kill'd him, conceived himperform an act of execution of juſtice, and ſervice to God.
Some other places there are in the New Teſtament belongJudaical cenſures, fit to be explained; but I have choſen to inſiſt onely on thoſe becauſe, I lately find them otherwiſe rendred, but yet diſcern no reaſon to recede from what I have now delivered, that they do belong to thoſe ſpecies of Excommunication not only from civil but from ſacred aſſemblies, though one in an higher degree then another. To which I ſhall onely adde, that they which have applied theſe places to Chriſtian excommunication, any otherwiſe then only by way of accommodation, ſhall not be pleaded for by me, who acknowledge that they belong to the Jews, and to their uſage of Chriſtians, and not to ſome Chriſtians dealing with others; but then ſure there is as little reaſon on their ſide who will not allow that way of accommodation, which would not be at all unreaſonable, though thoſe phraſes among the Jewes were ſuppoſed to belong only to civil commerce; It being ordinary for Chriſt to ordain ſome things in his Church, which were anſwerable to civil not ſacred cuſtomes among the Jews (as the Lords Supper, ſure an Eccleſiaſtical rite among us, was to their poſt-coenium, which was not ſo, and many the like,) to tranſplant from their forum to our Church, and therefore no way unfit for the Apoſtles and following Church to appropriate thoſe words to Eccleſiaſtical ſenſes, though they were ſuppoſed to be among the Jewes of a greater latitude: Of which ſort, becauſe I formerly promiſed it, I ſhall now ſpecifie in ſome inſtances.
This may be diſcern'd in the word Chriſtians, then that of a meeting together in a Town hall, upon no other way of probation, but that the Hebrew words anTalmudiſts, yea even in the ScriOld Teſtament taken in this ſenſe, this would be a little ſtrange; the matter of fact being moſt evident to the contrary, and it being moſt prompt and proper, that words uſed either among the Greeks or Hebrewes in forinſecal ſenſes, may be bent by Chriſtian Writers to a ſacred.
So in like manner, the word Jewes, and that word denoted among them ſome offices, which if they may in any reſpect be counted Eccleſiaſtical, are yet very diſtant from the Chriſtian uſe of it: ſuch was that of the Meſſengers ſent out to demand and bring in the dues to the Temple, which cannot without the helpe of accommodation be applyed to the Chriſtian acception of the word; and ſuch againe was the proxy in contracting or marrying two perſons, for he was call'd Apoſtolus alſo, an interceſſor or internunce betwixt them, which as a ſponſor, underSamſon had Judg. 14.20. i. e. in Varinus his definition Bridegroome himſelfe muſt not goe into the Fathers houſe, (viz. in a hee ſends one of his friends: To which mApoſtle may ſeem to referre, 2 Cor. 11.2. when he expreſſes his Apoſtleſhip by I have eſpouſed you to one husband, according to that ſenſe of Julius Pollux,
ſponſor all one with interceding or mediating a marriage, all one with that word Paul, agreeable to which
Pollux further extended to the mediators of any kinde of league,
Apoſtles pacifick office, praying and beſeeching us in Chriſts ſtead to be reconciled to God, all which are very conaccommodations, but farre from requiring the Chriſtian word to the very kinde of ſenſe that the Hebrew
So againe, Biſhops in the Chriſtian Church, doe in reſpect of their office, particularly that of impoſition of hands, (peculiar to them above the Presbyters even in St. Jeromes confeſſion) referre to the Princeps Synedrii, who imSanhedrim, but in reſpect of the name they referre to the uſe of the word Jewes, and accordingly the very word Mac. 1.53. and in Joſephus, ſet to ſignifie them that are ſet over any publike buſineſſe, the ſet men a worke, and require an account of the perforaccommodation brought both in the New Teſtament, and in all Sacred Writers ſince, to ſignifie an office parallel to this, but purely Eccleſiaſtick.
So the word Old Teſtament
it belong properly to the Elders of the people either in a common notion, or as members of their Sanhedrim, not any body, or ſingle perſons peculiarly Eccleſiaſticke, (though by the way 'tis moſt cleare, that the high Prieſts were not onely of that number, part of their Sanhedrim, or New Teſtament the mention of the high Prieſts and Elders comes oft together in point of judicature; and the buſineſſe of that Court, being all kinde of affaires, Civil as well as Eccleſiaſticke, it was moſt reaſonable that ſome perſons of both conditions ſhould be intruſted with them, and there being ſo, no wonder that there was no other Court, or Tribunal meerly Eccleſiaſtical) yet doth it unqueſtionably belong, both in
New Teſtament, and in the conſtant acorder of Eccleſiaſticks, as is moſt apparent both by Clemens, and Ignatius, and is confeſt by them, which aſſert the Biſhops, and Presbyters: which makes it not very reaſonable to conlearned Writer, who from the Talmudical writings of the Creation of the Jewiſh Elders, would conclude how little, or how nothing there is in the Creation of a Presbyter among Chriſtians, more then of a Doctor of Law, &c. But this by the way.
Laſtly, ſo the Deacons in the Chriſtian Church are directly parallel to the Synagogue, called by Epiphanius (by a light inflexion or change of the Hebrew) treaſurers,
Philo,
Joſephus) which I wonder a pag. 475.in ſynagogis praefecti, ut miniſtrarent menſis, when 'tis cleare that the Acts, noting firſt the miniſtring to them in the in univerſum ſignifie [providing for the poore] and that is as cleartreaſurers among the Jewes, as if they had literally in the Synagogue ſerved tables.
I ſhould now proceed to my third propoſal, the phraſes which are purely Chriſtian, but that I conceive it not unfit to take notice of one difficulty (which wee have not yet mentioned, nor ſhall have occaſion to mention among the phraſes purely Chriſtian) and to give ſome acHeathens. 2. Of Samaritans. 3. Of thoſe that are called Sinners. 4. Of Publicans among the Jewes; being tempted to that (if it be an extravagance) by another Parentheſis in a learned Authour before mentio
Gentiles, they were of three ſorts; either 1. Proſelytes of juſtice, who were circumciſed, and undertook their whole law, and theſe were allowed to live among them, to enjoy all liberty and priviledges, that any Jew did, differing from them in nothing but their Gentile-birth. Secondly, Proſelytes of the Gates, which were converted ſo far by them, as to receive the precepts of the ſonnes of Adam and Noah, but not to be circumcivii ſociety, and to come to the temple (Gods houſe being a houſe of prayer to all people, i. e. to all ſuch Gentle worſhippers, or godly men of the nation) but that with a marke of difference from the Jewes, and perfect Proſelytes, there becourt provided on purpoſe for them, called the court of the Gentiles, divided from the court of the Jewes by a little partition called by the Apoſtle Joſephus
that no ſuch Gentile proſelyte might goe in i. e. beyond their owne, into the Jewes court; and ſo theſe though admitted to ſociety in ſacris, yet were ſo removed or ſeparated by law, the whole body of them, that they were in a manner under the cenſure of niddui, or foure paces, but this not by any act of excommvnication, but by a general law or traJewes in this parti
Thirdly, there were the Gentiles continuing ſtill utterly unconverted in their Gentiliſme, and with thoſe they were not to have ſociety at all (not onely in ſacris, for there was no need of interdicting that, they would not joyne with them and for them to joyne in the Gentile ſacrifices were down-right Idolatry) but to ſeparate from them, for feare their company and converſation ſhould infuſe their Gentiles ſinnes into them, wherein they were ſo ſtrict, that they would not goe into the praetorium, where the band of Roman (i. e. ſuch Gentile) ſouldiers were,
Joh. 18. ver. 28. counting it a Pollution, if they had ſo done. So you ſee what was the condition of the Gentiles among the Jewes, and all this by law or ſtanding cuſtome among them, without any interpoſition of any degree of excommunication, as having nothing to do to judge them which are without, i. e. the laſt kind of Gentiles, and having ſet rules for the other two.
Then for the Samaritans, they are almoſt, if not quite, in the ſame caſe with the laſt ſort of Gentiles, no converſation allowed between the Jewes and them, as you ſee Joh. 4. ver. 9. the Jewes have not common commerce with the Samaritans, no not ſo farre, as that one ſhould give the other meat or drinke in his want, or helpe him to it, as appeares by the former part of that verſe, Doeſt thou being a Jew aske to drinke of me being a Samaritan? they might not eat together, which was proportionable to the Niddui, (that being a ſeparation, to the diſtance of foure paces, à congreſſu domeſtico,
p. 55.ſacro & civili, and a prohibition of eating and drinking together promiſeuouſly) and not onely ſo, but an interdicting of acts of common humanity, as helping to neceſſaries of life, like the proſcription among the Romans; but this is not by way of excommunication againe, (but by ſtanding law or cuſtome) for the Samaritans uſed not the ſame place of worſhip with the Jewes, came not to Jeruſalem, Joh. 4. ver. 20. and ſo could not be excommunicated by them. Nay, Matth. 10. ver. 5. you ſhall ſee the Samaritans and the Gentiles joyned together in oppoſition to the Jews, when the Apoſtles are commanded to go neither to the way of the Gentiles, nor to the City of Samaria, but onely to the loſt ſheep of the houſe of Iſrael; that is, firſt to them, before either Samaritans or Gentiles were preacht to, which were all one in effect, the Samaritan being called aliene, Luke 17.16.
In the next place, the word ſinners is in the New Teſtament an equivocal word; for it may ſignifie either Gentiles, as Gal. 2.15. ſinners of the Gentlles; or elſe ſcandalous offenders,
harlots, &c. theſe (it ſeems) it was unlawful to eat with, Mat. 9.11. If taken under the firſt notion, the caſe will be clear upon the ſame account, as before we gave you of the Heathens: but under the ſecond notion, if ſinners ſignifie notorious offenders, then are they conſidered either as men under the puniſhment of excommunication, or at leaſt worthy to be under it, and that either under niddui or cherem, the loweſt of which would make them uncapable of familiar converſation, and eating together with other Jews; and upon that ground, the Jewes might quarrel with Chriſt for eating with them, and S. Paul ſpeaking of the inceſtuous perſon might refer to the Jewiſh cuſtome, and thereupon command remotion in niddui for the diſtance of four cubits, being unreconcileable with familiar eating together) and ſo the Phariſee, when the Luk. 7.37. came with her cruſe of ointment, and anointed and kiſt Chriſts feet, reſolves that if Chriſt knew what ſhe were, he would not admit of ſo neer a commerce with her, and concludes him no Prophet, that he did not know it.
Laſtly, for the Publicans, who were alſo thought unfit for men to eat and drink with, I conceive that is not again from any of the Jewiſh cenſures paſt upon them, but only becauſe either they were Gentiles, and ſo uncapable of that commerce, or elſe being Jews, yet being officers of the Romans, they were ſuppoſed to commerce ordinarily with Gentiles, and ſo to be polluted by that means, and by the law of legal pollution interdicted that familiar reception among the Jewes; notPublican, Luk. 18, 10. went up to the Temple to pray, as well as the Phariſee; and if the Parable be argumentative, it ſeems the Phariſee and the Publican were in the ſame Court of the Temple, (as maybe gueſt by the Phariſees pointing him out, This Publican) and ſo that the Publican enjoyed all the ſame priviledges of acceſſe that the other did, (though ſtill he continued afar off, & that in a moſt humble poſture, as if he he were ander niddui, that lowexcommunication) but becauſe it may be ſubject to miſtake, to argue from Parables, I ſhall not do ſo, but leave the
Publican joyned with the ſinner, as one Heathen with another, both by the Jewiſh laws, forbidden to converſe with, and not expelled by any cenſure of excommunication.
Theſe conjectures being thus obiter and in paſſage premiſed, only on purpoſe to diſcard ſome leſſe pertinent places, which ſome others perhaps have taken liberty to make uſe of, and not out of deſign to make any ſpecial advantage of this explication of them, in order to my preſent purpoſe, or in oppoſiChriſtian: Such are, 1. To deliver unto Satan,
Cor. 5.5. 1 Tim. 1.20. anſwerable to Cherem among the Jews, ſo far as belonged to the ſociety in ſacris, a turning the blaſphemer out of the Church of Chriſt. This was the frequent ſtile of excommunication, becauſe it was the depriving the man of thoſe every-day means which are in Chriſtianity afforded, as ordinarily uſefull to eject Satan and the power of his Kingdom out of the heart: Such are, 1. The Prayers of the Church. 2. The publick uſe of the Word or Doctrine of Chriſtianity: (for ſo he that is under Gherem, nec docet nec docetur, neither teacheth nor are taught, and in the ancient Chriſtian Church it appears they were excluded from that, & upon repentance received for the firſt three years among the hearers in the porch,
Zonaras, which being the firſt degree of their return to communion, argues that before they were excluded from it) and thirdly, the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, in which reſpect ſcandalous ſinners are by S. Jude call'd ſpots in their feaſts, or agapae (which being annext to the Lords Supper denoted the whole action) i. e. unblemiſhed ſacrifices to be received there. The uſe of which means being in the oeconomy of the Goſpel deſigned to ſo much advantage to the Soule, for the caſting Satan out of it, conſebaniſhing from, or depriving of the uſe of thoſe means is properly ſtiled the delivering to Satan, though in Gods gracious diſpoſal of all things, that be dcaſt Satan out of him, on whom no
But then ſecondly, it was ſo call'd, becauſe in the Apoſtles times a ſad conſequent there was of this tradition or excommunication,
dirae or execrations in the Jewiſh cherem, which, ſay they, rarò effectu carebant, ſeldome wanted the effect, to wit, corporal power and poſſeſſion, and inflictions of Satan on thoſe, who were delivered up to him, as to a lictor or carnifex (in like manner as we read befell Saul after his defeevill ſpirit came upon him, 1 Sam. 16. verſ. 14.)
For it muſt be remembred, that about Chriſts time, and a litdevil was permitted to have ſuch a ranging unlityrannize over the bodies of mortal men, laying all kinds of diſeaſes upon them, (as indeed there is ſcarce any kind of diſeaſe, but ſome reſemblance of it you may finde in ſome or other of thoſe deGoſpel) which is ſomtimes called Satans buffeting, 2 Cor. 12.7. ſometimes racking or tormenting, as of the Paralytick, Mat. 8.6. grievouſly tormented, and ſo Mat. 4. v. 24. that condition of men is deſcribed by taken with divers diſeaſes and torments, the word poſſeſt with devils, and ſo here of thoſe conſequents of ſuch poſſeſſions, and therefore follows, and poſſeſt with devils. And ſometimes to bind, as Luk. 11.13. in the ſtory of the woman which had the ſpirit of infirmity, verſ. 11. (i. e. a devil or evil ſpirit that inflictinfirmity or diſeaſe upon her) 18. years, bowing her together, that ſhe was not able to look up; 'Tis ſaid of her, that Satan had bound her, ver. 16. and the curing her is called looſing her from her infirmity, ver. 12. from her bond, ver. 16. agreeable to the phraſe of binding and looſing in this buſineſſe, Mat. 16.19. & 18.10. Hence it is that the Apoſtles delivering to ſatan, is ſaid to be Cor. 5.5. to the deſtruction of the fleſh, i. e. by way of pain or diſeaſe, a ſpeciApoſtolical diſcipline. Thus in Ignatius Epiſtle to the Romans, we have the puniſhment of the devil, which I conceive in that place muſt belong onely to temporal inflictions, becauſe he wiſhes it were upon himſelf, that he may by that means obtain or come to Chriſt, of which eternal would deprive him; and, perhaps S. Pauls wiſh extended no farther, Rom. 9. then to be thus
excommunicate from the Church of Chriſt, and to be under thoſe temporal evils that attended it, which was an exube
The ſumme of what hath been ſpoken on this point, is, That as amongſt the ancient heathen Romans there was baniſhment, and interdictio ignis & aquae, offenders were interdicted the neceſſaries of life: and as in Ioſephus, the Eſſeni [caſt out from their congregation ſuch as are taken in notorious offences, and they that are thus caſt out, come many times to miſerable deaths, conſumed with hunger, &c. or as Heliodorus, 2 Mac. 3. in his ſacrilegious enterpriſe was ſcourged by two Angels in the ſhape of young men, v. 26. and hardly came off with life. So the Apoſtolical Excommunication, or Anathema, was attended with theſe adverſaries of life, diſeaſes, pains, & grietorments, to lay a neceſſity on them of returning, or being reformed by that means. And this I conceive is the rod which the Apoſtle mentions, 1 Cor. 4.21. the power of inflicting death, as on Ananias; or diſeaſes, blindneſſe on Elymas, and the like; the Heb: rod, being Iſa. 10.24. plague, all one with Mar. 3.10. and ſo very capable in that place of this interpretation, & by the matter of the choice there propoſed to the Corinthians moſt fitly applied to it.
This have I ſaiddelivering to Satan, and in it that Apoſtolical cenſure of excommunication, and its attendant, cordiſeaſes and pains.
To all which, methinks Cains condition deſcribed, Gen. 4. is very applyable, (by way of accommodation at leaſt) ver. 14. Behold, thou haſt driven me out from the face of the earth; anſwerv. 11. Thou art curſed from the earth, theor Anathema to which the curſing there is anſwerable, being a ſpecies of excommunication higher then Niddui or driving or caſting out, the Engliſh of Luk. 6.22. i. e. either from the Church (as anon you ſhall ſee earth, where Adam and his other children dwelt, as the ſole Church then exiſtent, and
from thy face ſhal I be hid: Gods face typically noting the Church, where God had alwayes a peculiar preſence, to which refers the bread of faces; or ſhewbread in the Temple, ſhewing or ſignifying the preſence of God there, and I ſhal be a fugitive and vagabond; and then finally it ſhal come to paſſe, ſaith he, that every one that findeth me, ſhall ſtay me; there is the death,
from which though God freed him, v. 15. yet the other he lay under, as appears by v. 16. Cain went out from the preſence of the Lord, went out, i. e. was turned out (as Mat. 25.46. is all one with chap. 8.12.) of the preſence of the Lord, i. e. out of the Church, or viſible congregation of Gods ſerexhibite himſelf, i. e. out of Adams family or the place where he dwelt, for it follows, Cain dwelt in the land of Nod on the Eaſt of Eden, but this onely as an image or accommodation.
One thing I deſire here to interpoſe as in a Parentheſis, which hath been touched on in other Of Conſc. 8.34.delivering to Satan, and 'tis this, that this act of the Church in delivering up to Satan, is but an Image of Gods real dealing, who is wont upon occaſion tradere Satanae, to deliver men unto Satan. The ground of this affirmation you may diſcern by compounding theſe Scripture Truths togeSatan is our adverſary before God, and therefore call'd Satan
enemy, and ſet againſt us, &c. Secondly, that one main act of his Satanſhip is expreſt in accuſing us before God, Rev. 12.11. and thence he is call'd peculiarly i. e. an oppoſite,
1 Pet. 5.8. and that either 1. upon ſome falſe ſuggeſtion, no real crime, as particularly that of unſincerity (or ſerving God only as long as God uſed him wel, allowed him the Job, Chap. 1. verſ. 9.11. in which reſpect he is peculiarly call'd calumniator; and 'tis obſervable that the 72. doe moſt what render calumnia
Gods ſervants to their Maſter, to be a ſpecial piece of his being our adverſary; Or elſe, ſecondly, upon the real commiſſion of ſome ſin, which advantage he will be ſure not to omit, when he
accuſe falſly, will not ſpare to accuſe when he hath true matter of accuſation allowed him. To which purpoſe he is ſtiled obſervator calcanei, an obſerver of the heel, in the vulgar Latine, Gen. 3.15. (agreeable to the Septuagints
an obſerver of the heel of Chriſt, i. e. of Chriſtians, or one that goeth up and down, to and fro in the earth, Job 1.7. to finde out matter of accuſation, and in this ſenſe he is called i. e. an accuſer (as that differs critically from a calumniator) of the brethren, i. e. Chriſtians, or believers, when they fal into a fault. An example of this, I conceive, we have in the caſe of S. Peter, Luk. 22.31. where Satans deſiring to have Peter, ſeems to be founded upon ſome previous or preceſtriving with the other Diſciples for ſuperiority, immediatev. 24. (as his ſucceſſor at Rome hath done ever ſince) or for ſome other ſin, which Satan ſaw, though we do not at this diſtance.
And upon this putting in of accuſations againſt any, folthird place, his expetivit ut cribraret, Luk. 22.31. his deſiring to winnow, his ſolemne petition to God that he that hath ſo offended, may be delivered unto him; parallel to which our Engliſh Bibles make that other place ſeeking whom he may devour, 1 Pet. 5.8. which is there plainly attributed to him, as he is plaintiff or adverſary in a Court, imdelivering to the Judge, Matt. 5.25. that ſo he may deliver him back, again as to a tormentor; and then if this Satanical courſe or accuſation be receipetition be granted, as it was (though with limitaJob 1.12. the reſult is, a man delivered up to Satan, to have as Job had, ſo many aſſayes of his malice practiſed upon him. To which purpoſe you may pleaſe to obſerve what Pſellus hath given us in his Scholia on the Chaldean Oracles on that text [Pag. 93.the devils have the power of binding men]
(as we ſay) regenerate men: and from thence it follows, ſaith he,
Many of pure and holy converſations falling into unexpected calamities: according to that of the Apoſtle, For this cauſe are many ſick and weak among you, &c. And perhaps it may on this ground be farther obſervable, that when men are thus by God delivered up into Satans hand; and he by that perforetell it to his inſtruments, and ſo ſomtimes doth foretell ſuch future events, to get a reputation in the world of fore-knowing all things.
Now this being the condition of the Apoſtolical cenſure or delivering to ſatan, that who were thus delivered, ſatan corporally tormented them, brought them to deaths doore, and ſometimes killed them, it muſt follow on the other ſide. 1. That the Apoſtles by the power of the Keys, muſt be enabled together, both to caſt out devils, and to heal diſeaſes, and ſo they were, Mat. 16.17. In my name they ſhall caſt out devils, and 18. They ſhal lay their hands upon the ſick, and they ſhall recover. 2. That whom the Apoſtles abſolve from the Cenſure of excommunication, they might and ſhould alſo cure of diſeaſes, the conſequents of that cenſure then (though not alwayes now, and therefore perhaps only the firſt power belongs to the Governours of the Church now, to wit, that of abſolving, not of curing) and ſo every where in the Goforgiveneſſe of ſins, and healing of diſeaſes, or caſting out devils, joyned together, as Mat. 9.2. Chriſt ſaith to the ſick of the palſie, Son be of good cheer, thy ſins are forgiven thee, and then v. 6. Ariſe, take up thy bed and walk, (the ſtile and ceremony of Chriſts cure) and the curing of that diſeaſe, an argument in Chriſts own Logick convincing and demonſtrative, that he had power to forgive ſins on earth, for though in Mat. and Luke it be on earth either applyable to ſon of man, or to the power of the ſon of man on earth, as probably, as to forgive ſins, yet in the parallel place in Mar. 2.10. 'tis diſtinctly to forgive ſins on earth, wch is not ſubject to that ambiguity, i. e. to abſolve in the Church, becauſe thoſe diſeaſes being conſequent to Gods delivering up to Satan, which is the Idea of the Churches binding, the ſinner muſt be firſt looſed (i. e. his ſin forgiven) before he could be cured, and therefore the phraſe was critically exact and proper of
woman with the ſpirit of infirmity,
to expreſſe the cure of that diſeaſe. So Jam. 5.15. (which if it ſtrictly belong not, may yet commodiouſly be applied to this matter) you find together the (ſaving or recovering the ſick, & [remiſſion of his ſins alſo: yea and it is obſervable what S. Cyprian ſaith ſo many yeares after, that baptiſme the ſeale of pardon of ſin, freed thoſe from evil ſpirits, that were before troubled with them; (Whence ſure it was, that the Catechiſts that prebaptiſme, are in the Canons of the Councils called Exorciſts) and if after baptiſme they relapſed to ſinning, the evil ſpirit returned again; by which 'tis manifeſt, ſaith he, that the Devil in baptiſme is turn'd out by the faith of the believer, and his faith failing, returns again.
I ſhall only adde two things to this matter, 1. That this may poſſibly be the original and occaſion, if not the pJoh. 5.16. [a ſin unto death, (in which the faithful are not bound to pray for him that is guilty of it, or in which caſe there is no promiſe that their prayers ſhall be heard) i. e. a ſin of ſuch a nature, as to which the delivering up to Satan the pray'd for, yet) as long as he continued impenitent & obdurate he was deprived of the prayers of the Church, at leaſt was fit to be excluded out of the Church, where men prayed in common one for another, as many as were preſent; nay perhaps the Apoſtles, having the power of diſcerning of ſpirits, might poſſibly diſcern ſome man impenetrably obſtinate, and ſo irrecoverably gone, and ſo give over all praying or interceding for him, (as on the other ſide [any man without that ſpirit of diſcerning, ſee his brother ſin a ſin which is not unto death, he ſhall ask or pray, &c. nay on the contrary pray for his exciſion in ſome caſes, as the after-Church judging, though with an humane (and ſo poſſibly fallible) judgment, of Julian the Apoſtate, baniſht him out of their prayers, (and rather prayed for his cutting off) to which yet I make no doubt they would have given him a return, if they ſhould have diſcerned any probability of his return unto the faith.
anathema maranatha, 1 Cor. 16.22. which is as if it were ſecond, and the Lord comes) the third ſort of the Jewiſh cenſures) compacted or put together into one, percenſure among Chriſtians inſtituted (as ſome would think) in theſe words againſt thoſe that have committed the ſin againſt the holy Ghoſt. For the [loveth not] there, will not properly ſigſin, nor indeed any other, of which the Church can have cognizance, (loving, or not loving being a ſecret of the heart, til it break out into ſome actual virtue or ſin, & then it puts off that title of the affection, and is call'd by the name of the action) but by way of accommodation, to apply to the ſtate of ſuch a man the two laſt degrees of excommunication among the Jews, the one nototal, the other final, irreverſible exciſion; and by that territhat ſtate to ſet an amazing formidable mark or character upon thoſe that love not the Lord Jeſus: whether they be hypocrites, who whatlovers of Chriſt, at leaſt not lovers in ſincerity, Ep. 6.24. or whether haters of him, as al vicious perſons are, and then the [let him be] is not alform of cenſure, but either a Prophetick or Apoſtolical denunciation, importing but this, that the hypocrite or hater of Jeſus Chriſt ſhall undoubtedly be damned.
By that which hath been ſaid on occaſion of this firſt phraſe (of delivering to Satan) wil appear diſtinctly, wherein this power of binding in the firſt branch of it, as peculiar to the Apoſtles from after ages, conſiſts, peculiarly in the power of delivering up to corporal inflictions, diſeaſes, &c. The other phraſes will expreſs the matter as it is common to the Apoſtles times with all after ages, the eccleſiaſticall diſcipline, not as it differs from, but as 'tis al one with the Apoſtolical, deveſted only of that one con
In this rank is the I will not ſpare, 2 Cor. 13.2. exv. 10. by abſciſion, and ſublition, taking away, or turning out of the Church; for I conceive
Theſe things I, now being abſent, write to you, that when I come, I may not be forc'd to uſe acts of ſeverity, according to the power which is given to me for edification (which I rather deſire to make uſe of) and not according to the power which was given to me for deſtruction or exciſion.) So again, the Cor. 5.9. the Apoſtles command of not communicating or aſſociating with ſuch. It hath much troubled ſome ſcrupulous enquirers, where or when it was that S. Paul had thus written unto them, phanſying it neceſſary to reſolve that he had written ſome other Epiſtle to the Corinthians before this Firſt. But ſure the beginning of the Chapter will lay this ſcruple, for to that (and not to any other farther off) the [i. e.
] doth belong, and that the [I have now written, verſ. 11. will enforce, for ſo in 3, 4 and 5. verſes we read, I verily, as abſent in body, but preſent in ſpirit, have judged already as though I were preſent, concerning him that hath done this deed; in the name of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, when you and my ſpirit are gathered together with the power of the Lord Jeſus Chriſt, to deliver ſuch an one unto Satan, &c. The Apoſtle though abſent, yet having an Apoſtolick ruling power or juriſdiction over them, paſſeth cenſure (as formally, as if he had been amongſt them) upon that fornicator or inceſtuous perſon: and by that ſpirit or power of his, whereAſſemblies, doth therein pronounce this cenſure of excommunication or delivering up to Satan againſt him, that by this means he may reduce that notorious offenverſe 6. &c. And then verſe 9. (having a little digreſt, v. 7, 8.) he reſumes his matter again, and ſaith it over briefly in another phraſe, with an i. e. this then was it I wrote to you in, or, by Epiſtle, (becompany with ſuch. By which it appears that the delivering a man to Satan, and the commanding delivered, as not to company with him; yet that not ſo much (as men now a daies think) leſt they ſhould be polluted by him, (i. e. by that act of commuunclean thing) as to help diſcipline him, that the inſenſate ſinner may ſee himſelf left alone to no ſociety but Satans (avoided, abandoned by all) and ſo be brought to a ſenſe of his deteſtable dangerous condiexemplary or fit to be imitated by them) And therefore though this diſcicut of the Church, ver. 12. for they will not be wrought on by the Chriſtians abandoning their company, yet ſaith St. Paul verſ. 11. with a profeſſor of Chriſtianity, one that lives in the Church, and yet is guilty of this ſin, or the like, Parentheſis) neither to company nor eat with him, in ſtead of which, 2 Theſ. 3.14. 'tis ſet a mark, or brand upon him, and doe not company with him) which in either place whether it belong onein ſacris, or be to be extenordinary civil ſociety, I profeſſe my ſelf not over-confident; For the former onely this may be ſaid. 1 That although the ſound of the words no not to eat) ſeem to contain the latter alſo, yet perhaps the aequipollence of that other phraſe [delivering to Satan] may reſtrain it to the former. 2. Becauſe the interdiction of converſing or eating with Chriſtian offenders might (now at leaſt) make it neceſſary for a man to go out of the world, as winterdict of heathen-fornicators company would have done then. 3. Becauſe the phraſe [cenſure, is by the Canons of the Councels ſolemnly applyed to theſe Eccleſiaſticall cenſures, ſuſpenſion either from the Church or from office in it.
And yet on the other ſide the Jews were ſo ſevere to ſome, as to deem it unlawfull either to eat or familiarly to converſe with them, as Samaritans, Publicans, heathens and ſinners (ſo call'd i. e. notorious ſinners) and a notable evidence and exMaccabees, where ſpeaking of the deſerters, or thoſe that fell off to any notorious breach of their law, the audeteſtation of them, judging them as enemies of the Nation, and denyed them the civility of common converſe or good uſage, al friendly entertainments, &c. and the ſame is called after in that place, ſeparating from them, averſation, and expreſt by they appeared enemies to them: and even the Jewiſh nidui or firſt degree of excommunication, being a remotion ad 4. paſſus, not ſuffering any man to come within four paces of him that was ſo cenſured, was an interdiction of familiar converſation or eating with him. And therfore perhaps ſome of that their diſcipline may be here imiin ſacris, 'tis not neceſſary he ſhould continue that other that extended to civil commerce, and therefore ſtill perhaps may not.
The beſt deciſion perhaps wil be, that this cenſure ordinarily belongs only to ſociety in Sacris; but yet ſometimes the ſtate of affairs ſo requiring, and when ſome other defect may be ſo ſupGovernours may proceed to the ſecond interdict, that no man ſhal talk familiarly, or entertain, or eat with them, that all men ſhall avoid their company, diſcountenance them, and not ſo much as ſay God ſpeed, allow them ordinary Chriſtian civility, by this means to beſiege, and ſtarve them up, and ſo, if poſſible, humble and reduce them. To which purpoſe it is obHugo Grotius
communes conventus non ſunt, there are no conſtant common aſſemblies of the Chriſtians in it, or wherupon the ſame occaſion there is no ſettled Government in the hands of a Biſhop and aſſiſtent Presbyters, or where the Church is torn aſunder by Schiſmes, (as in Corinth, when this firſt Epiſtle was written, chap. 11.18. whence it folv. 31. That judgments or cenſures were neglected, and upon that neglect, diſeaſes and deaths among them, (I would, I could not ſay among us alſo) whereas at the writing of the ſecond ECor. 2.6.) there in ſtead of excluſion from communion in ſacris, that other interdict of private commerce, or avoyding of priApoſtle; To this you may apply, Rom. 16.17. where the Apoſtle beſeeches them, to mark and avoid ſuch as cauſe diviſions and offences among them, and ſo 2 Theſſal. 3.14. juſt now mentioned, if any man obey not our word by this Epiſtle, note that man, and have no company with him, &c. And if in this reſpect, Mat. 18.17. may be extended to this ſenſe alſo, 'twill no way contradict or prejudice our preſent pretenſions, it being very reaſonable for private Chriſtians to conſtrain themſelves toward thoſe who have expreſt ſuch a contradiction to all fraternal methods of charity, and by outcontumacie and obduration, eſpecially when an Apoſtle at a diſtance ſhal paſs that judgcenſures, the law of the heathen Charondas being not unreaſonable in this caſeThat no man converſe with a wicked man or woman, or bring a reproach on himſelf, as if he were like him.
Another phraſe to expreſſe this cenſure is Tit. 3.10. After a firſt and ſecond admonition, avoid him; which that it belongs to the method directed to by Chriſt, Mat. 18.15, 16, 17. 'tis clear at the firſt ſight: but ſeeing there be three admonitions before cenſure, Mat. 18. the firſt of the injured perſon alone, the ſecond of the two or three, the third of the Church the difficulty will be, which 2. of thoſe 3. are the firſt & ſecond here? my opinion of it, with ſubmiſſion, is, that the firſt & ſecond here are the very ſame with the firſt & ſecond in S. Mat. 1. that of one alone, and then of that one, with one or two more with him. And if it be objected, that then the excommunication muſt not follow immediatly upon that ſecond, I anſwer that thoſe words, being ſpoken to Titus Biſh. of Creet by S. Paul, telling him what he ſhould do, muſt needs make a difference froa private man; It appeared probable before that the admonition of the Church ſignified that of the rulers of the Church & therfore when they have admoniſhed, there is no place for appeal to the Church, nor conſequently for that third admonition,
Church it ſelf, a publique, no private perſon) after a firſt and ſecond admonition (and the ſecond with one or two, perhaps with ſome or all of the College of Presbyters joyned with him) comes to be deſpiſed, the cenſure without any third admonition interpoſing. Which will appear to be the practice, if you look 2 Cor. 13.2. where immeſecond admonition, in the v. 11. by [in the mouth of two or three, &c.] he tels the ofI will not ſpare, i. e. I will proceed to cenſure: and ver. 10. he tels them, that this admonition is;
or cutting off, (for ſo ſharpneſſe, ſignifies) which is there called taking away, in the end of the verſe; the very word which is ſo ordinary in the ancient Canons, tollatur, for the cenſure of excommunication.
And the reaſon is there rendred, becauſe you may know that ſuch an one, that holds out againſt thoſe admonitions of the Church or rulers thereof a perverſe wilful ſinner,
I conceive by that non-ſubmiſſion to the Churches admonitions, he withdraweth and divideth himſelf from that comm
and ſo inflicteth that puniſhment upon himſelf, which the cenſures of the Church are wont to do on malefactors, for that is Cor. 13.10. and cut
which he being an heretick doth voluntarily without the judges ſentence, his verv hereſie being a willing exciſion. So ſaith S. Jerome, whereas fornicators, &c. are turn'd out of the Church, the hereti
going of his own choice from the Church; which departing, propriae conſcientiae videtur eſſe damnatio, ſeems to be the cenſure of ones own conſcience: So in the Council of Laodicea, Can. 40. after an order that no Biſhop ſhal diſobey a citation, when he is called to a Co
'tis added if he contemn, he ſhal be conceived to acc
which is the next degree to ſelf-condemnation. So in the 22. Can. of the African Codex, (or in Juſtellus his Account, the 19.) the words are clear of a Biſhop that being accuſed before a Council appears not, he ſhall be judged to have pronounced ſentence of condemnation againſt himſelf, and ſo even in Philoſtratus. l. 7. c. 7. it is a ſaying of Apollonius,
So in the 12. Tables, Praeſenti litem addicito, i. e. that he that abſents himſelf, be alwayes caſt; and ſo the Franks have alwayes obſerved it, ut abſens cauſâ caderet, ni Sonnia nuntiaſſet, that the abſent ſhould be alwayes condemned, unleſſe he gave a juſt excuſe of his abſence. And the Regulae ab Abbate Floriacenſi conſtitutae adde, Qui non comparuerit, tanquam convictus judicabitur, he that appeareth not, ſhall be judged as convict, i. e. Marculſi formul. l. 1. c. 37. and Bignonius on them, to Stephan. Fornerius rerum quotid. l. 6. c. 21. and out of him, Juſtellus in the Notes on Cod. Eccleſiae univerſae, p. 38. But enough of this.
I ſhall take in no more places to examine for this point of the nature of this power, ſave only thoſe in the Goſpel (with which this diſcourſe began) which, as we have once gone over in relation to the firſt enquiry, ſo we ſhall now again in order to the ſecond.
Firſt, then, Mat. 16.19. I will give you the keys of the kingdome of heaven] where 'twil be no news to him that is vers'd in the New Teſtament, if I tell him that the kingdome of heaven, ſignifies the Church of Chriſt here below Militant, being not a diſparate body but a fellow-member of Chriſt, with the other triumphant in heaven. I could weary my Reader with places to this purpoſe, ready at every turn to juſtifie this interpretation, as when 'tis ſaid of St. John the Baptiſt, Matt. 11.11. that though from the beginning there had not riſen a greater then he, (a more then ProBehold the Lamb of God) yet
the age to come, as the Septuagint, Eſ. 9.6. cal it, & ſo Heb. 2.5 the world to come, and perhaps Heb. 6.5. the powers of the age to come, i. e. of Chriſtianity, & Mark. 11.10. may I conceive, be rendred abſolutly thus, Bleſſed in the name of ehe Lord of our father David, be the comming kingdome; or Bleſſed in the name of the Lord be the comming kingdome of our father David; this Church or kingdome of Chriſt here on earth, not hereafter in heaven) the leaſt believer, at leaſt teacher of the Goſpel here (not Saint there) is greater then he. So Mat. 8.11. upon the Centurions comming to Chriſt, and expreſſing ſo great meaſure of faith, that he profeſſes not to have found the like in any Jew, he adds that Many ſhall come from the Eaſt and Weſt, all parts of the heathen world, and ſit down with Abraham, Iſaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven, i. e. as that Centurion did, believe in Chriſt (and become one Church with the Jews, of whom Abraham the father of the faithful was the firſt) and the children of the kingdome (they that were till then the only Church, to wit, the rebellious unbelieſhould be caſt out. So clearly Ch. 13.24. kingdome of heaven, the Church here below, not the kingdome above, is likened, &c. For ſure there are no enemies to ſow, nor tares to be ſown in heaven, which in this kingver. 15. (as Rev. 12.7. the war that is mentioned in heaven may be an argument that heaven in that place ſignifies the Church here below, which onely being Miliwar in it) and ſo in the other Parables in that Chapter. I have named enough for an hint to any to obſerve many more in this Goſpel, Chap. 18.1, 3, 4. chap. 19.24, 25. chap. 20.1. chap. 21.43. and (which is a little nearer to the phraſe in this place) chap. 23.13. the Phariſees ſhutting up the kingdome of heaven before men, i. e. keeping men from entring the Church, from becomming Chriſtians, and the like alſo in the other Goſpels. If this notion of the kingdome of heaven do yet ſeem alien, or forced, or leſſe proper for this place, then you may but pleaſe to obſerve, that a key refers to a lock, a lock to a door, or entrance to any place, and then the Church being ſupkeys of heaven it ſelf muſt be the keys of the Church below, as of the door that leads thither, and then that will return to the ſame iſſue ſtill.
Peter, and in him the reſt of the Apoſtles and ſucceſſor-governors of the Church had the keyes of the Church given them, i. e. clearly a power of ſhutting out, or receiving in to the viſible Militant Church, of removing the contumacious by cenſure of Excommunication, and receiving in the humble penitents by abſolution, and ſo of binding and looſing, (as it follows) Mark. 2.10. forgive ſins on earth, which (it appears by the mentioning of the keyes as the foundation of this power) ſignifies receiving men into the Church, diſexcommunicating, and therefore the binding is there peculiarly the cenſure of Excommunication, and nothing elſe;
From whence by the way may be underſtood the meaning of that place, Mat. 12.32. it ſhall not be forgiven him, (either in this world, i. e. in the Church from the Eccleſiaſtick cenſure, nor at the day of judgement, i. e. in the world to come, the phraſe ſeeming to me to refer to that rule among the Jews mention'd before out of
and then how ridiculous are they that ground a Purgatory on this place?
We ſhall not need to make any diſtinct ſurvey of the ſecond place, chap. 18.18. becauſe (as to the matter of this power, our preſent enquiry) it is verbatim (only the number and ſome little unimportant circumſtances changed) the ſame with this former place, binding and looſing in the earthly part of the Kingdome of Heaven, the Church below. One thing only it will not be amiſſe again to add as an appenabſolution is (in both) an attendant of the binding precedent, as indeed looſing generally preſuppoſes a band, and therefore Act. 2.24. where we read, looſed the pains of death) 'tis ſufficiently clear, and confeſt that
a band, ſometimes pang of trabands of death, in rehe could not be holden, &c. which intiabſolution to be in univerſum, or abſolutely neceſſary onely to thoſe that have been bound, and ſo only after excommunication, the abſolution proportion'd to the precedaneous cenſure, and that the onely thing that lyes upon any, neceſſitate praecepti here, or medii in any other reſpect, all other abſolution without this prebinding cenſure, being (though it may be allowed very uſeful & profitable for the comfort and ſatisfaction of the penicommanded, preſcribed the Prieſt to give, nor the penitent to receive (at leaſt by either of theſe two places.)
As for the third place, Joh. 20.26. (which by ſome is thought to belong to ſomewhat elſe, rather then thoſe cenſures of the Church, 1. Becauſe the phraſes are other, remitting and retaining, in ſtead of binding and looſing. 2. Becauſe the remit] is before retain.] And 3. becauſe this is deliver'd to all the Apoſtles together, whereas the two other were ſpoken, one perſonally to Peter, the other of the Church) I in humility conceive, that as before we ſhewed that this place in S. John belonged to the ſame perſons to which the other two belonged, to wit, the Apoſtles and their ſucceeding rulers of the Church, ſo it is perfectly parallel to them alſo in reſpect of the matter of the Commiſſion; and my reato remit, is al one with to looſe, and to retain, with to bind. And therefore Theophylact uſes together power of remitting and binding, confounding the two places in S. John and S. Mat. together, and rendring to retain, by to bind; and to looſe, by to remit, in Mat. 16.19. and ſo promiſcuouſly in other Writers. If there be the leaſt difference it is onely this, that to bind, and to bind, and alſo to keep bound; in which reſpect John, becauſe the order is inverted, and retaining,
remitting, and ſo the word which ſignifies alſo [to keep bound] or to not-remit, is more perfectly & critically agreeable, then to bind would have been; and yet when binding is mentioned firſt, remit, and looſe; eſpecially as applyed to ſin; both ſignifie forgiving of it; the firſt as ſin is taken under the notion either of a debt, or a thraldom, (for N. Teſt. applyed to both, to the one in the Lords Prayer, to the other Luk. 4.18. and both directly oppoſed to band; ſo in the Septuagints Tranſlation of the Old Teſtament, Gen. 4.12. (My ſin is greater then can be forgiven) or more clearExod. 32.21. If thou wilt, (or, O that thou wouldſt) forgive them that ſin; and in diremit) taken for forgive, and ſo in like manner to looſe, Job 42.9. God accepted the perſon of Job praying for them) he forgave them that ſin by Job, i. e. by his mediation. There
So alſo for bind, and to hold or retain, the ſame Hebrew word Jer. 33.1. and Dan. 10.8. & 11.6. and ſo Act. 2.24. [looſing of bands, and ſo muſt ſignifie keeping bound, (and in almoſt all other places it ſignifies to hold faſt, or take hold of, Mat. 18.28.21.46.26.4, &c. and is ſometimes joyned with holding faſt is precedaneous, and preparative to binding, Mat. 14.3. laying hold on him, bound him, and Apoc. 20.2. held and bound) and ſo retain, is taken for to bind alſo, (or if there be any differbinding, rather then more, and ſo will not conclude any thing which the former places were not able to conclude.) And ſo you may obſerve in the Fathers, viz. S. Baſil, ſpeaking of the freedome of Chriſtians in their bands, he ſaith they are bound, but not capable of binding; and many the like.
ch cauſed this inverſion, and conſequently no more argument will be deducible from this change of order, then from the change of words would be juſt to deduce: If the change of the words would argue ought, then I confeſs the inverting of the order, cauſed by that, would per modu ̄ accumulatiònis do ſo too; but that being once cleared to import no new thing, this which is onely attendant on that, ca
Thirdly, becauſe the third ground of ſcruple is as unconPeters perſon, (as 'tis ordinary for Donations made to Communities to be delivered to one of that number for the uſe of all) as is acknowledg'd by all but thoſe, whoſe pretended intereſt in S. Peter hath bribed them to inflame his, and leſſen the other Diſciples prerogative, aſmuch as they can. And the ſecond in plain words with a preVerily I ſay to you, i. e. to the Diſciples with whom the diſcourſe had continued by way of mutual colloGreek Fathers, particularly Theophylact on Mat. 13. where he affirms that promiſe of the power of binding and looſing to be fulfilled in thoſe words of Chriſt in S. John, Whoſe ſins you do remit, &c. the place was formerly ſet down at large, and need not be repeated; and if you examine the word N.T. you will have no temptation to doubt it.
Having now declared out of the Scripture the foundation & progreſſe of this power, theſe cenſures, and occaſionally interancient Church, and draw down the hiſtory of this practice through the firſt & purer times: But that hath been ſo faithfully performed by many others,5. c. 7. & 9.
Spalatenſis, that it would be a great inſolence to attempt to do it
Magazin for all farther explication of it) that there were ſome nice differences obſerved in this matter between the binding which was a cenſure, and the other which was onely a puniſhment, the one conceived to bind in heaven, the other not. 2. Betwixt the binding of the refractory impenitent, and the humble confitent penitent: the firſt for the cure and removing the ſcandal of ſome notorious crime; the ſecond on his voluntary conpenance, that ſo by being looſed again, he might be the more ſure of that pardon in heaven, which is promiſed to thoſe which are abſolved on earth, & ſo propter majorem cautelam, to ſatisfie the trembling conſcience, and aſſure it that God hath forgiven him.
Theſe are excellent profitable ſubjects, in which I deſire the Reader will ſatisfie himſelf out of thoſe judicious Collections of that very learned unhappy man. And if it be now demanded of me, whether private abſolution be not contained under the importdiſtinction hath in effect anſwered this queſtion, and defined, that in caſe of private binding it doth come under it, and that that, though in ſome ſenſe it be left ad libitum, or voluntary to the penitents will or choice, is yet neceſſary to every one whoſe conſcience either is not able to perform & go through the work of inward repentMiniſters aſſiſtance called in.
To which purpoſe I ſhall deſire that that may be conſidered which is delivered by our Church in the ſecond Exhortation beCommunion, in theſe words: Becauſe it is requiſite that no man ſhould come to the holy Communion but with a full truſt in Gods mercy, and with a quiet conſcience; therefore if there be any among you, which by the means aforeſaid (which were to examine their lives by the rule of Gods commandments, and wherein they ſhall perceive themſelves to have offended, either by will, word, or deed, there to bewaile their own ſinful lives, and confeſſe themſelves to Almighty God with full purpoſe of amendment; and if their offences be alſo againſt their neighbours, then to reconcile themſelves to thoſe, with readineſſe to make reſtitution and ſatisfaction for wrong done, and to forgive others that have offended them) cannot quiet his own conſcience,
but requireth farther comfort or counſel, then let him come to me, (i. e. his lawful Paſtor) or ſome other diſcreet and learned Miniſter of Gods Word, and open his grief, that he may receive ſuch ghoſtly counſel, advice, and comfort, as his conſcience may be relieved, and that by the miniſtery of Gods Word he may receive comfort, and the benefit of abſolution, to the quieting of his conſcience, and avoiding all ſcruple and doubtfulneſſe. All which being an exhortation of the Church belonging to a particular caſe, [when a man by the uſe of all helps which are within his own reach, cannot attain to quiet of conſcience, or be ſatisfied that he is fit to receive the holy Communion;] as they do imply that thoſe foreſaid meanes may happily ſerve the turn, without opening his caſe to the Miniſter, and conſeabſolution; ſo are they a fervent exhortation to all, in caſe thoſe means prove not ſucceſsfull, to ſeek out, & make uſe of thoſe auxiliaries, which whoſoever in that caſe ſhall neglect, will be guilty of great unkindneſs to his own ſoul, and may well be thought to have betray'd it to great and needleſſe danger. And it is worthy our noting from hence, that receiving of comfort, & the benefit of abſolution are by our Church here conjoyned, to ſignifie this abſolution to be beneficial to him that once wanted comfort, as a meanes of confirming that comfort which the Miniſter had now given him. To which end certainly 'tis very proper & ſeaſonable: for when a diſcreet & learned Miniſter, having had the ſurvey of my ſoul, (the cognioffence firſt, & then of my repentance) ſhall from the word of God give me aſſurance, that (if I am what to him I appronounce me abſolved, as a true penitent, from all my ſins; This will, 1. ſeal me a right of Gods promiſe of forgiveneſſe in heaven, as it were ſolemnly and in the Court; and 2. extremely quiet me, and confirm to me that comfort, i. e. that comfortable opinion of my good eſtate, and hope of my future happineſs, which he had given me, when I ſee him who hath no reaſon to be partial to me, and whom I cannot ſuſpect of ignorance, or paſſion in this particular, (both which perhaps I may upon enquiry diſcern in my ſelf) and beſide, who is ſet over me by Chriſt to this purpoſe, pronounce ſo clear a ſentence of me, and that (as the precedent words are) by the miniſtery of Gods word, i. by applying peculiar parts of that
pronouncing my abſolution. And that this is the meaning of the abſolution there, it is evident by that which is the ſecond thing, which I thought worthy our obſerving from hence, viz. what is added in concluſion, as the ultimate end of that comfort and abſolution, the quieting of conſcience, and avoiding of all ſcruple and doubtfulneſſe; which whether they be diſtinct, ſo that the quieting of conſcience may be the completion of the comfort, and the avoidſcruple and doubtfulneſſe, the end intended in, and obabſolution, or whether both together indiſcretè belong to both together, the product will be ſtill the ſame, that in caſe a man be not able to ſatisfie his own ſcruples and doubts concernWord of God applied to his caſe to give comfort, and by pronouncing abſolution to him to ſeal that comfort, and perſwade him to a greater confirmation of mind, that that comfort is not groundleſſe, and ſo take away doubts and ſcruples concerning that matter which before moleſted him, and made him unfit for the Communion, which was the only occaſion of the exhortation.
Beſide this, it is alſo true, that in caſe of ſickneſſe S. Jame's
advice (if not command) is punctual, that the Presbyters of the Church be call'd for, and that they ſhall anoint the ſick (a ceremony uſed in thoſe dayes by Chriſt and his Apoſtles in the curing of diſeaſes, and caſting out devils, not ſo much as a viand toward our laſt great journey, as among the Romaniſts 'tis continued, but either as a ſign of our Spiritual cure, or as a means ſanctified by prayer to cure the ſick, to deliver from the diſeaſe in the beginning of the verſe) and if he be that have committed ſins, abſolution ſhall be given him; for ſo that phraſe will be moſt grammatically rendred, not [they ſhall be forgiven him] for then it would be God ſhall forgive him] for then it would be the Lord ſhall raiſe him, but imperſonally remittetur ei, he ſhall have abſolution. Of which abſolution 1. There is little queſtion, but that it is a very proper preparacuring of his diſeaſe which is oft ſent to awake ſome drowſie ſinner, and is not removed til it have done the work in ſome meaſure, Ecclus. 38.9, 10. & therefore the ordinary preface
Chriſts cures, is [Son thy ſins are forgiven thee] as 2. Mac. 3. when Heliodorus had been ſo ſcourged for his ſacrilegious enterprize, and the high Prieſt offered ſacrifice for his recovery, verſe 32. the Prieſt is ſaid to have made an attonement, and thereupon God granted him his life, verſe 33. and ſo Ecclus 2.11. before Gods deremitting of ſins, before releaſing from the preſſure; and ſecondly, that abſolution, as it is the Miniſters act peculiarly, and an act of benediction in him, contrary to the execration in the cherem, or anathema, may well be thought in common reaſon to have bePatient, as the curſes of Parents are generalcurſes
Orpheus, the curſes of Parents are ſhrewd furies that haunt a man where ever he goes on the earth, have an inauſpitious influence on all his earthly proſperities, devour and eat out his patrimony; and ſo alſo by the rule of contraries, the bleſſings of Parents, Eccl. 3.9. may availe toward the removing of temporal calamities, and ſo conſequently, the prayers and bleſſings, and abſolution of the Presbyter the ſpiritual father. Thirdly, there will be as little queſtion who ſhal be the Miniſter of it, when 'tis conſidered that there is no ſuppoſition or preſumption in that place of the prethe Presbyters of the Church, and as little will there be of the fitneſſe, and exceeding expedience, that the ſins of which he is ſo peculiarly to receive abſolution ſhould be confeſſed, and bewailed before him, from whom the abſolution is expected. One thing only the conPresbyterial abſolution may not be (by force of that place) ſo abſolutely neceſſary to all ſick perſons, but onely to the ſickneſſe to it) committed ſins, either as the word greater ſins, or as ſins contrary to our duty toMiniſter the Presbyter is, or as indulgently in ſin, and ſo as it is not reconcilable with a 1 Joh. 3.9.
regenerate eſtate, as long as it continues. For 'tis worth obſerving what follows in that place, James 5.16. Confeſſe
one brother, i. e. Chriſtian to another, the ſick to them in health,
Be ye all ſubject to one another, 1 Pet. 5.5. i. e. all that are inferiours, to all ſuperiours. Where, whether treſpaſſe peculiarly againſt our brethren, or whether (as 'tis reſolved by Grammarians) lapſes, or lighter ſins, it ſeems to be here ſet in a diſtance from (if not oppoſite to) the greater ſins, or thoſe againſt God; and then as the confeſſion of them to the Presbyter, Gods officer, will in any reacomfort on ſafe grounds, and the benefit of abſolution upon ſincere repentance; ſo in thoſe ſins of an inferiour rank confeſſion to the wronged brother, or to whatever fellow-Chriſtian, may poſſibly be ſufficient; and aſſuunuſeful or unneceſſary, if it be but for the obtaining of the brothers united prayers, to help to remove the ſickneſſe, if that be inflicted (as oft ſickneſſes are) as a puniſhment for any ſuch treſpaſſes. In which caſe as the promiſe is there given of recoto the ſick upon thoſe other mens prayers, and not otherwiſe, ſo there is little hope that God will accept thy private prayers for removing that puniſhment, till thou go and reconcile thy ſelfe unto thy brother, and deſire and obtain his prayers for thee, (as Job's for his friends) when thy injuring of him had cryed to haven, and fetch't down that infliction on thee.
Nay thirdly, there will be little matter of doubt, or controprivate, frequent, ſpiritual conference betwixt fellow-Chriſtians, but eſpecially (and in matters of high conPresbyter and thoſe of his charge, even in the time of health; and peculiarly, that part of it which is ſpent in the diſcuſſion of every mans ſpecial ſins & infirmities, & inclinations, may prove very uſeful and advantageous (in order to ſpiritual directions, reproof and comfort) to the making the Man of God perfect. And to tel truth, if the pride and ſelf-conceit of ſome, the wretchleſnes of others, the baſhfulnes of a third ſort, the nauſeating, and inſtant ſatiety of any good in a fourth, the follies of men, and artifices of Satan had not put this practice quite out of faſhion among us, there is no doubt, but more good might be done by Miniſters this way, then is now done by any other means ſeparated from the uſe of this, particularly then by that of publick preaching, (which yet need not be neglected the more when this is uſed) which hath now the fate to be cryed up, and
Quintilian ſaith (comparing publick and private teaching of youth) to fill narrow-mouth'd bottles, (and ſuch are the moſt of us) by taking them ſingle in the hand, and pouring in water into each, then by ſetting them altogether, and throwing never ſo many buckets of water on them.
I conceive, I have now diſtinctly ſet down the ful importance of this power of binding & looſing, and how it belongs peculiarly to the publick cenſures of the Church, the binding by way of excommunication, or depriving of the common benefits of Chriſtians, (together with that branch of corporal diſcipline, or inflictions on mens bodies, peculiar to the Apoſtles times and power) and the looſing, in reſtoring the excommunicate perſon upon repentance to the Aſſembly of the Saints. And by this perhaps may be received ſome ſatisfaction to that queſtion agitated ſometimes, Whether Abſolution in the Church be onely declarative, or moreover miniſterially authoritative? which queſtion wil not now have ſo much place, the matter being thus ſtated. For the Churches abſolution being not the actual eternal pardon of ſins in Heaven, (which is left to be Gods work, none but he juſtifyng ſinners, except by way of conſequent upon this promiſe of Gods) but peculiarly the freeEccleſiaſtical cenſures here below, & from that other farther obligation that aroſe from the Churches binding, there will be no matter of doubt, but as the Governour of the Church authoritatively by commiſſion from Chriſt, preacheth the Word, adminiſtreth Sacraments, and inflicts cenſures, ſo he may authoritatively too, abſolve on earth, free from puniſhments in the Church inflicted on ſinners, without any neceſſity of interpoſing or medling (ſave only indirectly, or as I ſaid by way of conſequence) with that which is due from God to them in another world; to which purpoſe 'tis ordinarily obſervable in the Canons of the Councels, that à pace Eccleſiae arceri, being driven from the peace of the Church,
61. Can. 47.
excommunicated, and pacem dari, is to be received into communion again. In other places we find both together, communio pacis, communion of peace, all noting that, which excommunication deprived them of, to be the peace or favour, or pardon of the Church peculiarly, and not Gods peace, or pardon, or favour directly, but either by ſupGod of that, or by way of conſequence accidentally, more ſurely faſtning him under Gods disfavour, if this wrought not on him the good deſired effect of reformation.
To all which, by way of Corollary I ſhall adde, that the bare
binding of the Church (abſtracted from our contempt of, and perſin, upon which he is bound, and from his refractarineſſe continued in, in deſpight of this cenſure, (which no doubt may make his caſe more highWord is the ſavour of death to them that beleeve not) but is rather a means tending, as it is deſigned, to the ſaving of him, as in the next Chapter ſhall appear.
On the other ſide looſing on earth, or the abſolution of the
Church ſhall not free any impenitent unreformed ſinner, in foro coeli, i. e. obtain pardon for any that is not contrite, (much leſſe turn attrition into contrition, as the Romaniſts, or a votum poenitentiae, a wiſhing we were penitent into penitence, as others dream) but will rather be a means of damning him the deeper, of betraying him to, and hardning him in an impenitent eſtate, who is abdiſcipline before he be reform'd; which therefore the Church in pure Charity to the man is bound not to do, but to continue him under the puniſhment till it produce the reformation.
FOr the third enquiry, the end or uſe to which this binding is deſigned, &c. there will not be ſo much occaſion to enlarge; 'tis ſpeedily ſtated by anſwering, that the whole end, aim, deſign in inflicting of publique Church-cenſures, may be reduced to theſe three heads; 1. reformation of the offender: 2. repairing, or making up the honour of the Church, which ſuffered by him: and 3. that others may be warned by the example of his puniſhment, and not corrupted by exſharper methods, which no other calmer means of admonitions will work on, to cut off that member that balſams will not cure, or keep from gangrening, according to that of the writer of the Anſwers Ad Orthodox:
For both thoſe diſtant wayes, 1. Of application of plaiſters; and 2. Of exciſion, are the ſame Phyſitians methods of preſerving the whole, and proportionably to them the miniſtration of the Word and Sacraments are the Churches firſt method, and when that fails to produce its effect, this other of cenſure is the ſeco-workers with Chriſt, to bring back ſons unto God, as they are to beget them in the preaching of the Word.
To which purpoſe you may ſee and obſerve what the Apoſtle conſtantly adds to his ſentences of binding, or excommunication, or delivering up to Satan, the deſtruction of the fleſh, that the ſpirit may be ſaved, &c. So of Hymenaeus and Alexander, 1 Tim. 1.20. I have delivered them up to Satan,
inſtructed, taught not to blaſpheme, or reſiſt contumaciouſly; whence the word taught) in a common notion, may percritically taken in a notion peculiar to this purpuniſhments amongſt the Jews. For of the four puniſhments put into Eſdra's hand by Artaxerxes, Eſd. 7.26. the ſecond (rendred by us baniſhment, but in Heb. eradication, i. e. ſaith Schindler, caſting out of his inheritance) is in the Septuagint diſcipline or puniſhment, but there peculiarly for diſtermination, and ſo the fitter to expreſſe this turning out of the Church, this Church-baniſhment, or diſtermination, So 2 Theſ. 3.14. Excommunication is again, that he may be aſhamed, that he may ſee himſelf alone, no company but the devil thought bad enough for him, and ſo be brought to ſenſe and ſhame of his own vileneſſe, which is the moſt neceſſary prereformation; and therefore to ſignifie it an act of mercy and charity, of all other the greateſt, (though under the ſhew of ſeverity and wrath) it follows in that place, v. 15 Count him not an enemy, but admoniſh him as a brother; and therefore Mat. 18.18. the doctrine of binding, &c. is uſed as a means of exemplifying that great Evangelical truth, verſ. 11. that Chriſt came ſave, reſcue, deliver, reduce that which was loſt, i. e. impenitent ſinners, or thoſe, that the ſoft miniſtery of the Word would do no good on.
For there being (among others) two principal meanes of continuing men in ſin. 1. In ſome an opinion; that Chriſtian profeſſion, or the bare being Chriſtians (however qualified, or decreditableneſſe of an unchriſtian impious life, ſo long as they may be allowed but the Chriſtian name (mens generall deſign being to get the praiſe of men, not of God.) 2. In others a miſtaking ſorrow or attrition, or any the moſt ſlight wiſh that they were penitent, for that repentance which Chriſt cals for, and accepts and crowns: It follows hence, that unleſſe men may be driven out of theſe falſeholds, they will never ſet themſelves aright in the way to that great work: and therefore proportionable to theſe two heads, are the two exerciſes of the power of the keyes deſigned; the firſt to turn the Chriſtian profeſſor, that will go on in ſin, quite out of all ſociety of Chriſtianity, not allowing him the priviledges of his Chriſtianity, the Word, the
Sacraments, &c. unleſſe he will walk worthy of ſo honourable a vocation, the ſecond to ſet him his task of repentance, to preſcribe him ſome peace with Heaven, to take any the moſt laborious courſe to approve himſelf to Chriſt. The former of theſe in the act of excommunication, the latter in impoſing the penance, upon which he ſhall be received again, & both together to bring ſinners to repentance.
When ſinners by obſtinacy provoke God, 'tis his manner to withdraw his grace, to deliver them up to themſelves, (a worſe kind of devil or Satan) that by this means they may ſee their former forlorne condition, their vileneſſe firſt, and then their danger; & ſo he uſes to bring the ſecure, proud ſinner to humility, to the uſe of prayer, & wreſtling with God, to caiſe him out of this ſad eſtate. And ſo the Church in like manner by Chriſts dicontumacious, delivers them up to plain barbarouſneſſe and heatheniſme, deals with them as God did with Nebuchad-nezzar, driving him from the Court into the Wilderneſſe, transforming him into the ſhape of a very beaſt; & all to this end, that his underſtanding might by that means return to him, the field teach him leſſons of piety, whom the palace could not. Agreeable to which is that of Pletho upon Zoroaſter,
And then as afflictions are one of Gods engines and ſtratagems to beſiege, enter, and take the ſoul, (when he flew them, they ſought him, ſaith the Pſalmiſt) So among the Apoſtles were thoſe corporal inflictions, diſeaſes, &c. ſuperadded on purpoſe to make the impreſſion more violent, and to work more effectually on their hearts.
The effectualneſſe of which we may diſcern in one of the depenitents in the ancient Church, namely weeping and howling in the Church-porch, not perunworthineſſe, ſeeing themthoſe dogs, and evil workers that are without.
The ſecond end which I named, was the repairing the honour and dignity of the Church, which conſiſting in the purity of the lives of Chriſtian profeſſors, is neceſſarily loſt both in the opiGod, and men (eſpecially thoſe which are without) by the impieties and unchriſtian actions of any which are called by Chriſts Name, which is therefore by the Apoſtle ſaid to be blaſphemed or evil ſpoken of, when Chriſtians fall into any notorireputation of the Church, and even of the Chriſtian Religion, and in a kinde, of Chriſt himſelf, but by expreſſing the wrath and diſpleaſure of the Church againſt thoſe who walk thinordinately, and ſo proclaiming unto all, that Chriſtianity is not a Doctrine (as Zozimus, and Celſus, and Julian miſtook it) of ſecurity or impurity, though ſome ungracious perſons walk contrary to thoſe preſcriptions: This is the only tabula poſt naufragium, plank or means of relief, when the ſame and good name of the Church is thus ſhip-wrackt, and ſo fit to be deſigned in the ſecond place.
A third gain and profit deſigned by theſe cenſures is the warning and admoniſhing of others; not leſt they ſhould be polluted by preſence among the profane, as they that toucht the unclean thing were polluted under the Law, (any farther then by the ſpreading, leprous quality of their example) which is the comon errour of the proud faſtidious Phariſees of all ages, and is clearly confuted by St. Paul, 1 Cor. 5.10. where the heathen fornicators, which ſure would be able to pollute by ſociety, as much as Chriſtian ſinners) and by Clemens or that ancient Author under his name, Conſtit. Ap. l. 2. c. 14. who hath a notable place to fortifie againſt this miſtake, ſpeaking of thoſe which (unmercifully affirm that men ought not to pollute themſelves by accompanying with ſinners, nor converſe with them, (
But the deſign is to ſet a brand upon ſuch ſins, which otherimitable, and inſenſibly grow into faſhion, and ſo infect, and pollute, were not men thus told of their uglineſſe, ſhew'd their deformity, and fore-warn'd of their danger, which is ſure another act of mercy to all eaſie, ſeducible ſpectators, to the Church it ſelfe, and to him whoſe ſcandalous ſins are by this means hindred from being damners of other men.
And as the cenſures themſelves, ſo the inexorableneſſe, or at leaſt, difficulty of ſome Ages, (of Canons, of Councils, and practice of Churches) in granting of abſolution to penitents, that alſo hath been deſigned out of pure charity to help multiply their fruits of repentance, to ſet a value on Gods Ordinances, to quicken their zeal, to demonſtrate their ſincerity both to others, and to their own ſouls, each of which might perhaps be miſſing, if abſolution were over-eaſily obtainable.
All which the more it is weighed, (how this inſtitution of Chriſts, (beſides that, as 'tis ſo, it ought not to be neglected) is an act of ſpecial Chriſtian charity in not ſuffering ſin upon thy neighbour, but in any wiſe rebuking him, Lev. 19.17.) the more reGath and Askalon, that for ſome years the arts of ſome uncharitable men have ſo prevailed, that all exerciſe of this inſtitution of Chriſt hath been caſt and kept out of this Church of ours; the firſt, I think, that is recorded ſince Chriſts time to have continued any conſiderable ſpace without liberty of uſing that power of the keyes in excommunication, left unto the Church by Chriſt. The Lord be merciful to us in this matter.
As for them who either look upon this in others (or uſe it themſelves) as a matter of ſecular advantage, or accruement eipower or gain to the rulers of the Church, and ſo as a carnal deſign or engine diſguiſed in the ſhape of a ſpiritual inſtitucalumnies to help rend it out of the hands of the Church, or being themodium & cenſure of other men (whoſe ſhortnes of diſcourſe cannot ſeparate the order from the perſon, or the abuſe from the inſtitution) I ſhall ſuppoſe they will change their minds, & their practices, when I ſhal have given them one advertiſment, which I may hope to do more effectually, not onely by putting them in mind of S. Chryſoſtoms judgment, who in this very matter hathat the ſacerdotal dignity in pardoning and retaining of ſins is very great, expreſſes that preſently by this only way of probation, that a Prieſt if he live never ſo well himſelf, if he be not accurately careful of other mens lives, he bears thoſe wicked men (which he reform'd not) company to hell; and often when he is not betrayed by his own, he periſhes by others mens ſins, if he have not done all things rightly, which may tend to their recovery, and in that, founds all the reſpect and obedience that St. Paul requires to be paid to the Scripture, which by miſtake and raſh judgement, is wont to be produced againſt all exerciſe of power in Church-men, but being rightly weighed, as it doth not take away the power which we onely plead for, that of exerciſing charity, of diſciplining, reforming, i. e. doing the greateſt good to thoſe that are placed under us ſo will it teach every man (to whom that power is entruſted to learn nothing but meekneſſe and diligence, and all kinde of Chriſtian temper from the condition and peculiarity of this honour, and authority of his.
The place is that known Text Mat. 20. I ſhal deduce it from the beginning of the ſenſe, & lay it plain before you. V. 21. The mother of Zebedees children (having heard by her ſons of the proDiſciples by Chriſt, Mat. 19.28. that they ſhould have the dignity of ſo many Jews, was a dignity next unto the Regal) petitions Chriſt in the bePeter; and her petition was this; That (ſeeing in the equality of
Jewiſh pattern, where the Judah and Joſeph) muſt be ſome kinde of inequality, at leaſt a precedence of ſome before others) her Sons that he had ſhewed ſuch a ſpeciall kindneſſe to, might have that favour by Jeſus repreſſes her demand by telling her, ſhe is miſtaken in the kinde of dignity, that ſhould be inſtated upon his diſciples, 'twas not ſuch a one as in any worldly redeſirable, but as a place of great burthen, ſo ſubject to great perſecutions, and even death it ſelf, of which Hiſtories teſtifie they did. If this would not ſatisfie her, then let her know her importunity ſhould gain nothing; for God the Father had deall power were conferred upon the Son by the Father, yet there was ſmal hope that the Son ſhould thwart God
indignation of the Diſciples (not now to the ambitious requeſt of the mother, or brethren) he accomambition of thoſe brethren, for if they had had their deſires, they had been but ſmal gainers by ipreeminence ſignified (or brought along with it) no great ſecular fePrinces, that being under them, and over others, were ſerved and benefited by their ſubjects, which is meant by v. 28. uſed their power in order to their own profits and pleaſures, and pride, lords and maſters over ſo many ſervants, like thoſe Nehem. 5.15. where the following word burthen, and pains, and humility, and doing of ſervice, (as S. Mark reads it more clearly, not chap. 10.43. ſhall be your Miniſter) and he that will have that preChriſt himſelf, whoſe kingdome in this world was of this nature, not adminiſtred in that way as might bring in ſplendour or profit to himſelf, but in acts of charity, miniſtring of all kinds of grace, enduring, and ſerving, and dying for his people, and not requiring that ſervice, thoſe offices from them, as o
This excludes not Diſciples of Chriſt from power, (for he regulates them by his own example, and no farther, and he, we know, was not onely as God, King of kings and Lord of lords, but as all power given unto him in heaven and in earth, and in this his ſtate of condeſcenſion here, he was a Maſter over his Diſciples; and when he was called Good maſter, although he asked, why he called him good? yet the title of Maſter he diſclaims not, nay tels them clearly that they did well, who called him Maſter, and Lord, Joh. 13.13.) but ſhews the lot that was like to befal them, the ſame it did him, whoſe greatnes was exhumility, and charity, and patience, and offices of ſervitude; and ſo the greater any of them ſhould be, the greater portion of theſe ſhould be expected from them, as the appendage of their greatneſſe; which conſideration fully makes up the ambition of the two brethren, by diſenvy, but pity rather.
As for the uſe of to lord it,
to play the lord, and the importance of that, diſcerned by the word v. 28. or if you wil by comparing it with 1 Pet. 5. v. 3. where 'tis explained by that which prever. 2. by feeding, or governing, (for ſo by force or violence,
make gain, filthy, unlawful gain, of the flock, which is all one with Goſpel, heathen Kings did over their people) and contrary to that, is ruling them by perſwaſion, willing and ready to do, what
no ſtriker, no covetous perſon, Titus 1.17. and to the ſame purpoſe, 1 Tim. 3.3, 4, 5. and ſo ſure 2 Cor. 1.24. imperious beover mens faith, very contrary to meek, gentle perſwaſion, the method that S. Paul and all follow
All which I ſuppoſe not impertinent (as to juſtifie the authority ſo) to limit and regulate the uſe of that, and determine it to that one Chriſtian ſpiritual end, the reforming and winning, and ſaving of ſoules; a thing of all other, the moſt conoppreſſing or violating, invading or tyrannizing over them, in brief (to them which have need of it) the onely ſeaſonable Mercy and Charity in the World, thus in any wiſe to reprove, and not hate or ſuffer ſin upon my brother.
For the other part of the 2. enquiry, who are the objects of theſe cenſures, ſubjected to the power of the keyes by Chriſt, I anſwer, 1. Negatively, that the ſupream Magiſtrate in every Kingdome is exempted from it, and not onely à poſteriori, becauſe the offeſhame and contumely (which is the work of excommunication) would be a certain means to expoſe him to the contempt of his ſubjects, and ſo be in danger to diſſolve & ſhake the peace and ſetled Government of a Kingdom, (which I ſupRomiſh Heildebrandine or Gregorian Doctrine, that the Subjects of an excommunicate Prince were diſcharged from their allegiance, which was but a ſmal encreaſ of the former doctrin (if that were ſuppoſed true) of Chriſts placing a power in the hands of the Church to excommunicate Princes; for from the conceſſion of that, the other would generally follow of its own accord, and need no new doctrin to help it forward, the univerſal diſtemper of mens paſſions being a ſufficient encouragement to the many, to caſt off allegiance to thoſe perſons wch they conceive themſelves taught by Chriſt, and ſo by Chriſtianity appointed to deſpiſe;) but alſo à
priori, becauſe Chriſt found the world diſpoſed by his Father, in a regular ſubjection of all men to the powers placed over them (and thoſe higher powers at the time of Chriſts birth, as far as ſtories will help us to diſcern, were all Regal or Monarchical through the whole world) and was ſo far from changing that courſe by any new law of his, that he laboured by all means poſſible, to ſettle and confirm it on that baſis, and not ſo much as to accept, when it was offered him, the exerciſe of any Sec
or civil power, but to ſubmit himſelf, and conſequently all his, and ſo all that can plead or pretend any title from him, (ſupream power in any Kingdom. For the practice & opinion of the Church to this matter, through all times, infiDavid Blondel in this book, de formulâ Regnante Chriſto,
P. 187, 188, 189, &c.
Athanaſius, ad Epiſt
I ſhall adde no more to the nega
I anſwer,
In the ſecond place, poſitively, That the objects of this
Church-charity or Church-cenſures are, Every open, notorious offencomplaint of others, by notoriety of the action, or by his own confeſſion) that lives, and indulges himſelf in any grievous crime, any wilfull ſin; Every ſuch I ſay is to be bound by the Church, when after admonition firſt leſſe, then more publique, he continues refractory, unreformed, and not till then. The more ſhame for the eaſie denouncers of that cenſure, that either inflict it on every trivial commiſſion, without conſideration whether repented of or no; or that uſe this ſoveraign recipe, this generoſ
(that, ſay artiſts, muſt not be caſt away, either on the wanton or the deſperate patient, but onely on thoſe whom we ſee to
want it, and hope it may doe ſome good on) this ſtrong phyſick, this laſt and moſt generous medicament ſo Hence AviEp. 61. to Conſtantius the Biſhop, Illud monere praeſumo ne propter leves cauſas, & non ad Deum, ſed ſaeculum pertinentes, ne Laici quidem, non dicam Clerici, ſanctâ communione priventur, quia neſcit cujus dignitatis ſit ipſa communio, qui non eam omni animoſitate ſepoſitâ & cum magno dolore ſuſpendit, & cum maximâ festinatione reſtituit. vid. Can. 2. Concil. Aurel. 5. & Leon. magn. Ep. 89. taxing Hilary for that fault.
unadviſedly and uncharitably, ſo for any other end, rather then reforming of pro
Then for looſing, who is capable of that, is agreed in general, the greateſt ſinners, upon approbation of their repentance: As for Novatus who denyed abſolution to the Lapſi, he himſelf was cenſur'd and puniſhed for that ſeverity, as you may ſee in the 8. Can. of the Nic. Council, on which ſaith Zonaras
was caſt out and anathematiz'd in a council at Rome, Cornelius being Pope, and Decius Emperour,
But then, what degree of approbation will ſerve turn, what time of humiliation, what fruits and evidences of repentance may be thought ſufficient to give capacity of this looſing; the judgement of Councils and Churches have much varied in that particular, the 820.
Roman being anciently milder then any olatter ages have been more favourable to the guiltieſt ſons of the Church, then the moſt mercifull of the firſt ages had learned to be, even thoſe very Councils that condemn'd the ſeverity of Novatus and the Cathari, are able to teſtifie; I will give you but an hint or two out of the Canons of the Council of Nice, (before quoted againſt Novatus) Can. 11. the Council ſpeaking of them that fell in the time of Licinius his Tyranny,
the cenſure is upon true and unfained repentance,
(i. e. ſaith Zonaras,
Then
i. e. ſaith Zonaras,
for the ſpace of ſeven years more they have leave to be admitted within the Church, but to be behind a pillar, near the doore, and go out with the Catechumeni. Ten years already, you ſee, and yet farther, Two years ſhall they joyn in prayer with the people, but without the oblation: i. e. ſaith Zonaras, they ſhall not yet be vouchſafed the participation of the holy things, till theſe two years be over. This approbation of their repentance coſt them, it ſeems, no leſſe then 12. years.
But then the ſame Council ſpeaking of others, that having made ſome profeſſion of Chriſtian valour, like dogs returned to their vomit again, Can 12. reſolves, Af
; the ſeven years it ſeems are improved into ten, and tis probable the two years of communicating
Oneremitting of this
ſeverity, if he ſaw them (by humility and tears, and patience, and almſdee
And ſo Alcimus to Victorius the Biſhop, Authoritatis veſtrae eſt, errantium compunctione perſpectâ ſeveritatis ordinem temporare; 'Tis the part of your authority, when you perceive the compunction of thoſe that have ſinned, to temper the order of ſeverity, i. e. to receive him earlier into the Church, Epiſt. 16.
That which might be added in this point out of the ancient
Canons, would be endleſſe to relate, he that would ſee a particudegrees of theſe penitents, may have it very clearly ſet down in Zozomens Hiſtory, l. 7. c. 17. and I ſhall not ſo much as enquire what grounds our latter ages have had to remit ſo much of the ancient diſcipline, till at length it be crumbled and moultred away into a nothing, or a meer formality: what is amiſſe in it, I beſeech God may be reform'd.
I ſhall only add to this Chapter, that there have beeen in the practice of the Church, (I ſay not grounded in thoſe Texts of the Goſpel) two ſorts of binding; One temporary or penitential
penitent, and deſires the Abſolution of the Church, at leaſt when there is hope of repentance, in which caſe the cuſtome hath been to impoſe for ſome ſet time the works as are agreeable to that repentance, and proportioned to the former ſin, & not to abſolve til what is impoſed be performed. This the Nicene Fathers exfor whoſe penance the time is defined, and the ſeaſon ſet, Zonaras by (the ſpace determined for the penance of thoſe that had faln: And Alcimus by propoſitis obſervationibus interim ab Eccleſiâ ſequeſtrari, to be appointed ſome obſervances, and in the mean time to be ſequeſtred from the Church: & notae excommunicationis indictio donec publicâ poenitentiae profeſſione deſueſcant, ſetting a mark (anſwerable to the Paul) of excommunication upon him, till by publique profeſſion of repentance he diſuſe his former courſe, a kinde of Niddui, or tempo& ſine praefinito tempore, without any certain definition of time. When men are refractory, and give no hope of amendment, and that is a kind of Schammatha, Alcimus's irrevocable anathema, the binding over for ever, perennis excommunicatio, Turon. Concil. 2. c. 20. Pariſ. Conc. 3. can. 5. or uſque ad reformationem, for ever if they reform not. The forexcluſion, or abſciſſion from the Church, (but ſomtimes on the other ſide a comfrequent the prayers of the Church, or the Sacrament, every Lords day for ſuch a ſpace, hath been the penance or diſcipline) nor conſequently is it a binding that man ſo, that his ſin is not yet pardoned on earth, but tis deſigned for other uſes, for ſatisfaction to the Churches edification, &c. But they of the ſeband, and cut off from the comChurch and by no means admitted to the ſervices of it.
THere is but one enquiry now behind, i. e. what is the real
effect of binding and looſing, or what conjunction it hath with binding and looſing in heaven. Which though it be the weightieſt conſideration of all the four, yet ſhall I have occaſicenſure of the Church is a venerable thing, not only caſting a Chriſtian out of the Church, wherein he is appointed to ſeek ſalvation, and of which as long as he is thought unworthy, he is uncapable of heaven; but withall a ſuperaddition to the band in heaven, by which that ſin is made indiſſoluble before God, tilabſolved on earth, or that abſolution duly ſought from the Church; Chriſt having affirmed of him, that in this caſe his ſins ſhall not be pardoned there; as on the other ſide, that being by repentance reheaven ſhall return again to be his porpardon by the promiſe of Chriſt become due to him.
The plain reaſon of it is, The denunciation is irreverſible, and indiſpenſably univerſal, [Except you repent you ſhall all periſh] and the promiſe as infallible and immutable [He that confeſſeth and forſaketh, ſhall have mercy.] Now the binding, if it be as it ſhould be (clave non errante) ſuppoſeth the man impenitent and refractory, and ſo to continue till he uſe means to return to the peace of the Church again; and then without controverſie, whobound on earth, (caſt out of the Church for an impenitent and refractorie, and continuing ſo) is bound in heaven, caſt out from all title to that by God alſo. To which purpoſe is that known ancient paſſage in Tertullians Apol. ſpeaking of theſe cenſures. Judicatur cum magno pondere ut apud certos de Dei conſpectu. Summumque futuri judicii praejudicium eſt, ſi quis ita deliquerit, ut à communicatione orationis & conventus, & omnis ſancti commercii relegetur. c. 39. The judgements of the Church are exerciſed with great weight, as being among them that are certainly reſolved that they are in the ſight of God. And it is but a preparative pronouncing or paſſing of the future judgement, if any man offend ſo highly, that he be baniſh't from communication or partaking of prayer, of
Church-meetings, and all holy commerce.
But on the other ſide, he that upon his repentance, and approbation of that to be ſincere, is (clave non errante, ſtill) let into the Church again, is ipſo facto ſuppoſed to have right, (and by his abſolution that right ſealed to him viſibly, and Chriſts promiſe parheaven.
Now if it be demanded, Whether a true repentant ſinner once bound by the Church be not preſently looſed in heaven, i. e. pardoned and forgiven at the firſt minute of his repentance, without (or before he receive) abſolution from the Church? I anſwer, that in caſe of publique or ſcandalous crimes, the reformation muſt be publique and notorious alſo. And to that purpoſe confeſſion and ſatisfaction before the congregation, and him that bound, i. e. the Governour of the Church (to repair the injury done to the former by the ill example, and to teſtifie the ſincerity of the repentance to the latter) is neceſſarily requir'd to the approving of this repentance even to God, without which non remittetur peccatum, there is no more poſſibility of looſing in Heaven, then hope of abſolution on earth. But on the ſincere performance of this, as there is no doubt but God will have mercy, will looſe in Heaven, will juſtifie and pardon that (ſuch a) penitent ſinner; ſo is the Church-ruler on earth bound to looſe him here below, to reſtore him to the Church alſo, as ſoon as by his ſubmiſſion to his penance he approves himſelfe to him to be ſuch; and though 'tis poſſible he may be ſincerely penitent in Gods ſight, before he appear ſo to the Church, yet is he obliged to ſeek thus to approve himſelf to the Church, if his caſe have come under her cognizance, or in caſe he deſire to have any of that aſſurance which is to be had from the Church, or by title to the promiſe in thoſe texts.
And yet this exerciſe of the keyes is not to be conceived ſo abſolutely neceſſary, that none can be damned without that ſeal of damnation, or binding, or non-forgiveneſſe, nor again that none can be ſaved, or forgiven without the ſeal of remiſſion; For ſure the neglect of the Biſhop in the firſt caſe, his not-performing his office of exciſion, is no way able to reſcue the impenitent from the eternal guilt and puniſhment of his ſins, but rather a means to leave him remedileſſe unto it (his binding being indeed ſuch a
remedy, if it be made uſe of) and the bare want of the remiſſion or abſolution, ſo it be joyned with readineſs to perform all that is preparative to it, and an hearty deſire to be partaker of it, is in the merciful, gracious court of Gods audience ſure to be acChriſt (whatſoever you ſhall bind, &c.) though they be univerſal, binding all in Heaven that are bound on earth, yet are they not excluſive, ſo as none ſhall be bound in Heaven, but ſuch as are bound on Earth, or in the Church below. Nor on the other ſide, [whatſoever you ſhall looſe on Earth, ſhall be looſed in Heaven.] 'Tis [Whatſoever ye, that I] but not [Whatſoever not ye, that I] and conſequently, this double affirmation of Chriſt may be perbound here, ſtands bound there, and whoſoever are abſolved here, are abſolved there; and yet for all that, are many bound in Heaven which are not bound in the Church, & looſed in Heaven which are not abſolved by the Church. And if the phraſe uſed in Saint John, [whatſoever ye retained, it is retained] ſeem to any to have an excluſive ſenſe, thus, that what we abſolve not here, we do retain; and conſequently, that whom we abſolve not, God will not abſolve. I anſwer, that this is a miſtake, ariſing from the equivocalneſſe of the word [retain] which in the Greek
binding in the other Goſpels; in which, becauſe that intimates not any excluſive power, neither will it be reaſonable that this ſhall. And ſo much for the fourth par
To which, before we part from it, it will not perhaps be unſeaſonable (though I hope I ſhall not be obliged to juſtifie the truth of the relations) to annex a paſſage or two out of the latter ſtories of the Greek Church, (believed generally by them, & mentioned on affirmation of particular knowledge by ſome which have come from them to this place, & lived amongſt us) which will acquaint us with the awe, and ſignifie the opinion which it ſeems they have of the real efficacie of theſe cenſures of the Church. It is related (ſaith Crucius in Turco-graecia) in the Conſtantinopolitan hiſtories, that the Sultan Mahomet among other things concerning the Chriſtian Religion, asked the Patriarch Maxims,
That if the high Prieſts, and Prieſts of the Chriſtians ſhould excommunicate any perſon upon juſt cauſe, the body of that man diſſolves not into the earth, but remains entire and whole; and when the ſepulchre of any ſuch is opened, they appear like drums or timbrels, and black, i. e. the body ſwell'd, but whole, and withal much diſcoloured: And that upon abſolution the body is diſſolved to duſt. In the truth of which tradition the Sultan deſiPatriarch, who upon ſearch made, found (ſaith he) that a certain looſe woman having defamed a former Patriarch, Genadius Scholarius, was by him excommunicate, and ſo dyed. Her Sepulchre Maximus cauſed to be opened, and (She was found as ſhe was at the time of her buriall, only ſwell
This (ſaith he) was certified to the Sultan, who ſent ſome of his Nobles to view it, which they did with admiration, and cauſed the corps to be ſealed up in a Coffin with the Imperial Seal, and returned at a ſet day Then the Patriarch opened it, and officiated and read the prayer of abſolution: Whereupon the joynts of her hands and feet were immediately looſed. They ſealed it up again, and returning after three dayes found all turn'd to duſt. This they reported to the Sultan, who wondred, and was aThat this Religion and faith of the Chriſtians was wonderful and true. This ſame ſtory is related again at large, l. 2. Turco Gr. §. 32. In the Patriarchial Hiſtory of Emanuel Malaxus in vulgar Greek. A like example there is alſo of one Arſenius, who dyed excommunicate, l. 2. §. 43. p. 151. and alſo of Johannicius, a Pſeudo-patriarch, l. 2. p. 156. of whom, ſaith he, the excommunicate was found hard and ſwelled as a drum or timbrel. The truth of the paſſages, I hope it will not be expected of me to aſGoſpel the phraſes of binding
and looſing, which not knowing to what they belong'd (for the modern Graecians are far from being very learned) they may have applied them to the diſſolving, or not diſſolving of mens bodies in the earth, which they there expreſſe by Evangeliſt. If this be not it, I have no more to ſay of it, but that it was a
And now having taken this licence a little to expatiate, I ſhal enlarge excommunication among Jews and Chriſtians, proex abundanti, and by way of appendix, ſhew the conſent of others, even of Heathen people in this matter, by that means (if not to confirm, as by an inſtance, that ancient truth of Clemens ſo oft repeated by him, Grecians knowledge and ſolemn practices are generally ſtoln from the Jews, yet) to ſhew the opinion of other men, imbued with other principles of Theologie, by which the deſign of this former Trearational man, who is not a Divine, be ſomewhat eſtabliſhed, I ſhall inſtance but in two particulars (becauſe it is but ex abundanti, that I ſay any thing of it.) The firſt, of the ancient Grecians, as I find it mentioned by Diod. Si
16. in the diſcourſe of the 425.
ſacred War betwixt the Phocenſes and Lacedaemonians on one ſide, and the Thebans, &c. on the other; of which there is mention in Thucydides,
L. 1. p. 73. p. 425.Diodorus Siculus in the place fore-cited. From that one Author in one Page theſe few things may be learnt by way of ſtory. 1. That on occaſion of ſacriledge or invaſion of the rights of their gods, (plowing up a peice of ſacred ground call'd Cirrhaea (which was the crime of the Phocenſes) or the taking in War, and ſeizing on the like place call'd Cadmea (which was the Lacedemonians fault) the Senate of the Amphictyones upon complaint of the recorders of holy things, did devote or Anathematize even a whole Country or Region at once, as that of the Lacedemonians, and that other of the Phocenſes. 2. That what was thus done, was confirm'd by the Grecians generally, &c. 3. That though Sacriledge was the occaſion of this devoting, yet was it not the imcauſe or crime wherein it was founded, but their not
mulcts which had been inflicted on them by the ſame Judges for that crime. The puniſhments of thoſe firſt crimes are there mentiondevoting follows. 4. The nature of this puniſhment conſiſted, 1. In the ſhame that it brought upon the offenders, ſuch as Philomelus tels his Phocenſes,
2. In the conſequents of it, in that it would bring danger and ſubverſion to all their lives, & that in two reſpects. 1. In reſpect of God, to whoſe vengeance they were thus devoted, (anſwerable to the Phocenſes, called there men, to whoſe miſchief alſo they were expoſed, (parallel to what we read of Cain when he was caſt out of Gods preſence; Any man, ſaith he, that meets me, will kill me) and therefore in order to the Spartans, it is call'd there an expoſing them to the common hatred of all men. 5. That for them that were under any ſuch ſentence, there was no way, but to obey the mulct that was formerly ini. e. to reform their contumacie, which they that were not able to do, or not willing, and therefore pretend they were not able (nul the ſentence, by proving it unjuſt, (ſhewing that it was no fault, on which the former puniſhment, (to which their contumacie had been expreſt) was inflicted. And to make good this plea, their beſt & indeed only way was that of force, viz. to make Philomelus their General, & to provide him an Army, which was accordrouted and ſlain.
Pag. 432.Druids among the ancient Galls, mentioned by Caeſar de Bell. Gal. l. 6. the ſumme of it is this. Among the
Galls two onely ſorts of men there are, ſaith he, qui in aliquo ſunt numero & honore, which are of account and honour among them, The Druids, and the Equites, or Noblemen, all the reſt being pezants and ſlaves. The former of theſe are thus deſcribed, by their offices or imployments, Illi rebus divinis interſunt, ſacrificia publica & privata procurant, religiones interpretantur, ad hos magnus adoleſcentium numerus diſciplinae cauſâ concurrit, magnóque ii ſunt apud eos honore; nam ferè de omnibus controverſiis publicis privatiſ
And it ſeems this cuſtome and inſtitution among them was conceived to have had its original from Britain. Diſciplina in Britanniâ reperta, atque inde in Galliam tranſlata eſſe exiſtimatur, & nunc qui diligentiùs eam rem cognoſcere volunt, plerun
The ſtory being in it ſelf thus clear and full, will have little need of my comment or obſervation on it; all that I meant to do was to ſhew you the conſent of other Religions, & Nations, and by that to
heathens thought not that unreaſonable, which now Chriſt hath by ſtanding law eſtabliſht in his Church, and many that are called Chriſtians, are ſo willing to caſt out of it. And ſo much ſo this
ANd now by way of concluſion of this whole diſcourſe, I ſhall add ſomewhat of the utility of this peice of diſcipline, if with another preparatory to it, it might by the Governours of every Church be carefully exerciſed: That other preparative which I mean, is that, if not Apoſtolical, yet Eccleſiaſtical inſtitution of Confirmation. The intention of which, and deſign of our Church in it, every man ſufficiently knows (although it have been much and with very ill conſequence of late neglected) and therefore I ſhall not here inſiſt on it; and beſides it hath been ſet down at large in Confirmation, and the neceſſary preparatives of it, that of the Miniſters Catechiſing (and throughly inſtructing all the youth of both ſexes, and of all ſorts within his cure, and explaining to the underBaptiſme) being ſolemnly premiſed, according to the rules and intention of our Church, and all duties perCurate, the Child, and the Biſhop (and none permitted to come to the Lords Table that hath not laudgoldy and learned man, who did much ſtudy the wayes of adpiety and learning) tend moſt probably to the keeping men at leaſt within bounds of Chriſtian civility, from falling into enormous ſins, which they had in their own perſons ſo ſoChriſtian Common-wealth: And if it ſhould be objected, that having been ſo long neglected in this, it cannot now poſſibly be recovered again, becauſe of the vaſt number of thoſe that have been either not at all, or elſe but formally, and perfunctorily, or without precedent preparation confirm'd: I anſwer, that that argument proves not the impoſſibility,
difficulty of doing it, or if the difficulty be ſo great, as to advance into a kinde of moral impoſſibility, yet ought it not therefore to be left unattempted, (we are required to endeavour the doing of things which appear morally impoſſible to be done; becauſe God may enable us to do that, which, till we try, we conceive impoſſible; and though the not performing may not be damning, yet the not endeavouring may) or if ſtill the difficuluniverſal reformation in this kind, diſcourage even from attempting it, yet may it be reaſonable and feacible for every Paſtour, now to begin with all the youth of his Pariſh, which have not yet come to the Lords Supper, and keep them to this probation; and ſo for ever hereafter conſtantly to continue; and then, though the elder ſort of this preſent age come not under this method, nor conſequently this means of reformation; yet perexample of, and inſtructions beſtowed on thoſe unſtock of the ſucceeding age will now be wrought on, and ſo Poſterity be mended, though the preſent age cannot, which to every good Chriſtian will be worth conſidering. This courſe being thus taken for the planting, and rooting all good reprayers of the Church, and the purhabenti dabitur) together with the uſe of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, and attention to reading, and preaching of the Word, might very probably hope to be ſucceſſefull; but then becauſe poſſibly it may not, (ſome Chriſtians will be perjur'd and impudent, rather then be chaſte and conſcientious, after all this) therefore comes in the uſe and utility of the cenſures of the Church, as a Tabula poſt naufragium, a means of bringing him to repentance, that by the former means could not be kept innocent; of reducing him by the rod, that the crook could not keep from ſtraying. And if 'twere thus uſed, if every one that fel after confirmation, were firſt admoniſht by one, then if it ſerved not, by two or three, and then upon refractarineſſe, or indulgence in ſin, delivered up to Sathan, turn'd out of all Chriſtian Communion without any partiality, or reſpect of perſons, this would be as propable a means as
could invent, either by the fear and expectation of this cenſure to deter them, and prevent thoſe enormities that are now ſo ordinary among Chriſtians, or elſe by ſhame, and other conſequent inconveniences, as by Cauſticks to work the cure. For it cannot but be obſerved, what force ſhame, and credit have on the minds of men. A ſin that is gotten into ſome countenance or reputation, though it be deſtitute of all other lovelineſſe or ability to tempt any, doth yet carry all before it without reſiſtance; the fear of ſhame makes men vicious, that otherwiſe are not inclined to it, and certainly the ſame means would be able to commend virtue to us: there is not that infigoodnes in the minds of men (unleſſe as that word ſignifies the paſſions, or carnal affections) as that men would be very wicked to loſe by it; afflictio dabit intellectum, and ſuch afflictions as theſe that fall upon the fame, are not the moſt eaſily ſupportable, and therefore may poſſibly help even a ſenſual man to ſome underſtanding; and though the certain truth of this obſervation cannot otherwiſe be proved, but by our reſolution to make experience of it; yet ſeems it to me to have the Authority and Teſtimony of Saint Paul himſelf in theſe words, (though uſually, by thoſe that are led by the ſound of them, otherwiſe applyed) 2 Cor. 10.4. the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God, (or to God, or (by an hebraiſme very ordinary) very or exceeding mighty) to the pulling down of ſtrong holds, &c. which words that they belong to the point in hand, will 1. be probable by the Context, where the Apoſtle ſpeaks of proceeding againſt offenders, which he cals being bold towards them, v. 1.2. and to revenge or puniſh diſobedience, v. 6. and this according to the authority which the Lord had given him for edification or inſtruction, and not for deſtruction (which before I ſhewed you belong'd unto the power of cenſure) & then he adds a caution to remove a prejudice, that unreformed ſinners had againſt him, his letters were ſevere, and ſo he, when he was abſent; but far from all ſuch ſeverity, when he came amongſt them, vile or tame, or unconſiderable, when he was among them, i. e. that he threatned to excommunicate, but when
terrifying by letters, v. 9. and weighty or powerful letters, v. 10. i. e. ſevere and terrifying, which yet he threatens ſhall be equalled by his actions, when he comes among them, ver. 11. and ſo all along you ſee the buſineſſe is about cenſures. And then 2. this ſenſe of the words will be more then probable, by weighing the words themſelves, wherein Apoſtles Miniſtery, as it doth ſo in the onely other place, where 'tis uſed in the New Teſtament, 1 Tim. 1.18. That thou mighteſt war a good warfare, i. e. diſcharge the duty of thy Miniſtery, as thou oughteſt, according to the importance of the Hebrew warfare, ſometimes Miniſtery [then the weapons of that warfare] are the means to diſcharge that duty in the Miniſtery, of which nature though there be many more, preaching, catechizing, adminiſtration of Sacraments confirmation, &c. yet the context, or antecedents, and conſequents of this place belonging, as was ſhew'd to the buſineſſe of cenſures, will reſtrain it in this place peculiarly to thoſe. Then, that theſe are not [carnal] ſignifies that they are not weak, for ſo Epiſtles ſignifies weakneſſe, (and from thence oftentimes the law, becauſe it was ſo weak, ſo unable to give ſtrength to any diſciple of Moſes to perEpiſtles to the Romans and Galatians 'tis inſiſtTeſtimony, in the next prewalk in the fleſh, i. e. though we are weak, as men, and have no power over you, yet as Miniſters, we are not, our Miniſtery is with power, and therefore it follows, as a explication of [carnal] but mighty, or powerful, through, or to God, or exceeding powerful. And wherein doth this mightineſſe or power expreſſe it ſelf? Why, pulling down of ſtrong holds, & ſo it may literally be rendred, as the end of excommunication, pulling down of all fortreſſes, that maintain or ſecure a man in ſin; but more critically, the word excommunication it ſelf, both ver. 8. and Chap. 13.10. and generally in the Canons of the Councils, and then ſtrong holds, may
all impenitent obdurate ſinners, that will not otherwiſe be wrought upon, and are called, ver. 15. Every high thing, that exalteth it ſelf againſt the knowledge of God, i. e. againſt piety or Chriſtianity; and ſo the words being thus interpreted in the retaile, and then put together again in the groſſe, will run thus: [The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God, to the pulling down of ſtrong holds:] i. e. the cenſures of the Church are exexcommunicating pertinacious offenders. The truth of which obſervation, if not inexcommunication was delivering a man to Satan, and a conſequent of that in thoſe firſt times, corporal inflictions, diſeaſes, (and ſometime death it ſelf) which, if any humane thing, would moſt probaconſequent was peculiar to the Apoſtles times, and is not now in uſe, and conſequently that a great part of the power of Eccleſiaſtical cenſures is now loſt, and ſo now the weapons of our warfare may be carnal, our cenſures unſufficient to perform their task, to reimpenitents, though theirs were not. To which I anſwer, by confeſſing the objection, that indeed it is ſo; and very reaManna ceaſed to be rain'd from heaven, when the people were come into the promiſed land, flowing with milk and honey. Onely I ſhall then reply, that therefore it is more then fit, that ſome means ſhould be uſed, in caſe of any diſcernable defect, to incenſures of the Church, eſpecially in caſes of enormous, infamous crimes, which may be done by the Secular arm, in ſuch caſes (when the Eccleſiaſtical cenſures perſwade not) the impreſſion of inflicting penalties, ſevere enough, as may be found expeuſque ad reformationem, untill they make themſelves capaGod ſupplyed the
humane aid, by his extraordinary from heaven; and when the Secular Magiſtrates diſcharged not their duty, exerciChurch from rotten, vicious, prophane, incorrigible members, God gave this power to the Apoſtles of inflicting diſeaſes on Malefactors; ſo now that extraordinary power being withdrawn from the Church, the Magiſtrate ſhould think himſelf moſt ſtrictobliged to perform his duty, for which if it ſhould be required, that we produce the expreſſe commands or directions of Chriſt and his Apoſtles, or Primitive preſidents; I anſwer, That will be unjuſt to require of us, 1. Becauſe in Scripture times, there were other means to ſupply that want, the Devils corporal inflictions on them that were delivered to him, and ſo any other might be ſpared: 2. Becauſe this duty naturally belongs to the Magiſtrate, who alone hath ordinarily compulſive juriſdiction, which as it was practiKings in the Old Teſtament, ſo was it not interdicted by Chriſt in the New, but all left in that matter by him as he found it; which being granted, it may be ſaid, that as Chriſt or the Apoſtles give no directions for this, ſo they needed not to give any. 3. Becauſe both then, and in the Primitive Church, the Secular power was not Chriſtian, and therefore the aſſihazen, and drive thoſe that will not be allured and drawn, that ſo even in this world, there may be no peace, quiet reſt, tranquility; or ſecurity to the wicked.
Waſh yee, make you clean, &c.