SECT. I.

THe Paper (so I shall call it, after that name which the Apologists always give it at the Circumcision thereof) in the first Section, seemed to rise to the hoary head of Antiquity, and cast a suspitious eye upon Novelty, recogni­zing that, habet ut in aetatibus authoritatem Senectus, sic & in exemplis antiquitas; and accounting with the Oracle that to be the best complexion, which was concolor mortuis: yet this was delivered onely in thesi, and general, not in hypo­thesi, or particular application to my subject, and by way of preface, not of ar­gumentation, as they suggest, calling this the first-born argument, which yet had no double portion of substance, nor was the beginning of strength, or ex­cellency of dignity: Fit enim natu­rae quodam instinctu, & judicio recto sanè si illo recte utamur, ut in religionis negotio nova omnia sint suspecta & ferè exosa. Casaub. exer­cit. 16. S. 43. p. 390. There was notwithstanding, not the least intimation made, as if any thing that bears the stamp of Antiquity were therefore to be received, but onely not hastily to be laid aside; nor that any thing was to be rejected, because new coined, but not to be so easily entertained: neither that whatsoever was ancient, was infallibly true, but the more credible: nor that which was new, was undoubtedly false, but more suspicious.

The Apologists cannot say, and whosoever shall make inspection into the Paper, will not see, that I attribute too much to Antiquity, and if they would have ascribed any thing, they needed to have said nothing.

But it seems they have the same quarrel to Antiquity, which the Affricans have of the Sun, Urit fulgore suo; and as Herod, being originally a stranger, and Alien, sought to suppresse the Genealogies of the Jewish Nation, and especially of the Royal Linage: so the Apologists seek to disparage and detract from the exemplary practice of the ancient Church, and judgment of the Fathers, whereunto in opinion and way they are strangers.

De Carthagine potius nulla quàm pauca. I am not susceptible to assert the ho­nour and reverend esteem of the illustrious Fathers (as Iuther calls them) neither shall I need to undertake it; for though mutus fit oportet, qui non lauda­bat Herculem, yet it was no unapt check of Antalcidas, Quis unquam sanus eum vituperavit? But since the Apologists, instead of answering the testimo­nies, have thought to discredit the Witnesses, and have somewhat enlarged themselves both in this and the 13. Section, to lessen their authority: It may seem proditorious, to desert their Defence, and to shew lesse zeal to support them, than they have done to deprave their credit; especially seeing, as Isocrates was said to have made many Orations, in sending forth many Orators: and [Page 33]he that saves a Physician, preserves many lives and many remedies: So I shall in vindicating this Topick, fortifie the Arguments drawn from it; and if it seem out of my way, yet it is but in fresh suit of the Apologists, whom I am bound to follow.

SECT. II.

THey embrace that saying, That which is first is true, because true antiquity is a friend to truth, and every good way is old: but they restrain, and limit this to such age and antiquity, as things may claim onely for being revealed in Scripture: But this is not the onely antiquity which we are now debating of; this is Antiquity proved Ex priori; but it is Ecclesiastical antiquity (as I may call it) the consent and custome of the antient Church, antiquity pro­ved Ex posteriori, which we are now considering of; what authority it carries, what reverence and esteem it merits, and what force and influence it hath.

We concur to adore Divine Scripture antiquity as the best: Veritas in om­nibus imaginem anteceda; po­stremò similitu­do succedit. I ertul. Aug. contra Crescon. l. 2. c. 29. Idem de peccat. merit. & remis. 1.1. c. 22. In m [...]de natura & [...], [...]. 61. [...]. Mihi pro his omnibus, imo supra hos omnes Apostolus Paulus; to assent to it, as the truest, as that which nec falli potest nec fallere; and to captivate our understanding thereunto, Sine ulla recusatione, & cum credendi necessitate: But because this is the best and truest, and most infallible antiquity, therefore to infer, that no other antiquity needs to be considered of, or is worthy of reverence, or can lend any strength of argument, is as if I should conclude, that because an Apodictick Syllogism (whose principles are propositions, verae, primae, immediatae, priores, notiores, causae conclusionis,) is onely Scientifical, that therefore all Dialectick Syllo­gisms concluding ex probabilibus, are useless and despicable; or that St. Paul argued both weakly and superfluously, that the woman ought to have power on her head because of the Angels, when it had been enough, and more efficaci­ous to have said, because of God: or because Christ is the onely Mediatour be­tween God and Man, by his merit and efficacy; and upon whose intercession alone we can rely with faith: therefore 'tis vain and fruitless to seek or regard the help and assistance of the prayers of the godly.

To the antient Church I think most authority to be ascribed, and greatest reverence to be attributed, since streams run purest neer the Fountain; and if that which is first be truest, what is next to the first, is next to truth: and [...]here­fore, Sānctorum Patrum constitutiones qui proximiores fuerant Christo [...]scames, said Nazianzen; and those Orders be most pure, that come most neer to the example of the Primitive Church, said the holy Martyr Sanders: Fox Act. & [...]on. p. [...]494. yet the at re­station of that Church, I grant, is but an humane testimony, nor perfectly [...] ­vine, but in part, as it faithfully testifieth what the Apostles did and said: Di­vine, in regard of the matter and thing testified: Human, in regard of the [Page 34]quality of the Witnesses, and manner of testification, and therefore formally as such, being but an humane testimony, can beget but an acquisite faith; for no conclusion can be of higher nature than the premises, as no water can be made to rise higher than the Spring: Picus Miran­dula, Canus, and I grant that, Fidei acquisitae (quae fulcitur homine proponente, non Deo revelante) subesse potest falsum: and therefore, Nun­quam hominem quemvis per fidem acquisitam ità existimamus esse veracem, quin for­midemus cum vel falli posse vel fallere. Yet notwithstanding, fides acquisita [...]se habet ad fidem gratuitam, sicut praeambula dispositio ad formam, & disponit animam ad receptionem luminis,Alexander Hales; all as cited by Dr. F. White's an­swer to Fish. p. 14. 22.quo assentitur primae veritati propter se, & dicitur ipsam in­troducere sicut seta filum: and though divine revelation in Scripture be there­fore the sole principle, immediate motive, and formal reason and object of be­leeving, and last resolution of Faith; yet the authority and external testimony of the Church, may produce the same, as an adjuvant instrumental admini­string moral cause, and subordinate help. Prae omnibus si aperta fuerit Scriptura, eam ipsam amplector, saith St. Augustine: and therefore he that will not beleeve Moses and the Prophets, it will be in vain to raise any of the dead to perswade him; when the Scripture shines out in full brightness, omnes Perstringit stellas exortus ut aethereus Sol: But when that Sun shines not so clearly, as to con­vince and satisfie contenders who have bad eyes: the Fathers, as Stars that re­ceive their light from that Sun, may reflect some illumination upon us, as the Stars are to be seen by day, in dark pits, and obscure places: and though I con­sent to Augustine, Epist. 19. ad Hieron. that let the Learning and Holiness of other Writers be never so eminent, I will not think it true, because they have thought so; but because they are able to perswade me either by other Canonical Writers, or probable Reason: yet I add, that I am more confirmed in my perswasion, that I rightly hit the sense of Canonical Writers, and apprehend the Dictates of true Reason, when I conceive the same, which I finde that they thought; though they are not principles of infallible verity to command beleef, yet they are grounds of credibility to sacilitate assent; Non domini, sed duces, to use Seneca's words. And I shall more easily embrace that which hath their witness, and be more apt to doubt of that which wants their testimony; Sola argumenta ex Scripturis esse necessaria, Cathol. Orthe­dox. Tract. 1. q. 10. p. 121.è Patribus autem probabilia, saith learned Rivet: Their consent I esteem not ut fidei mensuram, sed ut testem temporis & argumentum historicum, which makes certain the matter of fact, that such was the doctrine and practice of the first and purer times, being registred to us by those that cannot be ima­gined not to know, being so neer; nor be suspected to combine falsly to im­pose upon us, being so pious.

They are not moved to hear men count and call good ways new, and the Adver­saries of true Doctrine have always loaded it with this Title (which confirms them to see the ways of their government have the same lot) and therefore this principle of Antiquity yeelds but a popular and fallacious Argument. But few I suppose will be moved with this argumentation, as not fallacious enough to impose upon popular judgements. For,

First, implicitly and interpretatively, those good ways are their ways, where­in is involved Petitio Principii.

Secondly, if so small a matter confirm their judgement, it is suspitious, that as small a weight of reason might first settle it; Talia sunt alimenta, qualia sunt Elementa.

Thirdly, If that be a popular and fallacious argument which is derived from a principle made use of commonly by Hereticks, or others, thereby to give a specious lustre to their own Opinions, and cast an odium on their oppo­sites, then Scripture it self may be sentenced to be a principle, yeelding onely popular and fallacious arguments; for who knows not, that most Hereticks have sought to fortifie their Opinions with pretence of Scripture, and have upbraided their adversaries with want thereof?

Fourthly, when any pretend antiquity to give countenance to novel and un­warrantable Opinions or Institutions, by turning the wrong end of the Pro­spective, to make things at hand seem to be far off: the fallacy is not in the principle, but the men that abuse and falsly apply it; nor lies it in the propo­sition, but the assumption.

Fifthly, seeing as Hierom tells us, Mendacium semper imitatur veritatem, the argument is the more specious, and like to carry more force, because subtil falsi­fiers have assumed it; for they being wiser in their Generations, would not lay on those colours that had no beauty or lustre; nor would they set that stamp on their counterfeit Coyn, did they not know it would make it pass more cur­rant.

Hierom (say they) is condemned, for desiring leave of Augustine to erre with seven Fathers, but they dare not, nor are willing to give this liberty; but yet they take as much, when in the question, whether Judas communicated of the Lords Supper, they mention twelve late Writers, and not all of them, aut magni aut bonì nominis, asserting the negative; and ask, who would not erre with such as those are? But we say, though we would not erre with the Fathers, yet we less distrust our selves to erre with them, or when they are on our side; and proba­bly suppose our selves farthest from erring, when neerest to them.

As the Scripture bids us to remember Lots wife, so they say to the Preten­ders of Antiquity, Remember the Gibeonites: Had this Memento been limited to false Pretenders of Antiquity, it might have been plausible: but if themselves had not forgotten to take some of the salt of that Pillar, whereinto she was turned, to have seasoned their discretions, they never would have made this instance indefinitly, and without limitation: For,

First, it follows not, because they counterfeited old things, we may not al­leage that which is truly ancient; or because some stones are counterfeit, therefore none must be precious Jewels.

Secondly, it may be retorted on themselves, the Gibeonites would not have simulated that, which had it been true, would not have been effectual to the ends for which they fained it; and had their bread, and bottles, and shooes, been as old as they dissembled, Joshuah might, and would have accepted, and been at peace and in league with them. And will it not then be consequent, to suit the Apodosis to the Protasis, in this Allegory or Similitude, that Antiqui­ty is a likely Plea, and lends a good Topick; and such things as wear her Live­ry, and bear her Character, are more receptible than those that want them?

But if the antiquity the Paper calls for, do signifie but Custome, as they guess by some passages, viz. what is setled by Custome, they will be bold to say of such antiquity, It is vetustas erroris: I shall say with Augustine, Quis dubitat veri­tati manifestatae debere consuetudinem cedere? But I add, Veritatem non ostendis, [Page 36]de consuetudine confiteris: De Baptism. cont. Donat. l. 3. p. 82. Tom. 7. Ibidem, l. 7. p. 99. Ibid. l. 4. p. 85. ad Januar. Ep. 119. de Ci­vitate Dei, l. 15. c. 16. but abstracting custom from the consideration of the matter, either as it is good (for goodness will warrant it self without custome, yet honum & consuetum duo sunt bona: and as St. Augustine gravely, Cùm consue­tudini veritas suffragatur, nihil oportet firmius retineri) or as it is evil; for then custom cannot authorize it: for the Philosopher said, Omnia mala habenda pro peregrinis: and S. Augustine, Aut propter fidem, aut propter mores vel emendari opor­tel quod perperàm fiebat, vel institui quod non fiebat: But only as custom, even as such, Ad humanum sensum vel alliciendum, vel offendendum, mos valet plurimùm; and upon that & other reflections, insinuated in the Paper, I might, without offence, conclude with Ulpian; In rebus novis constituendis evidens esse debet utilitas; and with St. Augustine, Non est à consuetudine recedendum nisi rationi adversetur.

But beside, the customs which I chiefly reverence, and engage to defend, are the customs of the antient Church; Ad Casulan. Ep. 86. and if the Apologists will be bold to say of such antiquity, it is vetustas erroris, I shall modestly re-mind them, that they are more bold then wise: And if they shall sleight the judgement of St. Augu­stine, in his rebus, de quibus nihil certi statuit Scriptura Divina, mos Populi Dei, vel instituta majorum pro lego tuenda sunt, nor shall prize the sense of the great Council of Chalcedon, [...], Let the ancient custom prevail; yet I hope they will grant there was some weight in that Argument of the A­postle, 1 Cor. 11.16. We have no such Custom, nor the Churches of God.

The gray hairs of Opinions and Practices are then beauty, and a Crown when found in the way of truth and righteousness: They are then indeed a Crown more glo­rious and worthy of double honour; but yet aetas per se venerabilis, saith Calvin: and therefore some suppose, that in the Greek an old man is called [...], which signifieth honour; Willet in Lev. 19.32. Arist. l. 19. Ethic. 2. Jansenius in locum. C. à Lapide in locum. and it is the dictate of the same spirit (which Aristotle hath also delivered almost verbatim) Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head, and honour the face of the old man, formally as an old man.

And some Expositors, because the relative is not in the Hebrew, thus inter­pret that of Prov. 16.31. The hoary head is a Crown of glory, it is found in the way of righteousness, as if old men were commonly righteous: as the Chaldee in the late famous Bible renders that of Leviticus, Rise before him that is learned in the Law, implying old men to be so: so as therefore we might turn the allusion against them.

The light of Doctrine hath long filled our Horizon; the light of Discipline was not so forward or successful, being a long while held by some men in unrighteousness: Ni­mirum liberanda veritas illos expectabat, as Tertullian once said of Marcion: but

Fair words cannot perswade us that we are not hurt, while we feel the smart of our wounds: neither have we been bred up in Anaxagoras his School, to beleeve the snow to be of other colour than our eyes discern it. What Quin­tilian and Seneca said of the Common-wealth, we may apply to the Church; the one, Quaedam sunt crimina laesae Reipub. ad quorum pronuntiationem soli oculi suf­ficiunt: The other, An laesa sit Respub. non solet argumentis probari; manifesta sta­tim sunt damna Reipub. The Tree is known by his fruit; and we have tasted such bitterness in the fruits of this Discipline, and the Principles thereof, that as Joab stubbornly said to David, Thou hast shamed the face of all thy Servants: [Page 37]So even those that could not be satisfied with the topping, but wished the cut­ting down of the former Tree, as being grown too high, to over-top and drop upon the Paradise of God, are truly ashamed to see this Plant spring up in the place thereof; which not onely like the Boranetz or Tartar Lamb, though it seem to creep low toward the ground, and bear wool like the Sheeps cloathing, yet destroys all verdancy, and suffers nothing to grow or prosper neer it: but he also that shall contemplate in what a light flame the whole Wood is, will be apt to conclude, that the Bramble is become the King of Trees, from whom onely this fire could come forth: So that some may well cry out, as the Constan­tinopolitans at Arsacius his succeeding of Chrysostom, Deus bone, quis cui? and are afraid to have contracted a suitable guilt to what the Romane Senate incur­red toward Drusus; of whom Paterculus tells us, Qui tanto meliore ingenio quàm fortunâ usus est, ut malefacta collegarum, quàm ejus optimè cogitata, Se­natus probaret magìs: But I remember Herodotus tells us, that Phrinicus was amerced 1000. Drachmes, for representing in a Tragedy the loss of Miletus, and thereby renewing the sorrow thereof: and therefore I shall not farther have unguem in Ulcere, having else-where rubbed the sore; and also, because not onely illè dolet verè, but also tute, qui sine teste dolet: onely in answer to the Apologists expressions I shall say, That their Light of Discipline hath proved an ignis fatuus, to lead us into Precipices and abysses; or a Comet to portend and effect mischief, and the fumes and exhalations thereof have eclips'd that Light of Doctrine, which they confess formerly filled our Hemisphere; it hath been onely forward to undo us, and successful as Pompey was great, miseriâ no­strâ: and as Curio was eloquent, malo publico, and was brought forth with more unrighteousness, then ever it was with-held.

Yet is it aes alienum, to acknowledge, that I neither can justly charge upon the Apologists, nor will I leave them under the least suspition of having any personal share of, or proper guilt in the Heresies and Profaness, specula­tive and practical Antiscripturisme, whose abominations in this Land make all good eyes to water, and godly hearts to bleed: But I look on Independency (the Principles of which Discipline have imposed on the Apologists) as the summum genus, the common Principle, and as it were the Trojaa horse of all those evils: for as the jangling Sects of Philosophers pretended to be all So­cratical; so the differing Sects assume the Livery of Independency, which is the Basis, as Physitians speak, of the Composition, and the Bond and Common tye of the Bundle: So as I impute not the mischief to Independents distribu­tively, but collectively; nor think them to flow formally and inseparably from Independency in the Abstract, so as to spread through al the denominations, but to have spawn'd from Independents in the Concrete, and that Discipline hath given the occasion of the rise and growth thereof, which how strict soever it pretend to be, in admitting to Church-membership, or Communion of Sacra­ments, yet is too loose in the liberty afforded to Opinions; in a conceit some­what like Tamberlains, That Religion is like a Posie, which is most sweet, when made up of variety of flowers. In an epidemical Contagion, some may be yet antidoted by temperament and habitude of body, yet the Pestilence is mortally infections; and although there are many good Subjects of the notion of Pa­pists, yet Popery hath many treasonable and seditious Principles: So though [Page 38]under the notion of Independents there are many Orthodox men, yet Inde­pendency is causally very heterodox; as he that lets down the Fence, or lays open the Gap, is guilty of all the mischief which the wilde Beasts do in the field.

They ask, whether we say the Sun rose not till twelve, because it shined not till then; or that America was a second or new Creation, because sound out of late? and thereupon perswade us, that their Government is elder than the former Custome of our Predecessours, and not younger than the Scriptures; and that it is unreason­able and unsafe to look onely on the Customes and Practices of the next Ages before us, which they are sure worship'd God impurely.

Though Clouds may mask the face of the Sun at one place, or for one in­stant, yet it shines forth in some other; and not onely by discourse of reason, but by evidence of sense, after the Sun is come into our Horizon, we know he is risen, for we then always see the light thereof (though not in full bright­ness thereof perhaps) for without that light we could not well see. Though America was but lately discovered to us, it was not unknown to all others; the Inhabitants were not ignorant thereof; and we know all this while under what Meridians and Parallels it was situate, and we are satisfied that it had a real, though no notional existence in respect of us: but we are still to seek where this new world of their Discipline was in being, until it was found out of late: And suitably to the products of divine inspiration, or results of rational discourse; a thing of this kind could have no being, till it was found out (and therefore not fitly compared with America;) If they can assign when, and where antiently their new light of discipline shined before we saw it, (unless perhaps some flashes thereof were among those who supposed they had more light of truth, The Donatists alleaged in defence of their Separation that of Cantic. 1.7. because more of the Sun-beams, and thought that onely among them­selves the Beloved made his Flock to rest at Noon) I shall yeeld there was such a Sun, though latter ages saw it not; else I shall suspect it to be onely Pa­relius, a counterfeit Sun, subsisting onely in the vapours and exhalations of mo­dern heads.

Antient Customs may be antiquated, and again redintegrated: some truths, in some ages, smothered by the predominating Errour and Faction, and be afterward revived; for Nullum tempus occurrit Regi Coelorum: But it is one thing to be new, Jewel apol. p. 5. c. 1. Divis. 1. another to be renewed; Quod verum est, serum non est, saith Saint Ambrose. As there can be no change in God himself, so ought there to be no change in his Religion, saith that Gemma Theologiae: If therefore their Disci­pline were but lately found out, it will be found to be without warrant. If they will commence per saltum, Neb. 7.63, 64. and say it is as ancient as Scripture, but cannot trace the descent and pedegree thereof, through any one age of the antient Church, they are onely like those Priests the Children of Habajah, who sought their Register among those that were reckoned by Genealogy, but it was not found; therefore were they, as polluted, put from the Priesthood. Although we shall gladly dormire inter medios cleros, that is, saith S, Augustine, in utrius (que) Testamenti authoritate conquiescere,In Psal. 67.ut quando aliquid ex i's profertur & probatur, omnis contentio pacifica quietè finiatur: Yet besides, that, they are likely to have as little foundation in Scripture, as they implicitly confess to have support from the practice of the antient Church: In the interim also they con­tract [Page 39]many prejudices, not easily to be wrastled with; for who will hastily be­leeve, that in this age, which to other works of the flesh, hath added swarms of Heresies (& mali mores excoecant intellectum, saith Ockham) the Light of Dis­cipline should break out, when so many gross Clouds eclipse the greater Lumi­nary of Doctrine; that this secret of the Lord should not have been with those that feared him in so many ages (whom he promised to teach, and to be with, and to lead into all necessary truth, Non verisimile est ut tot & tantae in unam sidem erraverint, saith Tertullian: Et quod apud multos unum invenitur, non est erratum sed traditum) nor reflected on us by those great Stars of the Primitive Sphere, between whom, and some others, is no more comparison, than between the pillars of the Temple and their shadows (as Nazianzen magnifieth Basil) and when the like late discovery cannot be asserted of any other truth? And lastly, that this Discipline should be so necessary, when the Church of God for many ages flourished in godliness, knowledge, and peace, and yet was never ac­quainted with it.

They are not the next ages before us that we look upon, as they odiously in­sinuate, but the most antient; and yet I wish that the present times may not ingratiate and endear the former age notwithstanding its corruptions, and have the fate which some think Augustus aimed at in adopting Tiberius, that the memory of his Government might be more sweetned by the succession of a worse.

In the 13. Section (for we will still endeavour to collect and unite toge­ther, what they have scattered of one concernment) they seek to enervate the testimony of the antient Church, by telling us out of the Lord Verulam, That they which too much reverence old times, are a scorn to new; That the Fathers a­greed in mistakes, and were divided in truths; That the Opinion of the Chiliasts (taken for an errour) is by Justin Martyr referred to the Apostles: Irenaeus af­firms, that Jesus Christ lived fifty years on earth: Lubbertus is cited to say it is the manner of the Fathers, when they would commend a thing, not knowing its ori­ginal, to refer it to the Apostles and primitive Times. In the three first Centuries, the Learned are perplexed with spurious works of the Fathers, which makes uncertain the state of the Primitive Church, which some extend not beyond the Apostles days, or third Century, and it is stretched too far to the age of Chrysostome.

We know, and acknowledge, that the Fathers (like the Moon) never bor­rowed so much light from the Sun of the Scriptures, as to be clear of all spots. Stapleton himself grants, there is none of the Fathers, in which something erro­neous may not be observed; they are like the Birds hatch'd at Cair by the warmth of an Oven, which have every one some blemish; and I wish their errours were of no other alloy, than such as the Apologists have detected: Piscator, Alsted Mead, Hack­wel, Gallus, &c. where­of, that of the Chiliasts, themselves dare not stigmatize for an errour: (and therfore unaptly alleage it) but only say it hath been taken for one, perchance they are more indulgent thereunto; because it is a Darling fostered, & much fawned upon by many of their Brethren, and indeed hath divers more learned assertors than them, who consent in the thing, though with some difference in the manner: and for the conceit of Irenaeus, it is a Chronological, no Dogma­tical errour; and Chronologers are one of those three things that never agree: Id calumniâ carere debebit, saith Sulpitius Severus: But because the Fathers [Page 40]might, or did erre, therefore to give no credit to their Witnesses, would be (in effect) destructive to all kind of humane testimony.

From hence onely can be concluded, that they are not infallible, and there­fore our understanding not to be captivated into any obedience to their Di­ctates (in that sense we call no man Father save the Ancient of days) and that iis (in enucleandis fidei controversiis) non necessarium est consentire tanquā ab omni exceptione veris,Chamier. tom. l. 1. c. 6. p. 4. Aquin. 1. q. 1. art. 8. ad 2.aut etiam in se—possunt proferri (ut) quibus ex certa Suppositi­one certis etiam circumstantiis hic discernendi (rectum ab obliquo) usu convenire queat; saith Chamier, and authoritatibus Canonicae Scripturae utitur proprie ex necessitate argumentando, authoritate autem aliorum Doctorum Ecclesiae quasi ar­guendo ex propriis sed probabiliter &c. as Aquiaas: But the errours of a single Father, or their mutual differences cannot lay any obstructions in our way, who lay no such great waight on their singular Opinions, yet set much by their general consent, in what the most, and most famous in every age have deli­vered, as received of them that went before them, and as practised or beleeved by them: What Lubbertus is alleaged to say, will not make either scale theirs or ours, to move much with the waight thereof; the notion Apostles is not alway taken properly, Dr. Ham. Re­sol. 6. quae. q. 5. p. 351. And see Par­ker of the Cross, part 2. p. 126. de Bap­tis. Contr. Don. l. 4. c. 24. & alii & Epist. 118. c. 1. or strictly to be understood; one great learned man hath mani­fested it, that in the Primitive Times Bishops were usually called Apostles: and another hath told us, that the ancient Church extended the Apostolical Times beyond the age of the Apostles, even to the Nicene Council: The igno­rance whereof perplexed Baronius to reconcile it: How Scithianus and Te­rebinthus are said to live Temporibus Apostolorum, who lived in Aurelians time, 300. years after Christ: and howsoever, yet I know it was the rule of Saint Augustine, often inculcated, and approved by our principal Divines in matters of fact and practice, That which the universal Church holdeth, and which was not appointed by Councils, but always observed, is most rightly believed to have been delivered by Apostolical Authority. If some Bastard Writings are put upon the Fathers, which like Eaglets being brought forth to the sun, are not very hard to be discerned, by their inability to endure the light of critical exa­mination: there are others which the Learned are agreed upon to bear the characters of their true Off-spring, which set the antient Church within our light and prospect; and it is no argument, that because some coyn is coun­terfeit, therefore none must be current; let them reject it, if we offer to pay them with false money: But I doubt their practice will need some counterfeit Writings to support it; for the genuine Works of the Antients will lend it no authority.

They should much have favoured our ignorance, to have pointed at those (had their authority been worth our notice) who confine the Primitive Church within the age of the Apostles, or extend it not beyond the second cen­teury, that we might have tryed what weight their reasons or authority carry in the counter-scales against the generality of the polemical Divines; who, though primitive be a relation, and spoken always with respect to another, so that what is primitive in reference to one, is not so toward another; yet they dilate the antient Church, Doctoribus Ec­clesiasticis 6. priorum saeculo­rum veterum patrum adscri­beremus titu­lum. Rivet tract. de patr. Author. Tom. 2. p. 648. Accor­ding to one of the Epocha's, the time for the measured purity of the Inner Court, and that is the visible Church remaining in its primitive purity, is 454. years. Mede's Remains on Rev. p. 20. whereunto more reverence and esteem is rendred, unto the first five hundred years; and within which Latitude of five hundred, did Bishop Jewel impale the testimonies which he challenged his adversaries to produce, in confirmation of several pieces of Popery: and sure the age of Chrysostome, which [Page 41]was the latter end of the fourth, and beginning of the fifth Century, was like the eighth Sphere; which though not next to the first mover (according to the old obsolete hypothesis) yet had more bright stars than all the Orbs beside.

What they insert out of the English Plato, that to reverence old times, is to be a scorn to the new, is meant of the arts and civil customes thereof, which are lickt into better shape by time, and daily improved, and refined into more per­fections:

but Theology and the Doctrine of Faith being inspired, not acquisite, was sub­stantially perfect at the first tradition thereof; and those which were neerest to those Secretaries of the Holy Ghost, had the advantage and opportunity to re­ceive a cleer explication and right understanding thereof; and though too much reverence to those antient Times, may peccantly verge from mediocri­ty, (wherein the matter of virtue consists) yet he that shall scorn any for reve­rencing those old Times which we dispute of, may put for to be Doctor of the chair of Scorners, and hath been new dip'd in their principles, who have learnt to say, in effect, with that Pope, Hoc verum erit, si ipse volo, & non aliter.

And whatever the Apologists may insinuate or glance at, the Protestant Di­vines did never absolutely disclaim, or renounce the tryal by the Fathers; nei­ther do they suffer any such Thrasonical vaunts as that of Campian, Field of the Church, l. 4. c. 5. p. 349. & appendix. Part. 1. Sect. 2. p. 750. to go un­checked and unshamed, Patres admiserit? captus est; excluserit? nullus est; in altero fugam adornant, in altero suffocantur: Luther, and the rest at the begin­ning, seem to decline such tryal, (saith a learned Divine,) because the corru­ptions of their writings were so many, as could not easily be discovered (confor­mable to the advice of Vincentius Lyrinensis, who saith, If Heresies be invete­rate, and so have times and means to corrupt the Monuments of Antiquity, we must flee to the Scriptures onely) but now having found out by the help of so many learned men, both of our adversaries, and amongst our selves, that have travelled in that kind, which are their undoubted Works, and which doubtful, or undoubtedly forged, we willingly admit the tryal by the Fathers, and we now onely decry and condemn the Papists for their servile enthralling them­selves to the judgment of the Fathers as to a Law, as Canus speaks, and ad ulti­mum iota, as the gloss on the Canon Law delivers, and for fettering themselves with an oath, never to expound Scripture contrary to their consent, and for ad­vancing them, to the disparagement and obsoleting of the Scriptures; as among other examples did the Sorbonist, Reynolds de Idololat. Rom. Eccles. l. 1. c. 8. p. 515. p. 301. Whitaker tom. 1. p. 13. Marta de Ju­risdict. citat. Dr. J. White's Defence way true Church, c. 20. p. 105. whom Stephanus asking where he read such a thing in the New Testament? he answered, Se illud apud Hieronymum aut in Decretis legisse; quid vero Novum Testamentum esset ignorare: but never de­serted a tryal by the Fathers, as by the Jury, though not as by the Law (which is the Scripture) nor as by a Judge (which is the Holy Ghost) Ad hanc canitiem tanquam in Areopagum provocamus, saith Whitaker to Campian: and I could cite many others to the same purpose; they are the Papists themselves, that with no­table hypocrisie depress and avile their authority, when it interferes with their Interests, speaking out plainly what the Apologists more covertly insinuate, That the common opinion of the Doctors, is not to be regarded, when another contrary opinion favours the Keys, or the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, or a pious case.

Those that wash'd off the water of their former Baptisme by new immersions, [Page 42]were the first that sought to bring under water also the authority and reverence of the antient Church; and it is very observable, that from the same Fountain have sprung the foul and bitter waters of Schisme and Heresie that have defi­led and envenomed the modern age, as if it were therein legible, that had due honour been given unto the Fathers, our days of peace and truth had been pro­longed in the Land.

What the Psalmist says of Children, I think of the Fathers, Happy are they that have their Quiver full of them, they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the Enemies in the Gate.

The Philosophers that writ of the contempt of glory, yet bewrayed their [...]n­bitious itch after it, by affixing their names to the books: So even those that seem to decry and sleight the witness of the Fathers, yet think themselves more gay Birds, when deck'd with their Plumes; and that they make higher flights, if they can impe their Wings with any of their Feathers: The Apologists them­selves in their 35. and 37. Section, and else-where, seek to borrow some colours from them, to paint the face of their Discipline more seemingly fair. And it is still true what Erasmus was wont to say, When Hierom is for our purpose, his au­thority weigheth much; when against us, it is worth nothing: Yet as Agesilaus sent Tissaphernes his thanks, that by fraction of the sworn League, he had set the gods on his side; so I thankfully accept this implicite and interpretative yeel­ding me the Fathers on my part, while to my sense no other corollary can be deducted from all their discourse hereof, but this, Let them say what they list, we neither value them, nor will beleeve them.

SECT. III.

PRimus felicitatis gradus est non delinquere; Secundus delicta cognoscere, saith Cyprian: They now condemn not all that differ from them, and must ac­knowledge that some godly men, eminent in parts and places, close not with them: and this I shall gladly take and put among their retractations, for heretofore it hath been their course (resulting as much out of subtilty, as censo­riousnesse) to brand such as are adverse from them, as enemies to godlinesse, and so to sentence them (I think) is to condemn them; yea they condemn them, while they renounce Communion of Sacraments with them, there being no way to communicate with them, but to tread that path which they have li­ned and beaten out; and if they grant them to be godly persons, how can they without Schisme desert communion with them? But indeed if their model of discipline be the onely path to Reformation, and be that point alone wherein peace and holinesse meet and close together, I think they could not but con­demn all that walk not with them therein, though in truth, rather this renders it evident, that it is no such right way, because so many godly and eminent men are found in another Road.

But as some censure them for going too far, so do others for not going far enough in their seperation.

And it is like enough that this befals them, which is the common fate of men that compound and medly themselves to comply with several Interests, and bear up with divers parties, who modelling themselves like the Tragoedian Bus­kin indifferently for every foot, while they would ingratiate with all, are endea­red to none.

Aristenus long since resolved Media via nulla est, and the Praetor of the Sam­nites in Livy wisely observed Media via neque amicos parit, nec inimicos tollit, and men of that model are like the flying Fish, which being partly Bird, partly Fish, is still prosecuted in the water by the Fishes, and in the air by the Birds: The Apologists indeed, like good Astrologers, will be sure to have chief respect to the Stars that are culminant, and when they draw the Scheme, and set the Figure of their Discipline, they observe who are Lords of the House, and accordingly make their judgment: so that (as famous du Moulin said of the Papists) He that would know their Opinions, must consult with the Almanack. Some of them that were the first to turn Tables, in the time of the Prelates, have been since so busie in tumbling them, that now at length they have in effect tur­ned them altogether out of the Church.

When the Jews were in the Sun-shine of prosperity, then the Samaritans would claim to be their brethren: but if once they were under a Cloud or Tempest, the other would not own the Kindred: And it is no new thing for men to be (in truth) like the Stone which Suidas fableth to have been in Aarons Brest­plate, Cujus Color sive ad prospera sive adversa mutaretur; for some while the Apologists held forth their Church in the notion of Presbyterian; but I could give account of the occasion (and cast it up with their own Counters, which if all the Box be not of the right stamp and metal, yet I am sure those I shall take are without suspicion) when their Church was to be entred by them in the Ca­talogue of a gathered Congregation.

A learned Divine of ours said, in answer to an Heterodox Prelate, that there were some tantùm in uxoratu non Papistae; and I may as truly say that some are tantùm in decim is non Independentes; and friends to that way, Usque ad aras tan­tùm, those Altars whereof they live: but manum de hac tabula, which as the Ita­lian Proverb speakes, I have not drawn Con amore with my affection to the draught.

But to speak freely, (being indeed too free of such obloquy) the most carnal and prosane in the Countrey are foremost in opposition to them, the scum of whose cho­ler they often see and hear, who measuring them by a fleshly line, finde their work de­fective, (I had snpposed rather excessive) not being able to bear the strictnesse of the word, (I thought they would have said their discipline.)

It is a misfortune, as sad, as singular, that the godly and wicked being of such different principles, should meet in one conclusion against their way. If the choler of some profane persons asperse on them, or their model (as perchance there may be some that are like Ithacius in Sulpitius Severus, who had no other virtue in him but his hatred towards the Priscilianists) yet scum being such light froth, cannot stick or defile, being soon to be wip'd off. Malè de me loquun­tur, saith Seneca, sed mali — Malis displicere laudariest, but yet notwithstan­ning, [Page 44] Moverer si de me Marcus Cato, si Laelius sapiens, si duo Scipiones ista loqueren­tur.

But whatever they be, Non multùm supra eos eminent quibús se irascendo ex­aequant; and since also, qui alterum incusat probri se ipsum intueri oportet, who would think that the Apologists, who take so tender a resentment of some pas­sages in the Paper (which yet I hope to approve, doe disrelish more by the di­stemper of the Organ, than the quality of the object; for quibus os putet, om­nia quae afferuntur putida sunt, oris, non alimenti vitio) would drop from their Pens so odious a blot upon their Opposers, among which (none perchance ha­ving said more in opposition to them, though nec me qui caeteros vicit impetus) doubtlesse they set me with Uriah in the sore-front of the hottest battel, that I may be smitten, and my good name dye.

Compare them, and determine if the Allegory and allusion taken from Ne­buchadnezzars Image, and the Romans pretended Magick, and an application of a passage in Chrysostome, which lye so indigested in the rising stomachs of the Apologists, or what else in the Paper may be capable of distast, be not cha­rientisms, and civil complements, in respect of this calumny, which sure is but the scum of a Brest boyling with an impotent choler; hic nigrae succus loliginis, haec est Aerugo mera, Ep. 47. is it possible; Tantae-ne animis caelestibus irae? I am more sensible of the dishonour they have hereby done themselves (for, qui alteri ma­ledicit sibi convitium facit) and as Cyprian, Neque qui audit, sed qui facit convitium, miser est) and my known deportment, especially measured by Seneca's Rule, Qui se innocentem dicit, appellat iestem non conscientiam, might have prevented, and will refute their calumny; and who, while I make not any externall judg­ment, either my Theater, or Tribunal, cannot by such clamours feel the Musick interrupted, which the Bird makes in my breast; scutum conscientiae sufficit ad­versus gladium Linguae: But I shall neither much complain (for omne naturâ in­validum querulum est) nor recriminate (since as Cicero to Dolabella, tua modera­tio eorum infamet infamiam) nor be passionate, because as Gregory, Qui mala non fert, ipse sibi per impatientiam testis est quòd non est bonus) but I shall quietly take up these arma justitiae à sinistra quorum convitiator faber est, as Augustine, and make use of this Dung spread upon me, to meliorate and manure me into more fruitfulnesse; and it shall be my solace, that qui volens detrahit famae meae, no­lens addit mercedi meae, as Suaviloquus Augustine.

SECT. IV.

WHether their way be grounded on the practice of the Primitive Church, is the great thing in question, and subject-matter of this Congresse, and there­fore not to be begged in the entrance. Quantum mutatus ab illo; how can this consist with their judgment delivered in the 2d. and 13th. Sections; nay, re­peated in the lines immediatly following in this Section, where their expressi­ons amount to this, that they nothing weigh, or make no account of the practice [Page 45]of the ancient Church, much lesse doe they reckon it a great thing, no: would they willingly have it brought into question upon this subject; so far are they from making it (antomastically) the subject-matter of this Congresse, well knowing, that to re-search into the judgments and practice of the Ancients, is with Roderick of Spain, To break open a Temple, where they shall onely finde Images of men armed against them.

Magentinus, an Interpreter of Aristotle, tells us, That a begging of the questi­on, is, when that which is proposed to be proved is used as a medium to prove it self, or when we use a medium, which seems to differ from the question, but is all one with it.

Now let any man cast eye on the Paper, and see what in that place I pro­pose to prove, and what medium I use for proving it; and then judge whether I offend in begging the question; or whether I may not question, that the Apo­logists need to beg more speculative knowledge concerning that Sophisme, though already they know as much practically, as any men that ever I met with.

I first insinuated, that Antiquity claimed reverence, and Novelty carryed suspicion: Next, that if the new way of the Apologists had ground or warrant from Gods Word, the practice of the Primitive Church, the demonstration of Reason, or did manifestly conduce to the advance of Godlinesse, I should not check with it for its Novelty (in relation to our age) but when many good, and moderate, and rational men were unsatisfied, that it had any such ground. or warrant, or tendency; and it seemed to me onely supported by popular dis­courses and similitudes, I could not but excuse those that conformed not to it. All this was by way of Introduction, rather than of Argument, or onely Propo­sitio Narrationis, and a precapitulation of what was to be dilated, and in parti­cular to be demonstrated afterward: So as you may see the Apologists here make a great Cry with little Wooll; yet out of this Lana Caprina they have spun six or seven of their Sections, making every Comma the subject of one of them; and in every one of the rest I was as guilty of Petitio Principii, as in this point; saving that they have omitted to speak here to the Warrant which their way should have from Scripture, and demonstration of Reason; so as I may say with Augustine to Cresconius, Si propterea respondisti quia tacere noluisti, non quidem ad omnia, sed tamen respondisti; si autem ad hoc respondisti ut ea quae à me dicta sunt, enarrares, video quidem te ad multa respondisse, sed nihil video re­fellisse.

SECT. V.

BUt they are struck with wonder at that (which is neither novum, rarum, aut magnum) viz. That any are unsatisfied that their way conduceth to godlinesse, as if this were a principle evident in it self, and apprehensible by intelligence, or by intuitive knowledge; or else themselves like Cato, that did good because he could do no other; but for truth of this they are confident to lay at stake their hearts, which else deceive them much, and their understandings, which otherwise fail them quite; and we shall be much too blame, if we will not be convinced by these new Topicks: But whatever befall their hearts, surely their memories have deceived, or attentions have failed them, while to start a trivial quarrel, they talk as out of the paper of a Rational, whereas onely it speaks of a mani­fest conducing to godlinesse, and so themselves relate the words, when they de­liver the Text in grosse, though they here change it, when they lay it forth by retail.

Let me first say, that it is not sufficient to warrant their way, though it did perchance conduce to advance of godlinesse in some acts or ends; for things are not denominated good onely from their ends or consequents; Bonum ex integra causa, licèt malum ex singulis defectibus: as in Logick, Ex falsis verúm (que) aliquando sequetur: so out of evil may good accidentally result. Corruption of Judgment, and false Opinions, may influence toward the generation of some real good. I doubt not but the fire of Purgatory hath holpe to sublime and purifie some souls in this life, which it never did in the next; and, as Birds at Cair, are hatch'd in Ovens by heat of fire, so that Purgatory fire hath produced many good works, though perhaps (as they say of these Birds) all of them may have had some blemish; though no man can malè uti virtute, yet he may bene uti vitio: As there are pious frauds, so there are pious injuries; there may be ex rapina holocaustum, yet sacrifice is no plea or protection for robbery; nor may I de­prive men of their right, with design to make them more diligent and sedulous to recover it, or others to preserve theirs.

But their way shames and restrains sinne, therefore conduceth to godliness: and it were somewhat indeed, if it onely shamed and restrained sin; but it shames (by rejecting from the Sacrament) many that are not culpable of scandalous sins, and restrains the use of those means, which properly and directly (being Gods Ordinance) have a tendency to the preventing and beating down of sinne. Secondly, it advanceth godliness:

First, by engaging such as walk in it to more watchfulness, being by this profession exposed to more observation for their ways.

1. If other mens eyes and observing of them excite to some watchfulnesse, and so consequently improves godlinesse (as they say the Tortoyses eggs are hatch'd by her eyes) it is the profession of godliness that occasions men to be observed; not formally, as it is professed in their way.

2. This is therefore either to impale and confine all profession of godliness to be in their way, and no other, or they conclude sophistically; for this which is but an accidental effect, is not proper to the profession of godliness in their way, but common to such profession in any way whatsoever; yea, it is common to an hypocritical profession: for whosoever makes any shew to be of the City of God, is set on an Hill, and cannot be hid. The smallest motes are discerned in the Sun, and he that pretends to more light, shall never be in the shade: and invidious observation, like the Sun-beams, reflects most upon that ground which seems to rise above the Level: Yet I trust this cannot excuse hypocrisie, or blanch it with a tendency to godliness onely, because a bare profession to be good, makes men more curiously observe others, whether they are such or not.

Secondly, in regard of the mutual watchings they submit unto: They that can watch over each other when they dwell some of them at neer 30. miles di­stance, have either as admirable eyes, as he that could from the Promontory of Lilibaeum in Sicily discern the number and bulk of the Galleys that came forth the Port of Carthage; or else have that rare Catoptrick which Fryer Bacon is said to boast of, whereby he could read things in the Moon, that were reflected from the Earth.

Thirdly, through the benefit of many private Exhortations and Duties, whose Light and Heat may both kindle and cherish gracious affections. The more faulty are the Apologists, not to make them publick and more communicable, since Light and Good are diffusive, and they kill as many as they might have benefited: Is it lawful to doe good, or to do euil? saith our Saviour, shewing good not done, is doing evil.

But first, why can they not be as watchful over themselves or others, if they had a communion of Sacraments with others, as now when they separate from them? Why should not their private Exhortations and Duties, if made pub­lick, and others brought to partake thereof, have as great influence, in order to the advance of godliness, intensivè toward themselves, and greater extensivè in relation to others.

Hath their Watch no other spring to set the Wheels a going, but hope to be rewarded with the Sacrament, in such a singular way, whiles others are exclu­ded? as if they would not

Sure then their Watch is onely to observe the time.

Secondly, if upon admission of a multitude, the Sphere would be too great for their virtue to extend unto, and the Horizon too large for their watchful eye [Page 48]to make inspection through; yet neverthelesse they need not by some general observation of the rest, remit or neglect their special watch over so many, as now they look after: and methinks it should be no lesse difficult to be watch­ful over many collected in one Parish, than over so few dispersed, at such di­stance, in so many Parishes.

Thirdly, if those be evil whom they desert, they are like to fall worse by such desertion; but I cannot see it likely, that themselves should grow lesse godly by their communion; in the natural body, when any parts are sick, all the hope of help from within, is in those parts that are sound (as Plutarch tells us upon ano­ther concernment) some men are like ambergrice, which though it have an in­grateful odour simply and by it self, yet begins to smell most fragrantly in compositions; and those consonants which among themselves, nor spell, nor sig­nifie any thing, yet joyned with vowels, doe form a perfect found; Aliquod bonum propter vicinum bonum; There is a winning by conversation, (as one stick kin­dles another) the example and emulation of good men, the desires to approve themselves to such (as Antigonus called Zeno his Theater; and Aeschines never did better, than when he spake in the presence of Philip) and the awe they have of such (as Cato kept the whole Theater in order; and of like influence was it in the Poet to be Coram Bruto) conduceth much to meliorate actions and persons.

Fourthly, why should they more distrust themselves to be like the Grape in this quality, Uvaque livorem contracta ducit ab uva, than the rest to resemble it in this property, Botrus circa botrum citiùs maturescit? True goodnesse is like Elixir, that by commixion with baser metals, improves them, not imbaseth it self; like Light, hath more splendor amid darknesse; and like fire, heats more by an Antiperistasis: and is their goodnesse onely of affinity with the Sentida, which withers, if any touch with it?

Fifthly, if by this separation themselves like the spirits and extractions of Chymists, become more pure and virtuous; yet what becomes of caput mortuum, those dregs of the people, as they call them? they not onely lose the influence of their godly Examples, private Exhortations, and Duties, but the fruit and help of the publike Ordinance, from which they are retrenched: Cannot these men go to Heaven, unlesse alone, as Cyprian said to Pupian? Is the good lesse, because communicable? (which is as much as to say, good is lesse good, because it is good; for the nature of good, is to be communicable) Or is their eye evil, because Gods and his Churches is-good? As he that saw the Votive Tables in Neptunes Temple of those that escaped shipwrack after their Vowes, asked, Where were the Monuments of those that were drowned after they had vowed? So what becomes of them that be excluded, while these are so im­proved by their appropriate exercises? Is it fit that some men should feast, while the most starve? Is it not better that many should receive Sportulam, than a few rectam? Doth their way advance godlinesse, in those whom they reject? which are divers hundreds, to one they admit: If it advance the conti­nuous quantity of godlinesse, sure it doth not the discretive. How many in so many years, have they gained to godlinesse; that is, to their way (for as Tychonius said of his Donatists, Quod volumus sanctum est) how much have they enlarged their Pomaerium's? I think there need no Libri Elephantini to record and catalogue their Proselytes: they say, the goodness of Phsifick is best [Page 49]demonstrated à posteriori, by the effects in working; and sure they cannot boast much of what in this they may have wrought or effected, when their Prolocutor hath above 5. or 600. in his Parish, and hath not (I take it) above 5. or 6. of them sublimed into his Church by all his Separations.

Lastly, are there none godly but they? Or they more godly for this way, and would not have been godly, or not so godly but for this way? Are they of this way more godly, then many that are not of it? If they evince this, Herbam porrigo; if not, ‘Urbem defendam dum vita atque arma supersint,’ I cannot with truth say of all, nor will speak with reproach of any, as Augustine doth of the Donatists, Damnant foras quod intus operantur; Yet I say, that if they deny there are as godly men that cross their way, as any that walk along in it, whereas they say, they boast not of their holiness, I shall tell them, that they not onely boast, but falsly boast thereof; the light of some of them doth shine, but we cannot discern it make any extraordinary blaze, and their Lights need snuffers too, as well as others: they are many of them perhaps godly men, de­nominating them from the better part, and according to their general course, not every particular action, and by their main end, not every of their ways, they have their alloy and rotten grains, and must be weighed with their grains, as well as other men. And though I am none of those who like Leaches suck out the corrupt blood; or like Quails, feed upon poyson; neither do delight to stirr stinking Carrions, which should rather be buried; yet there are publike Records which cannot be hidden, of grievous and execrable crimes, whereof some of their Communion (who were not onely ex domo novitiorum sed professe­rum) have been convicted, and which they have confessed; but though they do not expresly boast of their holiness, yet they are conceited thereof, and im­plicitly and interpretatively boast of it, while they separate from others, as not holy enough for their Communion, and suppose they should be polluted to communicate with them. All righteousness is by comparison; and though Guic­ciardine said of the Popes, that he was a good Pope, whose wickedness exceeded not other mens; yet they that profess to be holyer then others, and reject others from their Communion onely because not holy enough, if they be not much better then other, they are much worse; and as those little Globes that have a Diurnal motion about the Sun, we say are spots in the Sun, which yet are Stars, and would other-where be so denominated, were they not so neer his out-shining light: so that holyness which would be passable in others, will not be tollerable in them that pretend to so much; and it must be a greater Star that shall appear of any magnitude in any higher Sphaere.

God hath given sundry of their Meetings so much experience of growth, as to knowledge and affection this way, as plentifully confutes this Paradox: con­futes it in order to themselves perhaps, if they had stood in doubt thereof; not to others who cannot take notice of, nor have seen such experience. But this is but Testimonium domesticum, the belief hereof is resolved into their own testi­mony; and it is strange, that in a Democratical Church-Government they would imitate the Prerogative of Monarchs, and write teste meipso: Moses his face shined to others, and he knew it not; but it seems their shines, and them­selves onely know it. But what improvement of graces soever hath been oc­casioned by their Meetings, as St. Augustine saith of the Miracles wrought by Hereticks, they were done to confirm that truth which they held common with [Page 50]the Church, not their Heretical Opinions; so that increment of goodness was caused by the word and prayers at these Meetings, not formally, or the rather as they were Meetings in a way of Separation.

The old impure way of Pell-mell tends to many evils, it strengthens the hands of the wicked: And for this we must take their word, unless it can be proved by Jeremy 23.14. (Where though I find the Prophets of Jerusalem re­proved for strengthning the hands of evil-doers; yet I do not read any thing to perswade me, that they did this by admitting them to the Sacraments and Sacrifices:) Or can be confirmed by Luke the 13.26. where is mentioned, that they that shall stand without shall say unto the Master of the house, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets: But I did ne­ver till now imagine, nor I think did any other dream, that this was eating and drinking at the Sacrament: or if it were so to be understood, then to ad­mit them to the Word preached also, may as well strengthen the hands of the wicked, as to give them admission to the Sacrament; for they plead as well his teaching in the street, as their eating and drinking in his presence: And I ra­ther think it worthy very serious consideration, whether their way of excluding men pell-mell, and in the lump, doth not seem more to strengthen the hands of the notoriously wicked, while they see no other censure, or detestableness in this kind fall on themselves, then befall such as are innocent of Crimes noto­rious. And as contemptu famae & contemnuntur virtutes, so when men are pre­cipitously made to be of contemptible fame, they are put into some hazard to contemn virtue: Peccandi occasionem suspicando fecerunt, saith Seneca: and as some wise men think, in the case of jealousie, to hold any in suspicion is the way to put the matter out of suspicion: Plerumque bonos tractat [...]o pravos esse facit; so some may with more facility be tempted to fall to worse, when if they should so lapse, scarce can worse befall them; and being put to shame without great crimes, they will be less ashamed to become criminous, ‘Liberius peccant cum pudor omnis abest,’

And (since as Mago Almoner to Henry the seventh told the King, by occasion of the History of Joseph and his Mistris, It is one thing what a man should do, another what he will do) some men, though their Crimes have not been so great as to merit repulsion from the Sacrament; yet their grace per­haps may be so little, as that being repelled, they may be too conformable to the resolution of Otho in Tacitus, Cùm nocentem innocentém (que) idem exitus manet, acrioris viri esse meritò perire.

Secondly, while wicked men enjoy the priviledges of the godly, it will be dif­ficult to convince them of their impenitency and want of conversion: It seems then, that (as Pliny tells us) as the presence of an Adamant frustrates or su­spends the attractive virtue of the Load-stone, so the Word by participation of the Sacraments is defeated of its power to teach, to convince, or to judge, and ceaseth to be quick, and powerful, and piercing, &c. (all which effects we should have rather conceived might have been furthered and improved by the Sacraments.)

Let the Minister make them Saints in the Chancel (he may now do it in the Church as well since their Tables are no longer turned Altar-wise.) they will give him leave to make them Devils in the Pulpit till he be weary. This might be some colour for this effect of obduracy from their principles, who suppose all ought to be real Saints that communicate; but there can be none [Page 51]from ours, who assert, That Jesus sate down with the 12. and one of them was a Devil; but yet while they profess to admit none but Saints, and persons rege­nerate, the admission may make some rest secure upon that priviledge, without more re-search or inspection into themselves, and so to deceive themselves, Advers. Ana­bap. l. 6. c. 9. p. 231. because they have deceived others, Metuendum est, saith Bullinger, ne caena do­mini plerum (que) detur summis hypocritis et subtrahatur longè dignioribus, etenim qui se demiserint & humilitatem simulaverint, etiamsi animo longè turpissimo sint, et Evangelium spernant, nihilominus pro optimis et sanctissimis habebuntur, qui sunt dig­nissimi caenâ dom [...]ni; qui verò apertiores sint, et bilariores erant, et obnoxii communi­bus peccatis, à semulatione autem alieni sunt, Corde tamen firmiter divinae miseri­cordiae fidunt, &c. quia nondum illis pro peccatis suis satisfecerunt, ne (que) illis proban­tur ac nondum satis digni videntur, excludentur à caena domini. This he speakes of the Anabaptists, but it is as applicable to others.

The door of the visible Church is incomparably wider then the door of Heaven, (saith learned Baxter) and Christ is so tender, so bountiful, Saints ever­lasting Rest, Part. 4. Sect. 3. p. 104, 105.and so forward to convey his Grace, and the Gospel so free an invitation to all, that surely Christ will keep no man off: if they will come quite over in spirit unto Christ, they shall be welcome; if they will come but to a visible profession, he will not deny them admittance there, be­cause they intend to go no farther, but will let them come as neer as they will; and that they came no farther shall be their own fault; and it is not his readiness to admit such, nor the opening of the door of the visible Church, that makes men hypocrites, but their own wickedness: Christ will not keep men out for fear of making them hypocrites; but when the Net is drawn unto the shore, the Fishes shall be seperated, &c. And in the precedent page he saith, Their being baptized persons, if at age, or members of the Universal Church, into which it is that they are baptized, is a suffi­cient evidence of their interest to the Supper, till they do by heresie or scandal blot this (evidence) — and this after much doubting dispute and study of Scripture (he saith) he speaks as confidently, as almost any truth of equal moment.

The way of pell-mell blinds men in their wretchedness: very like! blindes them with light, and poysons them with the antidote, just as the means is de­structive to the end. Light may indeed some-while a little blind some weak eys, yet it is the proper means of seeing, and to keep them in the dark, will perpe­tuate their blindness, not make them see better.

Doth it not argue blindness of understanding to think by any argument to evince, that it shall either blind men in their wretchedness, or impede their conversion, by sealing to them an assurance, that if they believe in the Lord Jesus Christ they shall be saved by his death, which is the sum of the Covenant of Grace, whereof the Sacraments are Seals?

To raise our Structure the higher, and make it stand more firmly, we should perchance dig the Foundation deeper; and because this erroneous principle is the Fountain of those bitter Waters of strife, our Marah and Meribath, it might seem expedient to cast a little Salt into the Spring of those Waters to heal them. A Covenant is a mutual compact or bargain between God and Man, consisting of mercies on Gods part granted over to man, and of conditions on mans part required by God: it results from Gods antecedent and voluntary love that he entred into paction with man, and performeth his absolute promise of giving Faith and perseverance to his Elect: to which promise no condition is imaginable to be annexed, which is not comprehended in the promise it self, [Page 52]but to Gods Covenant of conferring other mercies, which flows from his conse­quent love (which is a natural property in God, whose proper nature inclines to reward good and evil) is a restipulation and condition of duty annexed. Of this conditional Covenant onely (the former being indeed rather a promise then a Covenant, being onely Gods act, without any mutual act of man) the Sacraments are divine external seals (and I suppose it is no such just cause, as may legitimate a war, whether it be more proper to say, they are conditional seals of the Covenant) to testifie and confirm unto us, that we shall surely acquire what God hath promised, if we seal back as it were our counterpart un­to God, and performing the condition render unto him what he requires, as a conditional promise is made absolute by performance of the condition, which otherwise obligeth not.

That the Sacraments are not Seals of the absolute Covenant, nor set to without respect to the condition, carries the stamp or seal of the Corporation of Protestants, and those which have set their hands to any Writing against Bellarmine, in that controversie of the efficacy of the Sacraments, have attested this truth. And some others of the Luminaries of our own Sphaere have re­flected much light upon the point. I therefore (whose harvest cannot attain to their Gleanings) shall not light my Candle in the Sun, nor in the worse sense bring an Owl to Athens, ‘Tu sequere à longe et vestigia semper adora.’ It may seem as much delirous to discourse of Military Glory after Hannibal, as it was for Phormio to do it before him; and a Smith may seem already to have run mad in undertaking (as he of old did to have effected) the amendment of an instrument of Archimedes. Onely I shall say, that whatever some rather odiously then ignorantly insinuate, this is yet neither the language of Ashdod, nor carries any stamp, or holds any affinity with Semi-Pelagianisme (or if you will call it so; Arminianisme, which is Synonymous (for Arminius and Socinus have had the fortunes to have these bastard and illegitimate Doctrines put upon them, which had other elder Fathers) as Sextus 5. his Obelisk, and Farnezi his Bull, and other Monuments, though formed and erected by the old Romane Emperours, are now denominated from those that of late times have redeemed them from rubbish, and restored their beauty) but the Doctrine we hold forth, hath no Analogy therewith: For beside that we assert Faith to be absolutely and infallibly infused by God, per modum creationis, and nothing to concurre to conversion, ex parte voluntatis causativè sed tantum subjectivè; and, ut cre­damus, to be wrought passively, in nobis sine nobis, although actively ipsum cre­dere be produced, nobiscum simul tempore consentientibus et co-operantibus, where­as the Arminians symbolizing with the Jesuits, affirm Faith to be purely an elicit act of Free-will, through a moral perswasion onely, upon an object con­gruously proposed, alliciens consensum non efficiens; and Grace (whose name they have antiquated, as well as destroyed the Nature, substituting the word help or motion in stead thereof) to be a general and indifferent influxe, ter­minable by mans good or evil free-will. Besides this, we are now disputing of Gods Covenant and Promise in time, not of his Decree before all time. If thou believe, thou shalt be saved, is not of the nature of a practical decree, but of a promise, and is onely doctrinal and enunciative: neither do we (as they do) make Gods Decree conditional, but onely the execution thereof, and not the will of God to save but the salvation of man, Gods eternal purpose in saving [Page 53]being absolute in respect of any cause or condition impulsive in the object, not in regard of the means in the execution, and order to the end. Gods promises for their form correspond not with his purposes, his promises being according to the manner of his executions, but his purposes have a different method: What he purposes, he performs for the matter, but not as he purposed for the manner: he saves in the same manner that he decreed to save; but in exe­cuting or saving doth not follow the same order which he did in decreeing: this which is last in execution, is first in intention; Dr. Kend. Vn­dicat. part 2. c. 7. and that which is performed on a condition, was absolutely intended: the intention was to perform it upon condition, but upon no condition was it so intended. We do not therefore say God intended upon condition of Faith to give Salvation; but that he inten­ded to give Salvation, upon condition of Faith; intending to give Faith abso­lutely, and Salvation conditionally.

But the Sacraments therefore being onely Seals of the Conditional Cove­nant, then men are not made Saints by being made partakers of them. Indeed the use of them may help to make men Saints by their influence and efficacy, but they do not imply, or presuppose all those to be absolute Saints that par­take them; but onely Saints conditional, if they seal back their counterpart to God, and fulfill that Condition whereupon he makes his grants and conveyan­ces: or onely relative and notional, not real Saints, Saints by calling, not by qualification; as the Apostle writing to the entire Churches, among which (especially among the Corinthians) many walked inordinately, calleth them Saints, that is, such as are made partakers of Gods Covenant, and Members of his Church; not Saints actu, sed vocatione, professione, debito, (as A Lapide) called to be Saints, taking the word (called) [...], and exegetically, ut sint Sancti, as Paraeus and Aretius; and so called charitativè, quia cha it as om­nes habet pro verè conversis, qui fidem et poenitentiam profitentur: such Saints, as according to the idiom of Scripture, are Synonymous with Professours of the Christian Faith: for it is not likely to be conceived by any, and will be more difficult to be proved by the Apologists (who else-where say Professours are vi­sible Saints) that all those Saints whose bowels Philemon refreshed, and whose feet the Widows had washed, and who had share of the Collections and Contri­butions, and Ministrings, had all given evidence of their real Sanctity: or that Paul when he shut up the Saints in prison, did tarry and forbear to do it, till he was convinced they were really such; but it was sufficient they were professors of Christianity, and that was enough to denominate them Saints. He that is a member of the Church, is within the Covenant, and is in Scripture-phrase a Saint, though not living altogether conformably to his profession, (those pri­viledges which are given to the visible Church, in respect of internal essence, (according to Tychonius his Rule de permixta Ecclesia) being attributed to the visible, in regard of external existence, as to be Saints, holy children of God, Saints everla­sting rest, part 4. Sec. 3. p. 105. Gal. 3.26. Christs body, 1 Cor. 2.13. branches of Christ, Joh. 15.2.) and there are many Saints, or sanctified men (saith Mr. Baxter) that yet shall never come to heaven, who are onely Saints by their separation from Paganisme into Fel­lowship with the visible Church; but not Saints by separation from the un­godly into the Fellowship of the mystical body of Christ: He is therefore (as I said) a relative, though no real Saint; and the entring into, and the accepta­tion of the terms of the Covenant, is common to very Reprobates; and in that [Page 54]notion a grave and learned Divine saith, Mr. Balls ans. to Can, part 2. p. 52. Tom 4. l. 1. c. 12. that Cain was in profession a Saint be­fore he had discommon'd himself. And we grant, that such an external, or (as Suarez calls it) a Legal Sanctification the Sacraments alwayes indeed do effect; so saith the famous Chamier, Sanctificationem illam quae pertinet ad exter­nam vocationem in Ecclesiam, quomodo Paulus dicebat ramos, id est, omnes sui tem­poris Judaeos esse sanctos, quòd eorum truncus, id est Abraham Sanctus fuisset, Rom. 11. et filios fidelium sanctos, 1 Cor. 7. Hanc sanctitatem concedimus semper conferri per Sacramenta, nimirum quia utrin (que) in confesso est, esse testes professionis Christianae, unde sequitur quicun (que) Sacramentorum sit particeps, hunc pertinere ad eum populum qui profiteatur Religionem veram; and if they will have none to be made such Saints by profession, but those that are Saints in verity, I shall de­sire them to perpend, that their Argument is more forcible to forbid the admis­sion of such as are not manifest Saints, and approvedly holy to be Church­members, then to be partakers of the Sacraments: for indeed the former are expresly, and in terms called Saints and holy, and therefore with more colour might they argue, that there ought to be probation made whether they were such before they were admitted into Church-fellowship, and what they shall answer to evade the force of the Argument against admitting none but upon tryal to be Church-members, may perhaps be catcht up and returned to fru­strate the Argument for non admission without tryal to the Sacrament, & vox tua facta mea.

2. Not to question why the Sacraments, (or indeed this of the Lords Sup­per, and not Baptisme also) are made the priviledges of the godly, and not other Ordinances also: Or how external and sensible Ordinances can be pri­viledges of an invisible and indiscernable Society: Irregenerate men admitted to the Sacraments enjoy no proper priviledges of the godly; but as is their Faith, such are their priviledges: A common Dogmatical or Historical Faith externally professed, gives them title to the common external seals of the Co­venant.

External Ordinances are not onely priviledges of the godly in facto esse, sed etiam in fieri: and either the Apologists must say they are never deceived in these which they admit, or else sometimes notwithstanding their caution, themselves are not priviledged from communicating the Sacraments to the unregenerate; and in so doing, they set the seal to a blank, and co-operate to their damnation, and the act contracts more of guilt in them then it can do in us, in whom it is for the impulsive cause, onely an errour of charity; and for the matter thereof, if it should be evil, yet is not so formally to us, because we are not thereof convinced in our Consciences; whereas they impose upon themselves a necessity of acting that, which they can have no infallible assu­rance they shall not fail in doing of, and yet are perswaded the failer thereof occasions that which cannot be lawfully done. As it is no obvious thing or facile work for any man to obtain an evidence of his own regeneration, so it is infinitely more perplext and intricate to acquire such assurance concerning another: and therefore upon this principle, that the Sacrament appertains to none but the truly regenerate, as the doubting soul can never approach, and so the sick be cast into an incapacity of a Physitian that most needs him, and the weak in Faith be frustrate of that which was instituted for confirming thereof, and the humble soul will be most afraid to come, and the presumptuous be [Page 55]most forward, since baser Mettals soonest run, and are most volatile, the richer are more fixt, and the full ear hangs the head, when the empty pricks up: and as he that knows most, discerns best that he knows little; so where there is much grace, there often the want thereof is most complained of; whereas when the strong man armed keeps the house, the things possessed are in peace: so also no Minister can admit any man with comfort, because not in Faith, and therefore with sinne, nor without a snare, because not in allibly, but doubt­ingly. For whereas it may be answered, that it is enough to act with the judg­ment of Charity, and to go as far as that can lead and direct, I shall reply, That Charity is very incompetent to hold the Beam, when things are to be waighed out in the Scales of Justice, and with à suum cui (que) tribuere. Charity pre­sumeth all are good that are not manifestly evil, interprets all doubtful things concerning persons in the better part, and judgeth aliorum bona certa meliora, certa mala minora, bona dubia certa, dubia mala nulla; which though it exalt the excellency of the virtue absolutely, yet it shews it is not respectively fit to be a just Judge, which must be impartial; and by what signs soever he may seek to make judgment, the possibility of being deceived will render him still pen­dulous and doubtful, whether those signs be certain, or his disquisition and de­liberation sufficient: and besides, if any shall say, that they admit none that are manifestly wicked, but such onely as being closely and secretly such cannot be discerned to be hypocrites, I shall answer them, as Augustine did Cresconius, Contra Cresc. l. 2. c. 23, 24, 26. Tom. 7. p. 47.49.Cur conaberis occultum excipere peccatorem, quem Scriptura non excipit, non ait oleum manifesti peccatoris, sed absolute oleum peccatoris, — Nec qui Baptizatur à mortuo manifesto, sed absolute à mortuo — ita nec occultus excipitur, quo evertitur omne quod loquer's: so in like manner they are unregenerate, abso­lutely such, to whom the priviledges of the godly are to be denyed, and not oc­cult unregenerate men onely.

3. Why is the one Sacrament more the priviledge of the godly, As cited by Bede, on 1 Cor. 10. and often by Chamier, v. g. Tom. 4. S. 11. c. 5. Sect. 27. or more makes those Saints to whom it is exhibited then the other? Are they not both alike equally Seals of the Covenant of Grace, and is not the Eucharist the re­newing of that Covenant which was formerly made by us, or others for us in Baptisme? Et institutio paria, et significatio similia, et finis facit aequalia. It is no ways to be doubted, saith Augustine, that every one of the faithful doth partake of the body and blood of Christ, when by Baptisme he is made a member of Christ.

They administer the Sacrament of Baptisme to Infants, of whose sanctity they can have no prognosticks, and of whose Parents holiness they have no Dia­gnostick signs: to tell me that other qualifications are more requisite to the one Sacrament then the other is nihil ad rhombum, that is not now our subject mat­ter, but whether if the Sacrament of the Eucharist be imparted to any that give not satisfactory testimony of grace, the priviledges of the godly be prostituted; and if so, why then it should not hold alike in the other Sacrament of Bap­tisme also: truly, as all the Rivers run into the Sea from whence chiefly they are derived, so let the Learned perpend, Whether these conclusions that seem to tend and lead thereunto, Advers. Ana­bapt. l. 6. c. 9, p. 229. did not first flow from the principles of Ana­baptisme, that great Abysse of modern Heresies; though perchance as Rivers they may seem at first to run a quite contrary course from the Sea, and to move so silently, that none can discern their motion thitherward, Post doctrinam [Page 56]de caena domini scrupulosè quaerunt Anabaptistae (saith Bullinger) quorum causâ instituta sit, et quibus danda est, ac multa de separatione dicunt, atque hac ratione cae [...]am domini amabilem et gaudio plenam, horribilem & tristem faciunt, ac aditum ad eam adeo coarctant, ut pii quo (que) homines ab ea abhorreant, et eam potius fugiant quàm accedant. And as a straight Line drawn out in length is weak, and can­not be strengthned but by being re-doubled, and bowed back again, whereby it draws neer to the nature of a circular Line, which is more strong by the sup­port which each part yieldeth to another: so let it also be considered by the Senate of the Learned, (for these points need rather Oedipus then Davus) whether the Apologists can be true and firm to their principle of admitting none to the one Sacrament, as being the proper priviledge of the godly, with­out satisfactory tokens of godliness, unless they also suspend Infants from the other, until they grow into a capacity of giving such marks and demonstra­tions; and also, whether they can exclude the Parents from the one Sacra­ment, without rejecting their Children from the other, since the Parents Faith is the ground of claim to the Child; and if a Dogmatical Faith, and External Profession cannot entitle the Parent to the Eucharist, whether can it give the Child a right to Baptisme, since quod facit tale debet esse magis tale: But for my part, were I convinced of the truth of these principles of the Apologists, I should have strong tentations to turn Anabaptist, and doubt I could not else be true to them, or maintain them.

This may also pertinently serve to blank or founder their Hackney Argu­ment, that the seal is to set a blank and false testimony that is given by a pro­miscuous admission; for when the Sacrament, the seal of Faith, is administred to those that are not true Believers, the seal is set to testifie and confirm that truth of sacred Writ, If thou believe, thou shalt be saved, (which is the compen­dium and abstract of the Covenant.) This promise is made to unbelievers, though it be the object of Faith; but the thing promised, which is the appro­priate object of Hope, is not to be acquired by any that performs not the con­dition: Besides, not onely by the rule of contraries, nor alone by an equal ac­commodation of that rule in interpreting the Laws, Praeceptum faciens includit praeceptum non faciens, Mark 16.16. (and therefore consequently the promise made to doing, implies the threat against not doing) but even in terms it is exprest, that as he that believes shall be saved, so he that believeth not shall be damned; and therefore the Sacraments being seals of the Covenant, as they confirm and as­certain the mercy to the faithful partakers, so do they the judgement to the un­faithful receiver: and therefore never is the seal set to a blank, to whomsoever applied, for somewhat of holy writ is still sealed, either salvation or damnation, according to the performance of the condition or not; as the same Deed or Wri­ting sealed and delivered may (according to Covenants) contain a grant and confirmation of a right and estate, upon condition of some services; and upon default thereof, that right and estate to be forfeited, and a mulct or penalty to be then incurred; and he to whom the Original is sealed, may seal back his counterpart, and oblige himself to observe the condition, before he have per­formed it, and though perchance afterward he break it, and so analogically he may receive Gods seal, the Sacrament, and set his own by taking it, that yet believes not; and as in the Word preached, which is the savour of life unto life, and of death unto death, and a sweet savour howsoever in both, he that be­lieves [Page 57]takes his part of the promise; he that doth not, receives his portion, which is the threat; so that to either it may be said, tolle quod tuum est & vade, and the terrour of the threatning may conduce and dispose to the acceptance of the promise, as fear introduceth love, as the needle doth the thread (in the expression of St. Augustine) even so it fares in the visible Word, the Sacra­ment.

Farther, when the Sacrament which is Gods external Seal of this promise is applied to an unbeliever, it hath all that is essential to Gods actual sealing of the truth thereof, the promise being made and published, the Sacrament by in­stitution signifying it, by similitude representing it, by sanctification assuring it, and God thereby engaging himself to verifie it; in respect of external sealing nothing more is done to a true believer, (for of internal sealing and making the external to be successful or efficacious, is not the question, neither may we confound the external sealing with the inward, which is made by the spirit onely) nothing is done more in relation to sealing to him that performeth the condition, than to him that fulfilleth it not. As when a Writing is sealed and delivered to the use of two to become a Deed when a condition is com­plyed with, or else to be as an escrol, he indeed that observes the Condition onely hath the estate thereby conveyed, but the sealing is alike to both. And this Conditional proposition is an absolute truth, even when made unto a Re­probate: though it be false that he believes, and that he shall be saved, yet it is true, that if he believe he shall be saved; for if the connexion be true, though both parts severally considered, or though one or other of the parts re­solved into a Categorical proposition be false, yet the proposition is true; Dr. Kend. ubi supra. the verity whereof depends on the connexion between the Predicate in the Ante­cedent, and the Predicate in the Consequent, which put together so as the Pre­dicate of the Antecedent become the Subject, and the Predicate of the Conse­quent be made the Predicate in a Categorical proposition, it will result onely into this indubitable truth, He that believes shall be saved.

Indeed if this Sacrament should be exhibited to an Infidel, not added to the Church, who had entred into no Covenant with God, nor assented by any Hi­storical Faith to the written Word, or should have the Sacraments exhibited without the Word, then they might argue that the seal were set to a blank, but being exhibited to those who are in Covenant with God, (as all are that be of the visible Church, how else can their children be baptized?) and have recei­ved by a Dogmatical Faith the written Word of promise, whereof the Sacra­ments are seals, there can be no blank but in the argument, if they shall in this case urge it; they will not say that it is an untruth or false testimony when it is delivered in the Word, though unto reprobates to whom that promise is offe­red, and the offer chiefly bottomed on the sufficiency of Christs death, to save all that shall believe, it being true that Christ by his death merited salvation for all upon condition of believing, if thereby we imply onely the connexion between Faith and Salvation, so that all believers shall be saved, (though it be not truth if we thereby intend that he merited salvation for all persons) his death indeed being sufficient for all, in regard of the price and merit thereof, though we cannot properly say he dyed sufficiently in respect of Christs pur­pose in laying down his life, and of the efficacy of his death, I say the offer of this promise to reprobates is grounded chiefly on the sufficiency of Christs death to [Page 58]save believers, and partly on our insufficiency to know who shall believe.

And if this proposition be no false testimony when it is held forth in the Word, wherefore should it cease to be true when it is given in the Sacrament, why should the same thing be true when proposed thetically, generally and to the ear, and false when applyed hypothetically, particularly and to the eye; as if the essence of truth consisted in the manner and way of representation, and not rather in the adaequation of things to the understanding? If they shall object that the Sacraments are mutual engaging seals, and as Gods seals on his part, so ought the receivers to set their seals to the counterpart, and when God obligeth himself to be their God conditionally, they absolutely promise to be his people; and therefore when wicked men partake of the Sacrament, in them at least it is a false testimony, while they profess to be what they are not; and because all that are within the Covenant of Grace de jure should be Saints, they ought to exclude all such of whom they are not satisfied and con­vinced that they are such de facto. I answer, 1. That I grant there ought to be the answer or restipulation of a good conscience in all for to be saved, but not in all that partake of the seals of grace and salvation. Yet whosoever re­ceives them doth or ought to set his seal to what is thereby sealed to him, which is onely, that he that believes in the Lord Jesus Christ shall be saved. 2. Let them assign a cause why the same reason holds not in Baptisme, and why upon that account they adjourn not the baptising of Infants, till they can render that satisfaction, seeing Baptisme is a seal of the Covenant as well as the Eucharist, and the seal is set to a blank when the baptised hath no faith, as­well as when the Communicant believes not. 3. Not to mention that there is a kind of mutual Covenant between God and Man, in hearing of the Word, God obliging himself by his promises there revealed, and in us there is a vir­tual engagement and profession of our religious reception of Gods will, and subjection of our Consciences thereunto with belief of his truth, hope of the good there promised, and love of God, which therein reveals himself, all which though wicked men seem to profess, yet nothing thereof they perform. But to insist on prayer, there is the like mutual Covenant, God obligeth him­self by his promise (though indeed as Durand aptly, Ames. Cas. Consc. l. 4. c. 16. p. 187. promissio divina in Scripturis sanctis non sonat in aliquam obligationem, sed insinuat meram dispositionem liberali­tatis Divinae, and thereby (as Thomas,) Deus non nobis fit simpliciter debitor, sed sibi ipsi) in some sense, to hear our prayers, if made in Faith, and in our prayers there is always an implicit, and for the most part an explicit and express pro­mise and engagement to God, to endevour to attain what we pray for, to glo­rifie God with all which we obtain by prayer, to observe his will that is pleased to accept the representation of ours, and to turn that verbal praise which we give him into real, by glorifying him by our religious lives, and complying with our vows, and verifying our professions of service, without all which prayer be­comes nothing but a mockery of God. But do not wicked men in all this flat­ter him with their mouth, Psal. 78.36. and lye unto him with their tongues? and if then men must be suspended from the Sacrament until they approve their holiness to the satisfaction of the Church, lest otherwise they make an hypocritical engagement and false promise, it seems to me to follow that upon the same ac­count they ought not to be admitted to prayers. Neither are or ought men to be Saints onely in order to the Sacrament, and not to other Ordinances; and [Page 59]if they must be rejected from the Sacraments till they give convincing signes of their sanctity, because all that are admitted to joyn in this highest act of Church-Communion (as they stile it) ought de jure to be Saints, it seems to me that till they render such signs they ought to be excluded altogether from all Church-Communion, and to be accounted as Heathens and Publicans, and no members at all of the visible Church; for the Church and Saints by cal­ling signifie the same thing, and all ought to be Saints that are of the Church.

Lastly, I may not deny that (through an accidental abuse which may not prejudice things good in themselves) wicked men may be facil to flatter and indulge themselves with a good conceit of their condition, though sinful, or an hope of their impunity in their evils, because of their participation of the Sa­craments. It seems by what St. Paul delivers, 1 Cor. 10. the Corinthians are an exem­plary instance hereof, being guilty of the like presumption and security. But what way of cure doth the Apostle use to prevent or remedy the malady? Truly not Empyrick-like straightway to take the knife in hand and fall to cut­ting oft, (for he doth not tell them that therefore all ought to be suspended beside manifest Saints) but he proceeds dogmatically, and to expel and cor­rect the errour of the Corinthians (which also lets out the vital blood and spi­rits of this Paradox of the Apologists) he better doth instruct and principle them, shewing that the Sacraments which were common to good and evil men, could give no privilege to sinne, nor protection from punishment. For quem­admodum tu comedis corpus Christi, sic illi Manna; & quomodo tu bibis sanguinem,Homil. 18. in 2 Cor. In locum. Calvin Instit. l. 2. c. 10. Sect. 5. p. 148. Aquinas, Justinian. Estius, Lapide, &c. English late Annot. Cha­mier. to. 4. l. 3. c. 2. p. 55.stc illi aquam ex petra, saith Chrysostome. The Fathers did all eat the same spiri­tual meat, and drink the same spiritual drink; the same, non in symbolis, seu signis, sed significatione seu re significatâ, as Piscator; iisdem quoque symbolis illustrem inter eos gratiam suam reddiderit; the same cum nobis, with us, not onely the same among themselves inter se, as the Papists would have it, for that would take off the energy of the Apostles argument, whose scope being ut ostendat quòd sicut illis non profuit quòd tantum donum sunt assecuti, ita nec his quòd consequuti sunt baptismum & spiritualia perceperint mysteria, nisi sint ostensuri vitam dignam gratiâ, in the words of Chrysostome, wherein not onely all Protestants concurre but even many Pontificians themselvs, therefore ut apta esset comparatio, oportuit oftendere nihil esse inaequalitatis inter nos & ipsos in iis bonis quibus falsè gloriari vetabat. Ergo pares in Sacramentis non facit, nec ullam praerogativam nobis re­linquit, saith Calvin, and therefore in illa comparatione rem eandem significatam esse fundamentum comparandi — nulla consequentia si compararentur in­aequalia aut dissimilia — nam si res impar,Ibid. c. 1.in promptu exceptionem esse futuram, Periisse Israelitas non participes beneficiorum quorum nobis Sacramenta sunt, addes Chamier: and the drift of the Apostle here is to compare those Sa­cramental Types in the old Law with the two Sacraments in the new, and that in two respects:

First, for the same nature or substance of mysteries in both; and secondly, Mede Diatr. p. 556. Chamier Tom. 4. l. 3. c. 1. for the same condition of the receivers, if either they abuse them, or walk un­worthy of them, saith a late judicious Writer. They were therefore the same spiritual meat and drink, in re (as Chamier) non in modo rei, (their Sacra­ments praefigurativè, ours rememorativè, and ours having ex ampliore revela­tionis modo gratiam uberiorem, as Calvin, non in specie visibili, sed virtute spiri­tuali [Page 60]— in signis diversis eadem fides, as Augustine, and out of him Anselm, there being discrepantia in signis, In Joh. Tract. 26. & 45. Tom. 9.convenientia in re significata, as Paraeus, theirs being antitypes of ours, signs of the same things, & ut apud Graecos Grammati­cos [...] sunt elementa quorum idem sonus, tempus deversum, as Chamier, and so this was the same meat and spiritual drink too, because spirituale aliquod significans, Ut supra. as Augustine and Piscator; figura spiritualis, as Sa, quia in symbolum & significationem spiritualium, as Salmeron, & quatenus habuerint rationem Sacra­menti, adds Piscator. So then however these were Sacramenta extraordinaria, transitoria & temporaria, yet being the same with ours (or else Christ is not ours, for that Rock was Christ) the same with ours in use, end and effect, and operating, Tom. 4. c. 9. p. 36. saith Ames, eodem genere non gradu efficaciae, and agreeing with ours omnibus iis capitibus, quae sunt de natura Sacramenti, as Chamter; and therefore the Fathers receiving the Sacramental Communication of the body and blood of Christ indeed, Confut. Rhem. Test. in 1 Cor. 10.3. Willet contr. 11. q. 2. p. 544. (as not onely Fulk and Willet, but the whole Protestant Host of the living God do contend) yet many of them God was not well pleased with, some whereof were Idolaters, Fornicators, Murmurers, did lust, did tempt Christ, yet the same spiritual meat and drink was received by all Sacramen­tally, though effectually onely by believers, the spiritual thing by the good alone, the Elements, which were spiritual in their signification, by evil men also. And thereupon likewise I hope it will seem evident to unprejudiced and unbiassed men, that the Sacraments are not onely communicable to such as have given positive signs and demonstrations of Holiness.

There are such answers given to the Argument drawn from this Scripture, as smack of some willingness to correct the Text, rather than their Models, and to set their spurs in the Apostles side, rather than to loose the reins in their hands.

Some tell us; Chamier ubi supra, Sect. 32. p. 17. First, that those were extraordinary Sacraments; but what then? Extraordinaria habent quicquid est de natura ordinariorum, exceptâ solâ ordinis circumstantiâ, quae eadem temporis ost, saith Chamier. Secondly, But these had no special promise annexed: But if so, then they had nothing beyond the Corporal use; and the Apostle was mistaken when he calls them spiritual meat and drink, and saith the Rock was Christ, in signification; though yet being extraordinary Sacraments; Ames thinks that idcirco non requirebatur ut promissionem haberent spiritualem ab ordinariis distinctam, sed satis fuit ut illarum promissionum beneficia singulari modo repraesentarent. Bell. ener. Tom. 3. c. 4. p. 42. Thirdly, that those might be common to all persons that were also common to beasts, which passed through the red Sea, drank of the waters of the rocks, and eat of the Manna.

But to omit that, Paraeus calls this Vere bestialem & caninam arrosionem veritatis, an argument smacking more of the Beast than rational Creature: even the matter and Elements of our Sacraments are common to bruit Ani­mals; for a Beast may drink of, or be washed with water, and eat of bread, even a Mouse may devour that which is consecrated; the possibility whereof hath made the Papists (out of whose Forge these Weapons issued, and upon whose Anvil they were fashioned) not more cautelous in their preventing it, than curious in their disputing thereof.

Divine Institution, doth not alter the nature of things, nor moral and rela­tive mutations infer real; the mystical use must be distinguish'd from the phy­sical; and from this use superadded to their nature they became spiritual, and Sacraments; none but those that were capable of that use (which not beasts but onely rational Creatures could be, (did partake a Sacrament; and it had been an hard saying, if the Apostle had told us, that Beasts did eat and drink spiritual meat and drink (as he calleth this.)

Fourthly, That upon the score of this Argument, both Infants, and all flagi­tious persons, such as were these Idolaters, Fornicators, &c. may be also ad­mitted to the Lords Supper: But for answer (beside that one knot is not untwisted by tying on another) wee do here onely argue that Sacraments formally as such, are not proper privileges of real Saints, or absolutely incom­municable to any, but such as have given satisfaction of their Holiness (which is their hypothesis, against which we are here disputing) and so much I think is fully and cleerly evinced by this instance; but yet though they are not abso­lutely incommunicable, We do not assert, nor is it here upon consequence, that all Sacraments may now practically be communicated to all persons, be­cause there are arguments drawn from other considerations, besides the nature of Sacraments in general, which limit and restrain their use. As for Infants, (to whom yet the Apologists will not affirm the Sacraments to be absolutely incommunicable, for themselves admit them to Baptisme) as they were in that time to Circumcision; and there being no more that we can find required to qualification for those extraordinary Sacraments than was requisite to Cir­cumcision, which was onely to be within the Covenant, immediatly in their own, or mediatly in their Parents right, Infants were in a capacity to receive these, as well as the ordinary Sacraments. Beside, an argument drawn from the Infants eating Manna, may pass in the next rank to that which Bellarmine collected from the drinking of Beasts, which might make a natural, but could no moral use thereof, and take it as common food, but not as spiritual, or as signs and pledges of better things. A principal end of the institution of the Lords Supper, was the commemoration of his death, for which Infants are in­competent; and here is an express command for a man to examine himself, which Infants are not susceptible of; and upon this account they are not ad­mitted to the Eucharist, though they are to Baptisme, being capable of the use and end thereof, viz. to initiate them into the visible Church, and constitute them members thereof, and engage them to the faith and obedience of Christ, and work upon them some other relative effects, in all which a passive recepti­on is sufficient, whereas in the Eucharist an active is requisite; Adult intelli­gent persons though criminous, have a potentiality to make such use, and do such acts, whether actually they do or not, though perchance they are incapa­ble of an holy and effectual use or actions; yet notwithstanding I do not think (as Paraeus doth not) that the Israelites did explicitly understand the mystical use of the Cloud, Rock, and Manna, yet most of them implicitely did so, Com. in 1 Cor. 10.1. and apprehended them as signs and symbols of Gods being in covenant with them, and all that were intelligent might have done so, and therefore all did in com­mon partake of these extraordinary Sacraments. And however there may be pious considerations and prudential motives whereupon such flagitious per­sons [Page 62]ought to be removed from Communion of Sacraments; Yet where either for preservation of unity, or through the multitude of offendors, or non-settle­ment, or non-administration of such discipline, or through any other obstacle (all which considerations might perchance be found in the condition of Israel in the desert) that cannot be done; for all those to whom it is not done, there may safely be a mixt communion, and free admission to the Sacraments being Covenanters and Church-members, without any such scrutining or proof of their real holiness, which I suppose may be concluded out of these premises. It irritates much when it is said that their way symbolizeth with the Donatists, but among other things seposited for future discussion, Aug. de con­vert. Donat. c. 23. p. Ep. 50. this is one point of their Correspondency, that the Donatists would have all their Church to be Saints, & suam ecclesiam ex qua esse profitentur, sine macula esse & ruga, and as they cast at our dore that with us wicked men enjoy the privileges of the godly, so Cres­conius tells St. Augustine vos inter fidelem & perfidum nihil discernitis, Brevicul. Collat. 3. Tom. 7. p. 118: but if they be all Saints with whom they hold Communion of Sacraments in their Church, theirs is less like to be the Church of God, for there are tares in that field, chaffe in that floor, bad fishes in that net, nec latere, sed cerni, not undisco­vered but apparant, Contra Dona­tist. post collat. c. 8. Tom. 7. p. 123. as Augustine, out of Cyprian, and so manifestly evil that the Wheat is rather hidden, saith he, when the Chaff is manifest. But adjourning a more plenary discourse of this matter, I shall here onely remind them of an aviso of Bullinger in an Epistle to Beza, Né dum purgatissimam ecclesiam, né quid hîc aliud suspicer, volunt instituere, brevi nullam habeant.

SECT. VI.

THE Apologists are rare men, for they say they pretend not to much art, & ‘Qui velit ingenio cedere rarus erit.’ It seems they can be content to quit the key of knowledge, so they may hold fast that of power; but I doubt they would not patiently hear another to say what they speak of themselves; else why can they neither digest nor relish the speech, that some other shekels may waigh more than those of the Sanctuary; and if they pretend not much to art, why undertake they that, which none should presume to do, but such as can justly make that pretendment? and there­fore as St. Hierome tells us, mendax humilitas, incauta humilitas; so I shall re­member them of what a grave Divine answered to one that spake somewhat in his own disparagement, Greenham. Oh, said he, why do you praise your self so much!

But as their own Espencaeus saith of the Bishops of the Councel of Trent, they were learned in their Assistants, so the Apologists tell us that what ever be their way of arguing, some other of the same judgment with them in the main have pub­lished arguments logical enough, and as yet unanswered. I cannot conceive those of the same Judgment with them in the main to be any other than Indepen­dents: But if they relate unto, or intimate those learned pens that have been drawn forth and impressed, in asserting Presbytery, and vindicating the power of excommunication (as I doubt they do, because in their subsequent discourse when their own quivers are empty, they make use of some of those arrows which were never aymed at, n [...] are proper for the mark) I must tell them they have no more interest in, or advantage by those arguments than the page which Huartus speaks of, could have in all the Kingdoms and Nations of the earth, by the false imagination in his frantick distemper, that they were all his Vassals and Contributaries, and himself the onely Master thereof. Of Trea­tises maintaining Independency I am assured there are many more written than I have read, who am not much conversant in the late English Pamphlets, who love not to be opening packes of small Wares, and chuse to set up some great lights in a room, rather than go to search every corner with a candle in my hand. But truly of those Independent Writers that I have met with, if I shall offer my judgment, I must say of their Arguments as du Moulin did of Boniface his Extravagants, They will do well with a sword in hand; I presume the Apologists engage more of time to books of this subject, and I doubt not but they have cropt the best flowers to make up this garland wherewith they seek to crown their way of discipline, which in their order we shall consider.

But the arguments which the paper means, when it calls them popular dis­courses and similitudes, were neither more lamely nor disadvantageously repre­sented (as they suggest) than really they were, for the Apologists have not cu­red their halting, they still go the same pace in their Apology, though to sup­ply the weight, here is addition to the number, but non gemit Antigenidus si Tellias novas habet tibias, and they could not well be unknown, or easily be mistaken, being so often inculcated, and made the ordinary subject of their Sermons, and resound of their Pulpits, this being the Sparta, they have chosen to adorn, and therefore no matter if not given under their hands till now, though perchance it had been more politick not to have now given them, the eye being not so easily charmed as the ear, and we might have imagined them better, if we had less perfectly known what they had been, and they might have been like the Images of Brutus and Cassius in the Funerals of Junius, Julius.eo ipso praefulgebant quòd non visebantur, as many other things; the less known, the more have been reve­renced; like Callipolis, onely fair afar off, and resembling the Chariots Vegetius speaks of, At first a terrour, but upon more acquaintance a scorn. We yeeld them the knowledge of distinguishing between illustrations and arguments, but we know more of their illustrations, than their Arguments, and their Declarations of the purity of Ordinances, and of the Saints, the prophaning or polluting of either by mixt Communions, the giving false testimony and prostituting the privileges of the godly, the mischief of evil society, and the partaking of other mens sins (which are good propositions till they be yoked with unsuitable as­sumptions, and terms argumentative in thesi, but misapplied in hypothesi) out of which mediums the Arguments were formed which the paper meant and called [Page 64]popular, because onely like to take with that kind of people which have Cor in auribus, non aures in Corde, as Augustine speaketh, taking things ut sonant, non ut sapiunt: such are neither good arguments, nor s [...]t illustrations: but out of their resolutions nothing can be distill'd but fallacia consequentis, and which are therefore but like Aegyptian Temples, specious in the Frontispiece, and a Calf or an Ape in the Penetral, ‘Desinit in piscem mulier formosa supernè.’ But some reasonings in the Paper are of that constitution, (I suppose they mean illustrations, which word immediatly preceded) and there are indeed many illustrations of the reasons, or the things proved by reason; but whereas they have told me that my discourse is onely Rhetorique, and that I should have used more of the fist than the palm, and a major and a minor would have done better than my ingenious sentences, and witty illustrations, besides that which the Poet hath prompted me with, ‘—Leporem tu quo (que) pone mihì.’ Let them string up such sentences and illustrations, and I shall like their dis­course the better, if such a thread run thorough it, such sentences, though som­time pick'd from Heathens, being in some degree argumentative, seeing to rea­son from what the wisest of natural men have taught, carryes no great unsui­tableness to St. Paul's reason from what Nature teacheth, 1 Cor. 11.14. I must further take leave to answer, that (absit invidia verbo) it is so facil and fami­liar to me, that of quicquid conabor dicere I could make syllogismes; how easie had it been to have thus argued? That which was not done by our Saviour Christ at the first institution, is not necessary to be done in order to the admi­nistration of the Lords Supper, but the special examination of every Commu­nicants knowledge or life was not done by our Saviour Christ at the first in­stitution; ergo. Or thus, That which was by the Lord Jesus imparted to Judas, is not to be denied to any that is not scandalous or notoriously wicked; but the Sacrament was by the Lord Jesus administred to Judas, ergo; Or thus, What was permitted by St. Paul is still allowable; but to come to the Sacrament up­on the private examination of a mans self, was permitted by St. Paul, ergo. And thus I could as easily have done thorough the whole discourse; but out of the Schools, I thought it a more flat and tyring way of arguing; and I took my precedent chiefly from the greatest Masters of Controversies, in whose larger Vo­lumes I meet not with many explicit syllogismes, and remembred that Tacitus commendeth Seneca, that he had Scribendi genus temporis illius auribus accommo­datum; and that Mercury speaking to Battus, sell into Battology,

And therefore chose rather to be in fashion, than to wear richer cloths, and to be wet with the common showre of folly, as it is in the Fable, than to be wise with singularity.

But who hath not read in Aristotle of a rhetorical, cryptical, and implicite Syllo­gisme, which Logicians say is usual, Ornatûs aut brevitatis causâ; and which by a tacit supply of one proposition is made up perfect: Children when they first learn to read, spell every syllable, but grown more skilful, they make up and pronounce every word at its first aspect: so I think the like of discourses, where any versed in arguing can readily analyse the speech, and by a mental supply of what is onely implyed, finde the force or fallacy of the argument. Though I have censured others for popular Rhetorique, the Imposture of our times, yet not as rhetorique, but as Enervous, where affections are onely wrought upon, reason not at all; and which being resolved, appears but like a Calf made out of golden ear-rings. Whether mine be of the one, or the other kind, neither my self nor the Apologists are competent Judges, who perchance may both look on it through a Perspective, though I at one end, they at the other of the Glass; and at the one end all things appear greater, at the other less than they be. But however it be, though they (as Cresconius did St. Augustines) do slight and up­braid my rhetorique (such as it is) having perchance the like quarrel there­unto which he had to Demosthenes his Candle, because it stood in his light, and they have some affinity with Cleon, who using to hold the worst side in the cau­ses he pleaded, was therefore always inveighing against Eloquence; yet per­chance some may find more implicite Syllogisms in my Rhetorique, than Lo­gick in their explicit ones. As he among the Romans was held the best Citi­zen, that being a Plebeian favoured the Optimates, and being a Patrician coun­tenanced the people; so I think him a more accomplish'd Writer, that taking the part of a Logician to work on reason, takes in ayd of Rhetorique; and play­ing the Rhetorician to move the affections, makes Logick auxiliar. Things of the same signification may have different impression, according as they are dressed, and set forth; and perchance the same thing nakedly and bluntly de­livered, had not made so easie and great an impression on the famous Marquess of Vico, as it did when set forth under an elegant similitude by Peter Martyr. I would be made all things to all men: Modus orationis auditor, ‘Orpheus in Sylvis, inter Delphinas Arion.’

It was Epiphanius his commendation, that the Learned liked him for the mat­ter, and the unlearned for the style; and (as Pliny saith, they sometime deal with the Elephant) it is convenient to deck the Manger with flowers, that the Provender may go down the better. But the Apologists will prove themselves Builders, and not Painters; and sure they may be both with commendation, for Christ was painted crucified among the Galatians, which Interpreters under­stand of the lively and evident setting forth of his sufferings. Let them there­fore lay solid Foundations, and build up firm Wals, we shal not only allow, but take complacency in the painting thereof: But let them not bring us back again to Babel, that when we call for stones, they bring us onely Mortar to daub with. They are, they say, Builders, not Painters; perchance he that can judge of Colours, will take this but for painting: they may be Builders at some times, and in some things and respects, and yet perchance be Painters onely in some others (as particularly in this subject:) for it is not necessary, that he that builds should never paint. It is a debt to Truth, to acknowledge that [Page 66]they are capable to build up in our holy Faith, and do edifie: themselves di­sparage their skill and pains in building, more than I dare to do; and confess their power of destruction an hundred to one greater than that of Edification, pulling down a goodly Church, that with some stones selected out of the ruins, they may build an angust Chapel after their model. And can they pass for good Builders, when after twenty years labour in a Town that hath formerly had two or three expert Architects to prepare the work, (and one of them shi­ning. ‘Tanquam inter ignes Luna minores;’ By whose excellent preaching, they were like Capernaum, lift up to Heaven) succeeding each other (and as Machiavel saith of Princes, so may I of Mini­sters, The continued succession of two good Ministers cannot but effect great matters:) that yet their Prolocutor among 5. or 600. stones cannot hitherto hew or square above five or six of them for the Altar, or make them lively stones, 1 Pet. 2.5. built up a spiritual house (as the Apostle speaks.) It is likely, that in some resemblance with that living stone, they may be some of them disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious; but while they will not own them for such, they detract much from their own faculty in building. I sup­pose we do not see any painful and holy labours in Gods field recompensed with so poor an Harvest, and God is not wont to give so small an increase, where any wise planting and diligent watering hath preceded. Had the Apo­logists been as frequent, and earnest, and importunate, in preparing men for the Communion, as they have been in asserting their power of suspending them, and been careful rather to prevent, than to punish indispositions, I be­leeve they had superseded those multa supplicia, which cannot but be to them tàm turpia quàm medico multa funera, as Cassiodor speaketh; but suam quis (que) homo rem meminit; and the Proverb which Ammonius, in the life of Abbo, tells us, was used of things too eagerly and impertinently insisted upon, venit ad decimas, may now be turned into venit ad suspensionem; their Pulpits have been too much set to the tune of their models and plat-forms of Discipline, which might with more honour and more fruit of their Ministry, have onely resoun­ded repentance toward God, and Faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ: but while they have been more careful lest they marre their own Inheritance, than to raise up the name of the dead (viz.) Jesus Christ our elder brother upon his Inheritance, no marvell though they spit in their own faces, and put upon them­selves the reproch of bad builders. He is not like to build the house better, that hath not entred at the door. The influence of the Agent is upon the Pa­tient well prepared, and those preparations and previous dispositions are best wrought by familiar and gentle applications, humble condescentions, meekness, of spirit, and by being given to Hospitality, which are the most proper tools and most effectual Instruments to build with: durum & durum non faciunt mu­rum; and he that shall chuse to make use of the contrary, may think to build such a Chamber for himself, as Tobias had by the preparation of Eliashib, in the Courts of the house of God; but he may not hope to build Gods house, especially when his Rod takes up almost all the Ark, and leaves so little room for the pot of Manna. The Halcyon or Kings-Fisher doth onely build his nest [Page 67]in a calm; and the Fishers of the King of Heaven are onely like to edifie the Church by calm comportments, and gentle applications, not by raising such firy and boysterous storms. Amphions Musick brought together, and laid the stones for building the Walls of Thebes; but they are so long, and so much knocking and beating of the stones, that they break them to pieces, and are like the Italian Musicians that were admitted to sound their Airs before Sultan Achmet, which were so long a tuning of their Instruments, that he thought this their best Musick, and sent them away with contempt and indignation, and fru­strated of their reward.

SECT. VII.

WHO would have imagined, that the drawing of an Allegory from Nebu­chadnezars Image, would have been an occasion to bring me into the firy Furnace, (as St. Augustine calls an Adversaries angry mouth) and that quicquid tetigero ulcus erit. Bitterly, (they say) but

I conclude, that I cannot but excuse such, as at the sound of such Musick cannot fall down and worship the Image which Nebuchadnezar hath set up; I make their holy and Christian way, the means (antonomasticè) of spiritual life (though I trust all are not spiritually dead that partake not of these meanes,) Nebu­chadnezars Image and Idolatry, and their Exhortations, moving soules to their so­ciety (as tending to Reformation, and some rise of order) so as it seems they only are of the Reformed Religion, whereas they onely reform the Church militant in the Military notion; (as Troops and Companies are said to be reformed when they are lessened) This is Pagan Musick; Magnum crimen Caie Caesar, & ante haec tempora inauditum! But are the Apologists in earnest, and will they as much blemish their Charity, to think I intended this, as their discretion, to suppose that this can be inferred from my expressions? If I seem to conclude bitterly, it is because the stomach vitiated the tongue with choler, therefore every thing tastes bitter: Doth it more imbitter them to hear the same thing drest in a Rhetorical figurative expression, than in a rustical and blunt Language; Acuto quàm retuso telo vulnerari commodius sit, saith the great Physician Celsus. A comparison reflects more light, and impresseth more com­placency, than a simple contemplation. If I had said I could not but excuse these that could not dance after their pipe, would not that have irritated them with the harsh sound thereof? And what do I in that other delivery of my self, but signifie the same thing in other words? Scaliger tells us of a Maid that sounded at the sight of a Rose (as Cantharides are killed with smells of [Page 68]sweet flowers) and it seems the Apologists are offended with a poor Flower of Rhetorique, a Rose that hath no prickles. Allegories are but implicit and contracted similitudes, which as they must not be wrested beyond their scope, and (as Heralds say of Bearings) the resemblance must be taken from the best of their properties, not the worst; so he that shall apply all that to the sub­ject of the apodosis, which agrees to the subject of the protasis, will forfeit as much of discretion as of charity. In that Allegory, (viz.) where the dead carcass is, there will the Eagles resort; the carcass refers unto, and shadows out our blessed Saviour, but dare any to be so foolishly blasphemous, as to apply unto our Saviour other properties of a carcass than that one of conveying his Saints to him as Eagles to a carkass. Do not the Apologists in the close of this Section, tell us in the phrase of Scripture, of Adders stopping their ears to them, and of their piping to them that have not danced, and shall we have so little wit or ingenuity, to say they grant themselves to be Charmers or Fidlers? With as much colour of justice do they complain else-where, that I lay Ma­gick to their charge, in saying their gathering others from their proper Pastors into their Church, resembles that Magick which some Romans were slandered with, of charming and bringing other mens fruits into their Fields. As Socrates said of Heraclitus his Works, What I understand, is good; what I understand not, I beleeve is good: So when they else-where complain of despiteful Ca­lumnies cast upon them, who will not contrariwise be apt to say, what I know hath no cause of complaint; and therefore I beleeve what I know not is as causless. But as it tends nothing to the honour of their patience, imbecilla se laedi putant si tanguntur; so as little to the repute of their innocence, to be so tender, Hieron. in Is. 2. Tom. 4. p. 20. Aug. Tom. 7. p. 69. as to catch fire from every spark; for not onely wise Tacitus hath said, agnita sunt si irascaris; but more reverend Hierom, Qui m [...]hi irasci voluerit, priùs ipse de se quod talis sit confitebitur; and perchance when they suspect I accuse them of Idolatry, they re-mind that of Hierom, Omne dogma contrarium veritati adorat opera manuum suarum, & constituit idolum in terra sua.

SECT. VIII.

THE Paper, (quantum distabat ab illa?) that otherwhere is too par­simonious, is here (quanto majora dedisti) become very prodigal, in gran­ting them more power than they desire, (and then surely the grant is excee­ding large) for it impowers the Minister alone to excommunicate, which the Lear­ned make an act of jurisdiction belonging to the whole Church, (the act and exer­cise of that power, none but their late sprung party of Independents do invest the whole Church with, though the Church-Representative in general Coun­cils perchance do assume it) Or to the Officers of the Church, (which is not so [Page 69]accurately expressed, for the Minister is a Church-Officer too) but herein he speaks the opinion of the School, which seems to put Church-censures into the Mini­sters hands alone. But however, the School-men may perchance seem to allow a Minister to deny the Sacrament, ad hic & nunc, to him that is notoriously guilty of mortal sins; and so is jure & demeritoriè already excommunicate; Aquin. suppl. q. 22. art. 1. Biel. in 40. d. 18. q. 2. conclu. 3. Valencia in 3. disp. 7. q. 17. punct. 3. sic eti­am Durand. & Estius in 4. d. 18. ille q. 4. iste Sect. 14. item Vasquez de excom. dub. 17. yet so broad and unlimited an expression, that the School seems to put Church-cen­sures into the Ministers hands alone, argues the Apologists to have tasted the School-men, tanquam canis ad Nilum, or heard them, tanquam eccho per reflexio­nem, at second hand; for it is their general and constant doctrine, that not all Priests, nor onely Priests; but, as Aquinas speaks such qui habent praelationem sive jurisdictionem coercivam; that is, judicii exterioris contentiosi, in the words of Biel, or legitimam jurisdictionem, ordinariam, vel delegatam in foro externo Ecclesiastico, in the phrase of Valentia, have the power of Excommunication, though paro­chial Ministers may inflict it sometimes by special commission, or in certain particular cases, by custome; as in Theft and Rapine. But

The Apologists do but dream all this while; when they awake they will finde they have not that which they thought to have held: neither was that granted which they assume. The Paper argued, ad hominem onely, not ad rem, and suppo­sed they might comparatively take as much power alone to exclude some noto­rious sinners, as they did assume to excommunicate so many that were not noto­riously sinful: & yet as Luther said in the matter of Absolution, Hieron. ubi supra. in casu necessitatis quilibet potest esse Sacerdos; so under the duress of necessity, (quae quicquid co­git, defendit, saith Seneca, so that the Oracle resolved, omnia necessaria concedit Deus) where discipline by any obstruction is not regularly setled; or those that should concur to the exercise thereof, do generally and totally desert or neg­lect the duty, if the Minister by the power of those keys which he holds in his single hand (so it be not Citra consensum Ecclesiae ac praecipuorum ejus membrorum, In 1 Cor. c. 5. p. 466.maximè autem Christiani Magistratus; as Paraeus limits it particularly, although that consent be onely implicit and interpretative) shall shut out from the Sa­crament, untill he verifie his repentance, any one that hath lapsed into such an execrable sinne and scandal as deserves excommunication (for onely for such sins St. Epist. 118. Augustine affirmeth may a man separate from the Communion) and is notorious by sentence of any Judicatory whatsoever, Confession of the party, or Evidence of the fact, See more of this Sect. 29. that Minister that shall do this shall live without any quarrel from me for so doing. But yet what necessity in some cases may some­time warrant, is not always and in all cases regular or absolutely to be practi­sed. Honesta lex est temporis necessitas, necessity is a temporary, no perpetual Law; and the great Lawyer Paulus resolveth, quae propter necessitatem recepta sunt, non debent in argumentum trahi. And as the Paper did not concede them what they suggest, so had it granted as much, yet it is no more than they de­sire, unless their desires have narrower boundaries than their practice; for in the 29. Sect. they say in terms, the Ministers of the Gospel may act by virtue of their Commission from Christ, upon their own knowledge or conscience, as to censuring; but as a Conquerour, having vanquish'd his enemy, will not be [Page 70]content with that which before would have given complacency: so by that time they were grown confident of their Victory, and thought their shadow grown longer, and like the bounds of Sparta; so their power is lengthned with the sword; and perchance as the shine of success may quicken them, their claims may still spring to a greater heighth. And if they do not claim, yet they already usurp the power to suspend alone, without the efficacious concourse of any others. Those whom for form sake they call their Elders, may perchance sometime heretofore have co-operated, not as Physical, but Moral causes, ad quorum praesentiam, non efficientiam sequitur effectus, to whom therefore I cannot allow the nature of Consonants, which though mute of themselves, have their sound when joyn'd with Vowels; but those having no vital principles, they are rather like Architas his Dove, and Regiomontanus his Eagle and Fly, which move by these Wheels which they make and set, and whereof they order the spring; and yet also it is very obvious and transparent to all about them, that these Wheels have been rarely or never set a going about the Work; for one or two of the Ministers onely made tryal and judgment, and admitted or laid aside as they list, which I think they will not deny; or if they should, I could verifie by particular instances.

But whatsoever be the neglect of others, the Apologists have now redeemed their faulty omission of the Eucharist, the frequent Celebration whereof they sense to be their duty; and so secundo post integritatem gradu consistunt, and are almost innocent, because (as they say) humbled: The lesser evil hath somewhat of good, and it is well that they see, and farther from evil, that they have in any degree reformed their fault, God may in his good time reflect one beam of light more upon them, and make them see that they have yet no other­wise rectified their sinne of Omission, than as he doth, that idly sate still, and then starts up to run a wrong way. But as qui tardè vult, diu noluit; so qui pau­cis dat, multis negat; as I doubt not but they would hitherto have wholly inter­mitted the administration, unless they could have gathered a selected compa­ny, among whom to have administred it in the way of separation: so now still they omit and lay aside the Celebration, in respect of so many as they admit not, which are by far the greater number: so as take the denomination from the greater part, and we may say they administer to none (in comparison) and in their proper Churches and Charges they celebrate not; for as the Papists poysoned their God in the Sacrament, that they might poyson the Emperour, so they have suspended the Sacrament it self in their Congregations, that they might suspend the people: and their zeal to the administration, may well be gathered and concluded out of this, that their Prolocutor by his Allotrio-Episcopal influence and acting, hath procured and brought into some Chur­ches, under the notion of Pastors, some which long time after were not Mini­sters lawfully ordained, and so in no capacity to consecrate and administer. And whereas they tell us, that all that are desirous and worthy, with little pains, might partake thereof; As for many of those that are rejected, their de­sire will be sufficiently witnessed, and their worthiness is not to be tryed by un­sealed weights, and uneven ballances; and for the pains which they must take, which I imagine they intend of their travell to a remoter place, Ad Paulin. Ep. 13. Tom. 1. although fru­strà fit per plura, and one place is as neer heaven as another, as St. Hierom said, Et de Hierosolymis & de Britannia aequaliter patet aula coelestis: so they that call [Page 71]them ten or twelve miles, may with as much reason command them twenty or thirty farther: Yet it is not so much the place, as the way that is questioned, and the reason and authority that enforceth it. But of the place, we shall su­spend farther consideration, having destined a special Section to that Topo­graphy, and desire onely it may be here perpended, whether the thrusting out of such a multitude from the Sacrament, do not check with that caution, which Augustine so often inculcates, of not eradicating the Wheat, while they rashly would separate the Tares.

SECT. IX.

IT is no unprofitable way, saith an eminent Divine, Dr. Jo. Whites Defence way, p. 143. when one cannot defend his question to pick a quarrel to the state thereof; Which trick, saith he, Dr. Staple­ton in his time made good use of. The Apologists, it seems, have learn'd this trick, and here question the Paper for mistaking the question; but it being their practice directly which was questioned, the state of the question will be best determined, by calling under our prospect their way and their practice. At Holisworthy divers assembling at the Publick Lecture, the Prolocutor of the Apologists, who was married to that Church, and now by a new kinde of Poly­gamy sought to contract a new and fairer Spouse, of such as were most mall­able to his impressions, and facil to be lick'd into that shape whereunto he would form them, drew some few (for he retained his interest in his old Church, when he gathered a new; and being more provident than Aesops Dog, kept the substance, when he catch'd after the shadow; and held the Bird in hand, when he sought more in the Wood) into a more private Conventicle, where after the Lecture, they had a kind of prophecying, and one or other was by turn selected to be Moderator of their Exercises, where Jacob not rolling away the stone from the Well for the sheep, but the sheep for Jacob to drink, while the Ministers sate by in silence (& silere eos turpe est & Xenocratem loqui.) O­thers, who though like those Animals whose eyes serve them well enough in the dark (for their private obscurer condition) yet have no perspicacy for a grea­ter light; so their parts either infused by nature, or acquisite by study, being too angust to reach that heighth, or comprehend those Dimensions: Yet [Page 72] ‘— Currus petit ille paternos.’

They presuming (as I think) to understand above what was meet for them to understand, Epist. ad Paul. in Tom. 3. p. 8. which the Apostle forbids; and when

Sola Scripturarum ars est quam sibi omnes vindicant — hanc universi praesumunt, lacerant, docent antequàm discant, which St. Hierom derides, and not contenting themselves with the judgment of discretion, Hieron. ubi supra. but usur­ping that of direction, and cancelling the natural Law of Relatives, were all Pastors without Flocks, and the Sheep all turn'd Shepherds, they undertook

To expound and apply difficult Texts of Scripture, and resolve doubtfull Cases and Questions in Theology; and with the Child (as it is in the Story of St. Augustine,) to lade out the Ocean with their Cockle-shell; and as they arro­gated to be Gods mouth in publick teaching of the rest, so to be the mouth of the rest to God, in publick praying for a blessing upon others. Nay, some of their Women impatient of that Gagge which the Apostle had set in their mouthes, as if not fitted for this age, wherein he did not fore see that Sex should become such able Speakers, had their frequent interpositions, even to the modelling of their Meetings and Exercises, Discunt, proh pudor! à feminis, quod viros doceant; so as their Congregation had somewhat of Analogy with the State of Athens, where Themistocles ruled the City, and some other governed him. And now, when in conformity to the Independent Archetypon, (where when seven or more persons by frequent society are satisfied of the holiness of each other, they agree to constitute a Church of themselves, so when) they had drawn forth stones enough, hewn and formed them to their fashion, that there might be no noyse of Hammers at Pyworthy, thither the Prolocut or car­ryed them without ever appointing of a Communion at home, where such as were fit might come to be admitted, or examining who in his Parish else were fit, or endevouring to fit them in any other way, save by preaching, That to come under their discipline, was the onely door to let in to the Sacrament, he there erects of these Stones his altare contra altare, whereof all they which did at first partake, and were received into Communion of the Sacrament, had their tesseras hospitales, Ad annal. Ba­ron. Exer. 16. Sect. 43. p. 393. or mensales, or somewhat analogically to what Cafaubon speaks of the Heathens in their sacred mysteries, Habuerunt & Symbola quae pro tessera erant thyasotis corundem sacrorum per quae se invicem agnoscerent, bring­ing their Leaden Tokens with them, as Badges to distinguish them, or Passports to warrant their admission. Others afterward, led by their proper affections, or drawn by their importunity, entred into society and communion with them, after they had rendred some satisfaction of their worthiness, most (of any one Parish) out of the Parish of Pyworthy, from whence their Elders were selected, many out of divers, some adjacent, some distant Parishes, very few out of the [Page 73]Prolocutors own Parish, who yet upon some emergencies would have owned the Church, and appropriated the gathering thereof to himself, so as however he else-where speaks of finding a Church setled at Pyworthy, to colour his ad jour­ning thither from his proper charge; yet it was of his settlement onely upon this occasion: and though that Parish Church had then a Minister, yet he that hath since ordinarily officiated there was long onely a candidate of the Mini­stery.

This abridgment of their Church-History, will set this whole Discourse in more light, and put us right in the true state of the question agitated between me and the Apologists, which had its rise and result from their proceedings: Nonnulla pars est inventionis nosse quod quaeras, saith Augustine. They say, the Author is unacquainted with their way, (and it had been happy if none had ever been acquainted therewith:) It is probable, they have their Cabala's, for at their Assemblies they have sought to set Harpocrates at the door, that some of the mysteries of their way might be as secret, as the Holyes of Ceres: but the thingnow in question,

But we erre in saying they examine all, which they deny that they do; such as are more knowing, and are willing, do onely make profession of their Faith and know­ledge, some publickly, some more privately; which is in effect to say, that they do not examine them in one point, but in all: there is no more difference be­tween examination upon interrogatories, and a large continued profession, than between a Pedlars laying open his whole Pack, and his shewing forth some few parcels, that some may enquire for; or than when a person is suspected to have filched some commodity, between his ripping up, and shewing out all the laps and receptacles of his garments, and the Officers making a particular re-search into them. By compelling men to make profession, they make (in effect) an examination of more particulars, and put them under a more difficult tryal; as to give a brief answer to a question, is more easie, than to make a long con­tinued Oration. And if this profession be not an examination, let them exa­mine themselves: how can they reconcile these two assertions, That they do not examine all, and that in the reformation of a corrupt Church (which they say is the work they are about) it is necessary to examine all, without convicting them­selves to omit to do that which they say is necessary.

And if profession therefore be a kind of examination, how can that also cohere with truth, or with it self, that they examine none but those which may well be suspected of incompetent knowledge; and yet they bring under this profession such as are knowing. And if none he examined, but such as may be well su­spected of incompetent knowledge (which we not suspect, but know in some particulars to be otherwise, unless they are of the humour of Dionysius of Sicily, who admitted all to have recourse to him, save those he expected treacherous; but yet suspected all for such, that he might admit none,) then such as are not of competent knowledge being uncapable of admission to the Sacrament; and they admitting not the rest of their Parishes, because they should be, and will not be examined: how can it consist with what they tell us else-where, That it is enviously surmised, that they think all those uncapable, whom they admit not: And [Page 74]if they will examine all, and yet do examine none but such as may well be su­spected to be of incompetent knowledge, it is as little to the honour of their Ministery, as to the credit of their peoples proficiency, since Diogenes thought the Master was to be stricken, when the Scholar play'd the Truant.

The omitting of the use of Sacrament (they say) concerns them not: but sure it doth, because they omit it in their own Parishes and charges, where it is their special and proper call to administer it, and they omit to distribute it to all that come not under their examination.

That about convening from divers Parishes, will but confound the discourse if mixed with it, (and indeed it is like to confound all the specious discourses they make in defence of their way, as I shall endevour to manifest anon) most of those admitted were taken in, not without their proper Pastour. I will not divide the house upon that tryal; but whether these that were admitted with their Pa­stour, were culpable of Schisme, we shall hereafter examine: in the mean time, St. Cyprian imputes Schisme to those that were admitted without their Pastour, Ecclesia est plebs sacerdoti adunita, Cyprian. Epist. 68. p. 209. that is, (as Junius explains him) Respectu unio­nis externae & materialis, non internae & for­malis cum Christo — ex illa formali seu essentiali sunt Catholici, ex externa, secundaria & adventitia noscuntur & cen­sentur in corpore, Junius in Controvers. 4. Bell. 1104, 1105. Citat. Vasquez in 3. Disp. 219. c. 2. p. 499. Tom. 3.grex Pastori suo adhaerens, unde scire debes Epi­scopum in ecclesia esse, & ecclesiam in Episcopo, & si qui cum Episcopo non sint, in ec­clesia non esse: and farther, Frustrà sibi blandiuntur ii qui pacem cum sacerdotibus Dei non habentes, obrepunt & latenter apud quosdam communicare se credunt; cùm ecclesia, quae Catholica una est, scissa non est, ne (que) divisa, sed sit uti (que) connexa, co­haerentium sibi invicem sacerdotum glutino copulata; and if it were not Schisme, it is a fault forbidden by the first Councel of Carthage, Ut nullus Clericus vel Laicus in aliena parochia sine literis sui Episcopi communicaret; and a fault which the Councel of Milevi censured with deprivation of the Communion.

2. Such as were admitted of other Congregations are persons justly (which term is unjustly assumed or begged) offended with the grossness of their administra­tions at home; where no separation at all is made, nor cherishing of desires that way. It gave the pretended rise to Donatus his Schisme, that Caecilian (supposed a traditor) was retained in Communion with the Church.

First, this is to condemn themselves for chaffe, by separating themselves from those whom they suppose to be chasse; Vos nihil in­ter perfidum & fidelem dis­cernitis. Cres­conius Augu­stino: Sepa­rarunt caus â quòd in Com­munione Sa­cramentorum mali maculant bonos, ideó (que) se corporali disjunct one à malorum contagione recessisse, ne omnes pariter per [...]r [...]. Aug. de unitat, baptism. c. 14. for saith St. Augustine, De area vix excutie­ris, si triticum es, — eo ipso quòd discedis & volas, paleam te esse indicas. And secondly, to confess that all Augustins learned and ardent propositions, & strong armature against the Donatists, could not beat down and dash in peeces that Schisme, but that it would in part rise and spring up again in these men. For if to refuse to have Communion of Sacraments with evil men, and to separate be­cause discipline is not exercised in casting out of evil men, be not a main part [Page 75]of the Schisme of the Donarists, I am too dull to understand the sense of St. Augustine; and if I mistake him and their Heresie, I erre with Plato, and many learned men share with me in the same misprision. If they shall say, That they separate not from all Churches, but onely from those Congregati­ons that are so corrupt, and therefore they are neither Donatists nor Schisma­ticks:

I answer:

1. Might not the Donatists have put in the same Plea, Altingius probl. Tom. 2. part. 2. pro­blem. 17. p. 329. Junius in contro. 4. Bel­lar. p. 1165. Ames. de cas. Consc. l. 5. c. 12. p. 288. who when they di­vided themselves from the Catholiques had a Communion with the many Churches of their fraternity? Adhuc ista verba communiter dici possunt, potest enim & alius dicere, as Augustine; this is the common defence of all Schismaticks, that when they leave one Church, they go into another; but as Altingius will give them one venny, Quibuscum coenam sumere detrectamus, eorum fraternitati tacitè renunciamus: So secondly, let them take a blow from the famous Ju­nius to beat down this interposition, Schismatici comperiuntur multi, qui non à spiritu aut capite aut à corpore discindi volunt, sed ab hac, illave ecclesia (i.e.) mem­bro particulari corporis ex infirmitate particulari; especially if, as Ames addeth, the separation be propter causam omnium ecclesiarum communem (as we suppose it is, being causâ morum corruptorum, scandali, aut singularium offensionum, Tryal grounds, Separat. c. 10. p. 197. Sacramen­torum Commu­nione sociamur. Contra Dona­tist. post. Col­lat. c. 28. Tom. 7. p. 127. Sa­cramentorum participando­rum commu­nione cohaerere. Ibid. c. 21. p. 126. In una congrega­tione paria Sacramenta tractantes. Contra Par­men. l. 3. c. 2. p. 13. Malus frater, propter communia Sacramenta. Collat. cum Donatist. prima die. Si in communione Sacramentorum mali maculant bonos, si propter ipsam tantam Communionem Sacramentorum mali perdunt bonos. Contra Crescon. l. 2. c. 35 36. p. 5. Tom. 7. Commixtos bonis malos intrà retia suorum Sacramentorum. Bre­vicul. collat, cum Donatist. 3. die p. 118. Bonos malis in communione Sacramentorum misceri. Ful­gentius l. de fide ad Petrum. wherein all Churches may be alike concerned.) If they shall think to evade by tel­ling us, that they hold communion in other Ordinances, not onely Mr. Ball gives sentence against them; That to use one Ordinance, and not another, is to make a Schisme in the Church; but St. Augustine hath fore-stalled their Plea, who as he makes external unity and communion to consist mainly in the participation of Sacraments, so he constitutes much of the Schisme of the Do­natists in their refusing to have communion in Sacraments with the Catholikes. And though I deny not that they renounced and protested against all other communion with the Orthodox, as well as in the Sacraments (to which heighth and wideness of separation the Independents have not risen or remo­ved) yet do they symbolize with them in the kinde, though not degrees of their Schisme; for there may be several stories of building one higher than another, yet all upon the same foundation: And these Duties notwithstan­ding wherein they communicate with others, they account no acts of Church-fellowship, or Ecclesiastical Communion, but such as they can dispense unto Pagans also. And themselves also seem to constitute the root of Church-fel­lowship in the Communion of Sacraments, owning none to be of their Chur­ches, but such as communicate with them of the Supper of the Lord. As there­fore they applaud the fighting Cock, which having lost one eye for the battel, turns away his blind side lest he be stricken, where he can least ward the blow: [Page 76]so I cannot blame the Apologists to seek to sequester from the question their gathering into their Church such as separate from and renounce communion of Sacraments with their own Congregations, which is the grand heteroclyte and chief anomalon of their way; which (as Calvin saith of the point of Justifica­tion controverted between us and the Papists) would they retract, it would almost quit the cost to grant them all the rest. But the lawfulness of this they undertake to assert hereafter. But Aut deme verbis, aut adde viribus, for the words require more than a City: In the interim, they abstract the state of the que­stion, and deliver it in this form, Whether in the reforming of a long corrupted Church it be necessary that all the members thereof do submit to some examination or tryal of their knowledge before they be admitted unto the Lords Table? This que­stion they fear not to maintain in the affirmative.

They suppose corruption in their Churches, (and he hath no fire of divine love in his heart, that hath not Water limbeck'd out of his eyes to see it) Men well sa­tisfied with the present frame and temper, not looking on them under any such disorder, they can expect little of reason or truth from ‘— Vox tua facta mea est;’ If we could as easily accord in other things as this, ‘Et duo concordes animo moriemur in uno;’ Onely I cannot tell, neither should I concur with them in a desire nor much to dispute with such; for the more they are sick, they the more need the Physi­cian, and though Cain be not his brothers keeper, yet Jacob holds him by the heel, detinet gressus suos (as Bernard allegorically interprets it) and though they seem never so incurable, yet he that lay 38. years diseased, might perchance have bin sooner cured, had he not wanted one to put him into the healing pool: however, si non liberabo animam suam, liberavi meam; for Qui non corrigit rese­canda, committit, & facientis culpam in se habet, qui quod potest corrigere, negligit emendare, saith Gregory. But yet notwithstanding all this, it would be the great question, whether they found, or made more of this corruption, and whether the Cure may not be as mischievous as the Malady, as it fared with Cn. Pompeius, of whom the Historian tells us, Gravior remediis, quàm delicta erant; and whether since they undertook the Cure, the Diseases have not grown more desperate and incurable, & ut antea flagitiis, ità nunc legibus laboratur; or perchance a­mong wise and moderate men this would be beyond question,

When men of their way and principles declaim against the corruptions of the Church, [Page 77] ‘Clodius accusat moechos, —’ And when they cry up Reformation, Clodius de pudicitia.

And it will be farther no less questionable, why this way of examining and proscribing from the Sacrament, should be unto reformation (as quick-silver to other metals) that without which they could have no constitution, and that this Cure could be wrought by no medicine, whereof this is not the Basis, so as all the Psalms of reformation end in this Gloria; whereas I rather think (si non falsis [...]ludor imaginibus) that scarce any thing hath more obstructed the work of reformation, than this inclosing of the Sacrament, and censorious dri­ving of so many from it; as nothing more prejudiced the Romane Church, nor more helped forward the work of our Reformation, than their with-holding of the cup from the Laity, which hath made them lately somewhat wiser by their harms; so as now in this Nation (what is done elsewhere I know not) the Laicks are permitted the Wine, though not the Cup; out of which it is powred into a Glass wherein they drink it; for reason of State forbids they should have it in the same manner the Priests receive it, that being reserved onely for Kings to be so far made equal with Priests; and if they should perfectly reform this sacrilegious abuse, they should confess a former error, and consequently for­feit their Palladium, the infallibility of their Church; and since res, aetas, usus semper aliquid apportat novi, aliquid moneat, ut illa quae te scire credas nescias, & quae tibi putaris prima, in experiundo repudies, it is possible that at length piscator ictus sapiat, and those Fishers of men too may change those Nets which drive away most Fish, for those that may inclose more, and not by alienating hearts, forfeit their hands, which might help to carry on the work they pretend to. As Saracenus Moses to Lucius of Alexandria in Ruffinus, Nunquam verior potest esse fides quae auribus capitur, quàne quae oculis pervide [...]ur; so let them give us some sensible effects and demonstrations à posteriori, of the aptness and energy of their way for reformation; they cannot dispute us out of our senses, and we see where they set up after eight or nine years, among several hundreds, they gain scarce so many units; and their reformation is like the filings and washings of Gold by false Clippers, onely to impair and embase it, like Dioclesians desert­ing the Empire to attend a Garden; or like Woolseys destroying forty religious houses (as they were then accounted) out of the ruins thereof to build two Colleges. Nay, they do not edifie after that proportion, nor to that similitude. As whom they admit, have liberty given to beleeve what they list (liberty in things of the minde, being the great bait or philter of Independency) so those whom they reject, are like enough to take liberty to do what they list, little or no care being taken of them; and they being cast off without any great crimes, may be careless what they do, since they can speed no worse, though their crimes become greater. I know nothing can so much excuse the former frame and temper as the succeeding; as Augustus adopted Tiberius to reflect more glory upon his own raign by comparison with his Successors, comparatione deterrimâ sibi gloriam quaesivisse, saith Tacitus; nor any thing that can more en­dear the present frame and temper of the Church, but the like fear which the old woman had that prayed for Dionysius of Sicily.

It is no new thing to transfer upon others our proper faults: Me suo nomi­ne exulem vocat; as Nero set Rome on fire and charged it on the Christians, and yet all the time of the burning too he sang some of Homers doleful verses: but ori digitum, for the fore-finger that used to stop the mouth, had the attribute of salutaris from antiquity.

But to revert to the question, as stated by the Apologists. If there were no other Gulph between us, but the necessity of Examination of our knowledge, in order to our admission to the Sacraments, we might sooner come together: but yet, first, why this should be onely necessary in the reformation of a long corrupted Church, and not be of a stable permanent necessity (seeing know­ledge is always needful in every Communicant, and they will be satisfied that every one is knowing, and that satisfaction cannot be had without examina­tion, as they pretend) they have not favoured our ignorance so farre as to tell us; and I doubt we shall need not onely some Delian diver, but Elias himself to come to resolve us.

2. In reformation of a long corrupted Church there may be an obviousness of reason to examine those that are corrupt, or suspected to be so, but all are not so (we hope,) and why all should then passe under examination, our dul­ness needs to be prompted to apprehend the reason.

3. It had had more of rational congruity to examine in reforming an igno­rant Church, rather than a corrupt, for there may be knowledg enough, where there are corruptions too many.

4. We are left in a mist also, and need to have it cleared up to us, how they understand the Church to be corrupt; whether with the Brownists (the comparative degree of this separation) they suppose the reformed Churches to be corrupt in the first constitution, and in Essentials, which though directly they affirm not, yet implicitely and by consequence they seem to say it; why else do they gather new Churches, and separate from the former Congregations? Among Heathens they might finde a proper spheare for such activity, not here; if there be Churches already gathered to their hand; and they cannot, in my sense, stand firm and unshaken upon this degree or stair, unless they ascend to the superlative degree of separation, and require a farther probation in order to the re-acception of the other Sacrament; and so as the Papists upbraid us to have had no Church before Luther, they will gratifie them farther, confessing that till now gathered by them, we had none since.

5. If they suppose corruptions onely in Accidentals, in doctrines not funda­mental (but that charge they have seemed to wave;) or in discipline and man­ners, this indeed is the way to keep the power in perpetual exercise, & qui velit potestatem, perpetuam velit, for whatsoever the Donatists may talk of a Church in this world without spot or wrinkle, yet as Beda tells us (who according to his wont took the hint thereof from Augustine) while the Apostle saith, Retract. l. 2. c. 18. That he (viz. Christ) might present to himself a Church not having spot or wrinkle, he first said glorious, sufficiently signifying when she should be without spot or wrinkle, to wit, when she should be glorious; here she may be fair, but among women (onely by comparison) and yet is black still, habet aliquid Aethiopici decoris, as Origen. Since then Corruptions will still be, and Reformation thereof ought always to be, they need not have limited the necessity of examination in these terms, in reformation of a long corrupt Church, but have determined it always necessary.

6. And of necessity we must cast dirt in the faces of the Churches of God, that have preceded us, as well in dignity as time, if in reformation of a long cor­rupt Church this examination be necessary. The godly Judges and Kings of Israel and Judah, with the assistance of the Prophets and Priests, oftentimes had a zeal like fire to consume the grown corruptions, and purge and purifie the Church; yet there is no light that there was any such fiery tryal of those that were to come to the Sacrifices or Sacrament. St. Paul begot the Corinthians to Christ, and that body by many distempers soon grew corrupt, and in purifying thereof, the Apostle prescribes no such looking to the state of those that were to be admitted to the Sacrament, he onely commands every man to examine himself, none to examine another; not to take our Prospect at too great a di­stance: The Morning Star of the Reformation arose to dispel and clear the contagious Mist of Popish Errors, Superstitions, and Usurpations; yet we can­not discern the least foot-step of any such way of examination, but whosoever professed a desire of Communion with them, was accepted and received into fellowship with them in the Sacraments, unless by any notorious crime he for­feited it.

7. And if the question thus stated be the mark the Apologists shoot at, let us with a touch onely, and in general here, try how their arrows will fit or reach it. They have mustered up in the 25. and following Sections, sundry Argu­ments grounded on Texts of Scripture, to verifie their judgment, and defend their practice: Doth any of them conclude the question thus stated? I be­seech you try in which of their Syllogismes is this Thesis, the conclusion; It is necessary in the reformation of a long corrupt Church, that all members thereof sub­mit to some examination of their knowledge. Nay, which of them mentions any examination, (onely one Text speaks of giving an answer, but not to the pur­pose) or which specifies the Sacrament, as that in order whereunto the duty in­joyned is to be performed? one excepted, where is a command for men to exa­mine themselves, none to submit themselves to be examined by another. The withdrawing from, noting, not eating with, not giving holy things, or casting pearles, shutting up, keeping out, &c. is to be understood (in their own sense) of men of wicked lives, nothing here intended of men defective in knowledge, and nei­ther can examination be concluded out of the Texts, but by making petitio principii the medium, viz. that what is there injoyned as duty, cannot be com­plyed with, but by such examination. But then for the limiting and restraining of all to the time of Reformation of a long corrupt Church, the Chymists that can extract oyl out of steel and flint, volitant velut umbrae, compared with these men, whose omnipotence of Logick can create something out of nothing. Who ever till now suspected, that onely in the reformation of a corrupt Church things ought to be done in order and decency? The precious to be separated from the vile, that we should be delivered from unreasonable and evil men, and withdraw our selves from every brother that walketh disorderly; That we must not cast pearles be­fore Swine, and give holy things to Dogs, nor be partakers of other mens sins; that we ought to obey them that rule over us, &c. As if at other times, when a long corrupt Church is not to be reformed, we need not, nor are obliged to do any of these things. Diogenes seeing a roving Archer, ran to stand at the mark as the safest place; so surely all the Apologists shafts are shot so extremely wide, that I may willingly chuse to keep my self at this mark, which they set up for [Page 80]the state of their question, and yet never fear to be hurt with any of their arrowes.

Concerning examination the paper did never absolutely oppose it as pre­cedanous to this Ordinance (as they suggest.) I might say to the Apologists as St. Augustine did to Cresconius, Lege prius diligenter contra quod scribis, aut in­tellige quae dicuntur, aut noli quod intelligis vertere in aliud; for the very first inspection into the paper will cleare it of that charge: it is denyed to be ne­cessary that all be examined, but it is affirmed of some (viz. such of whom there is a violent suspicion that they are ignorant) that it is meet they should be examined, and these propositions carry neither Diagonall, nor interpretative contradiction.

Though they have not yet prompted us with the least Jota of Scripture that might enforce this examination preparatory and dispositive to the Sacrament, nor helped us to the smallest colour of reason to evince it to be more requi­site, in order to the Sacrament, than other Ordinances, yet we shall here tell them:

First, that wee doe not so much question the conveniency of exa­mining, as the necessity thereof: Durum est quod necesse est, said Quin­tilian. As love is the sweetning of labour, and ubi amor est, non est labor, sed sapor; so necessity is the imbittering of all undertakings, like the Salaman­der which if laid to the root of a tree, it never flourisheth or prospers. Quod cogitur, altera mors est. As the Colossus at Tarentum might be moved with a fin­ger, but not at all stirred, if one set his whole force to it; so many may be facil to goe that are impatient to be driven, and lesse cheerfully chuse to doe that which they cannot chuse. It is a memorable Story which Cardan tells us of him in Millaine, who having in sixty yeers been never without the Walls, yet when the Duke hearing thereof sent him peremptory command ne­ver to goe out of the Gates during life, he that before had no inclination to doe so, yet soone dyed with greefe to be denyed the liberty of doing it: Be­cause therefore we would not be brought under a yoke or into bondage of any thing, we strive to stand fast in that liberty wherein, we thinke, God and the gifts which he hath given us, have set us free.

2. We doe not altogether dispute whether they may call men to examina­tion, as whether it be so necessary, ratione medii, so as that if they will not come under it, they have power for that cause onely, to keep them from the Sacrament. Lo. Verulam. We shall say of this matter, as a learned Man doth of Alchimy, which intends to improve baser Metalls into Gold, and then with one drop of that Elixir to transmute a whole Sea of Quicksilver into Gold; That the foundation is more facible than the superstructure, the antecedent more ra­tionall than the consequent, the proposition more plausible than the infe­rence: So in the first part they may pretend colour, but in the second are blanke. A Land-lord may require his Tenant to bring forth his Lease and shew his title, but if he thinke himselfe not obliged to produce it, it follows not that he may be thrust from his Tenement. When Bellarmine arguing for Auricular confession and agitating the History of Nectarius, Bellarm. de poenitent. lib. 3. cap. 14. pag. 304, 305. tom. 6. Denison de auricul. confess. cap. 14. p. 92. objects that Adversarii non admittunt homines ad Eucharistiam nisi exploratos, and for proofe [Page 81]thereof, besides Melancthon, cites Calvin, Interim quin sistunt se oves pastori, quoties sacram coenam participare volunt, adeò non reclamo, ut maximè velim hoc ubique observari: Dr. Denison answers, Illam consuetudinem probant — illud tamen ut ab ecclesia susceptum, non à Deo praeceptum, exigunt. And howsoever this be vendicated as the Doctrine and practise of the Reformed Churches, espe­cially those that are of Presbyterian model, yet in the necessity (and so also in the Universality) thereof, it is but a Servant lately taken in for a need, that weares the badge or cognizance of the family, but it is not of the linage or right off-spring. We know that Gentlemen of this Nation that travell into France or Holland, upon the offer of themselves are ordinarily admitted to partake the Sacrament, without examination, and even in the Church at Charenton, the most celebrious of the Nation.

3. We doe not so much oppose this pretended power of examination, as the consequence of it. As Qui veterem fert injuriam, invitat novam; so if we give place to one imposition, we make way for more, and as in Gods Law, he that offends in one point, is guilty of all; so in mens commandments, he that gives up his liberty in subjection to one thing, forfeits it in all, for even in this concernment, Eadem est ratio partium & totius, and if obedience be due to one command, it is also to more, that shall come stamped with the same authority.

4. Neither doe we at all contest against an expediency of examination re­latively to some persons, such as lye under a violent or morally probable su­spicion of ignorance, Quando intercedit sufficiens ratio ad generandum dubium, as the Schoole defines it, who being convicted to be ignorant, we deny not but it is fit their approach be somewhile retarded, untill they are better instructed; but such whose understanding in the Gospel is well known, Reply to Dr. Whitgift. p. 164. or which doe exa­mine themselves, Mr. Cartwright saith, their meaning is not they should be examined: and when there shall appeare an expediency of Examination, none but will say, it may be done aswell in private, and that it shall sort better as well with charity, as prudence, to doe it so.

But though palpably ignorant persons may be excluded, yet it is a fallacy of the consequent to conclude that therefore all must be examined. There are some that are elevated above all suspition of ignorance, and there are other wayes of discovery of ignorance besides particular examination upon interro­gatories. Themselves tell us, that they examine none that are taken to be Di­sciples, and therefore they may know them to be such without examination, by their education, discourse, actions, and imployments. Were a Pastor so fa­miliarly conversant with his Flocke, as he ought to be, and is some thinke im­plyed not onely by Paul's preaching from house to house, but also by those alike-used Scripture idioms, the Church in or among you, and you in the Church; or did not deeme the feeding of the Lambs by catechising, to be beneath his magistery and greatness, he would need no other marks or signes to know his Sheepe by, than such as he might take from common conversation.

Even themselves say that Christ needed not to examine his Disciples before they did partake of his Supper, because they were known to him; §. 12 but if their Sheep be not also known to them, they are no good Shepheards that practi­cally know their duty.

But to dispute, No ignorant person ought to be admitted, therefore all ought to [Page 82]be examined whether they are ignorant, is (as I have elsewhere instanced) as if I should argue no Ideot ought to mannage his own estate, therefore all ought to be examined, whether they are Ideots, before they be admitted to the man­nagement of their Fortunes, and is somewhat analogous to Bellarmine's reaso­ning, that because Ambrose censured Theodosius, therefore he was a lawfull Judge of him in an external Court, to examine matters in order to his sen­tence, who notwithstanding proceeded onely ex evidentia facti.

And however, we cannot thinke it fit to examine silly Maid-servants, what is the Essence of God, that is a depth too great to put an Elephant in, much more a Lambe; The Philosopher could say, De Deo hoc tantùm dic, Esse; and Gregorie better, Ne vocabula quidem Dei naturae congruentia reperire homines pos­sunt, and therefore de Deo cùm dicitur, dici non potest.

And we should also thinke it very usefull to affie the Standard of the San­ctuary, and to determine what measure of knowledge may be a competency for the Sacrament. It is evident that the Catechumeni presently upon their ba­ptisme were anciently admitted to the Eucharist, Durantus for this cites the authority of many Fathers de ritib. Ec­cles. lib. 1. cap. 19. p. 161. Albas. de veter. Eccles. rit. l. 2. obs. 22. p. 315. Mr. Ball answ. to Can. 2 part. p. 58. Sylvius 22. ae. qu. 2. art. 10. conclus. 3. p. 28. Usher serm: on Ephes. 4.13. and answer to the Jesuite p. 311. & 312. Bellarm. de Verbo Dei l. 4. cap. 11. Hieron. ad Pammach. tom. 2. p. 238. hist. l. 7. c. 30. and yet Albaspinus tells us, that during their catechumenacy they were taught nothing de arcanis Sacramentorum; and the profession at first required of all that were received to Baptisme (as a learned Divine affirmeth) was that they beleeved the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost; Regulam fidei per baptismum accipimus, saith Irenaeus; qui ba­ptizandi erant olim solitos reddere seu recitare Symbolum, is affirmed by Sylvius, out of many antient Authors. In the Eastern Church, they recited the Ni­cene; in the Westerne (who, saith Bishop Usher, applyed themselves to the ca­pacity of the meaner sort more than the Easterne) the Apostolicall, and both he and Erasmus shew, that the Apostles Creed (which the Fathers called regulam fidei) was not so large at first as afterward, when it was enlarged by accession of sundry Articles occasioned by the emergency of severall Heresies and other occasions. Bellarmine is very confident (and we take up this arrow to shoot it back against himself) that the Apostles never used to preach open­ly to the people other things than the Apostles Creed, the ten Commande­ments and the Sacraments, Hierom tells us in his time, there was but fourty dayes allowed for catechizing the Heathen, Ut per quadraginta dies publicè tradamus sanctam & adorandam Trinitatem, saith he, (which insinuates what was the Doctrine taught them;) and the same thing Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus & omnis testatur antiquitas (addes Victorius in his Schol [...]a;) and Socrates relates the whole Nation of the Burgundians were catechised seven dayes, & the eighth were baptized; and if we may judge of their proficiency by the time of in­struction, it could be no great stock of knowledge, that aliens from the Church and Faith could acquire in that interim, in all probability not so much as the Children of the Church may doe after so many yeers teaching, as the other had dayes.

The Apostles themselves at the first institution had a very small cantle of knowledge, who had onely an implicit Faith, even of the death and resurre­ction of Christ, as appeares, John 20.9. and Luk. 9.44, 45. and 24.7, 8. nei­ther doe we finde they had any other preparatory instruction concerning the [Page 83]Nature and ends of the Sacrament, save what was collected from the words of Institution, which we propound not as a sufficient extent of our knowledge, or that we should content our selves with such a measure, but as a restraint upon their rigor, and that they should accept a lesse stint than what they exact.

But notwithstanding if some are weak in knowledge, it is no unlikely way to improve it by frequent partaking of the Sacrament, where the great mystery of the redemption of the World by the death of Christ, is so sensibly shewed forth; so as to suspend men because of their meane knowledge is, as if they should deny them the meanes, because they have not fully attained the end: and if profession of Faith may serve in lieu of examination (as the Apologists insinuate) the very comming to the Sacrament and partaking thereof is a kinde of reall profession of Faith. And Aquinas tells us, Addit. ad 3. q. 5. ar. 2. Durand. 4. d. 17. q. 14. Loc. com. part. 4. p. 194. Sacramenta sunt quae­dam protestationes fidei, or signa protestativa fidei, as Durand, an owning of Christ externally; and engaging to beleeve in him; they profess their Faith as touching the body of Christ nailed upon the Cross, and his blood shed for their salvation (saith Peter Martyr) confession being to be made with outward actions, not onely with the mouth: And if any orall and explicite confession was thought fit to be made, it was onely the joyning in the publick repeating of the Apostolique Creed, which in the Easterne Churches usually preceded the Sacrament: and therefore in the third Councell of Toledo it was decreed, Cano. [...]. Ante communicationem corporis Christi & sanguinis, juxta Orientalium partium mo­rem, unanimiter clarâ voce sacratissimum fidei recenseant Symbolum, ut primùm po­puli, quam credulitatem teneant, fateantur. Besides, the adding Amen to the words of Consecration, wherewith (saith Ambrose) the Elements were delivered, quibus singulis vescentes confessionem fidei suae addebant, respondentes, Amen: Chemnitius saith, was a profession of the Faith, Exam. Trid. Concil. part. 2. p. 107. Idem p. 111, 112. and the same learned Man addes, that therefore in Festis solennioribus tota multitudo ad majores Basilicas conveniebat, & ibi solennis quaedam Communio celebrabatur, Ut quisque publicâ professione ostenderet se esse membrum ecclesiae, and this, he saith, was enacted to be done by the Agathense Councell; where observe that he speakes of tota multitudo, not five of five hundred, and so many at these times convened, that one Church could not containe them, and Leo prescribes that therefore sacrificii oblatio reiteretur: and sure every mans proper reason will dictate to him, how impossible it was that in such a confluence there could be a triall of every mans knowledge and holiness, which could neither be perfectly known to them that in such manner administred. De re Sacra­ment. l. 2. p. 52. Hospinian speaking of the solemne communions upon the greater festivals, tells us, Nec malo consilio haec solennis communio instituta fuit, sed ut hac publicâ professione declararent se esse membra verae ecclesiae, & admonerentur sicut unus est panis, ita multos se unum corpus esse, atque hoc modo consensus in doctrina & fide retinerentur.

So when Erastus objected, that sinners were called to the Sacrifices; Beza an­swers, Such sinners as testified their repentance by their sacrificing: and if to sacrifice were a profession of repentance, then to come to the Communion, by the same proportion of reason, is a profession of Faith, and the Priest might have as rationally examined the truth of the Sacrificers repentance (which he did not, but charitably judged of the sincerity of his heart by the offerings of his hands) as the Minister may now make research into the knowledge of Faith [Page 84]of the receiver. §. 10 And at the Passover, the antitype and [...] of the Lords Supper, and the same in substance with it, as themselves affirm: we have not the least. Evidence that there was, but there are Arguments that there could be no such examination of the partakers; Rivet. Gerhard. for though the owner had brought the Lambe to the Courts of the Temple to be killed by the Priests, which the Learned deny; yet it was eaten at home by the whole Family, to whom the Master taught the end and use thereof, but called none to ac­count what understanding they had of that, or any other mysteries. Let them, if they think it expedient, and will afford the pains to do it, examine men also of their aptness to profit by the word, and of their proficiency thereby; but as if men decline and will not come under such examination, we cannot allow them to shut them out from hearing the Word; so neither can we permit them to exclude all from the Sacrament, that conform not to be examined in ante­cedency thereunto.

Yet if the Apologists would onely bring us all under the necessity of an un­limited examination of our knowledge, to have peace with them, we might be content interpretatively to put out our right eye, and subject our selves to a suspicion of our ignorance. But

A satisfaction concerning mens knowledge and verbal examination in order thereunto, is not onely nor principally contended for by them, nor alone or chiefly questioned by us. They insist on it to be satisfied of their Holiness, and without real proof thereof they admit none to fellowship in the Sacra­ments, which they tell us are the privileges onely of the Godly: This is that Helena that chiefly sets us all at War, and hath kindled those flames: they sup­pose that to be a Church-member with a dogmatical faith, gives not a right of being admitted to the Sacrament, or is the Directory for them to admit him: Neither is a negative holiness sufficient to be free of scandal, but he must give positive signs of sound grace; nor that it is enough they have nothing against him, he must shew some evidence for himself of real holiness: it avails not that they know nothing to the contrary, they must have farther satisfaction; they grant not that every intelligent member of the visible Church hath a right, till he have forfeited it; but allow no title till he have pleaded and ap­proved it by some evidence that he is a member of the invisible Church: They repel not men for notorious Crimes, nor in any formal judicial way of Censure, but because they are not satisfied concerning them, or they have not merited their good opinion. Nay, I would particularly instance in some that after admission have been laid aside, not for want of grace, but for lack of some de­grees thereof, as for not being humbled enough; and for defect of such satis­faction, or almost upon suspicion of the unsanctified estate of some, in whom they may perchance observe some inordinateness, they suspend themselves (ra­ther than those which are the far greater number) from the Communion, ga­ther a new Church of those they suppose more pure and holy, and erect a sepa­rate Altar, whereby they directly fall within the definition given of a Schisma­tique by the great Councel of Chalcedon, Qui seipsum à Communione suspendit, [Page 85]collectam facit & altare constituit. Had the Apologists conformed their Churches to the Presbyterian model, set up and setled that form of discipline; had they retained the Celebration of the Sacrament, and constantly at their appointed times administred it in their proper Churches, and admitted all those that they could not particularly charge with, and plainly convict of some scandalous crime (and notorious, according to the received definition) what Silenus said was the greatest happiness of this world, had been the felicity of this contro­versie between us, Never to have been born, or soon to have dyed: yet they suggest,

1. That in yeelding that scandalous and notorious sinners may be suspended, I pre­varicate, by granting the main of the question, and yet opposing them stiffly. 2. They impute it to me, that my concessions look one way, and my arguments another, imply­ing, as if I did covertly dispute against the power of Excommunication. 3. They obliquely charge upon me, by some insinuations, as if I were inimicous, and had some animosities against the Presbyterian Government.

But to the first, Praevaricator est quasi vari­cator qui di­versam causam adjuvat pro­dita causa sua: quod nomen Labeo à varia certatione tra­ctum ait; nam qui praevarica­tur ex utra (que) parte constitit, quinimo ex al­tera. Cujac. ob­servat. Or it is a metaphor taken from vari, those that have their knees out of joynt that they touch above, and the feet are farre asunder; so they that strive together and are friends privi­ly, are called Prevaricators. Dr. Andrews. (not to question how properly they apply the word prevari­cate) though the main had been granted, yet some lesser and collateral things might merit my opposition, as well as they have found their defence: but yet having the main in grant, I should have thought, that to defend these pettier things, were a play not worth their lamp. But that which they call the main was never the least part of the thing controverted, being yeelded without all controversie. It is indeed the main Fortress and Castle whereunto they ratreat upon every charge, though they will find the Gates thereof shut against any refuge for them: verily all the fatness of their discourse ha [...]h no other relish, but that there is a power, and that it is a duty to exclude such as are nefarious and scandalous from the Communion. Were the Apology deplumed of those feathers which are but borrowed, in respect of what is proper to our question, it would shew as naked as Aesops Crow; but their Arrows thus feathered, as little hurt me, as hit the mark they have set up; for if I had blended the beams of the Sun with my ink, I could not have made it more clear or lucid that I am not among the Antipod [...]s to that Thesis; rather the abstract of our difference, and the punctual state of the controversie between us, is compendiously this: They think none ought to be admitted to the Communion, but such as give sa­tisfactory signs of knowledge and holiness; I suppose they should exclude none but those that are signally ignorant and flagitious. They require a positive probation as necessary, and that demonstrative proof ought to be rendred of their godliness, I judge a negative trial sufficient, so as to have nothing against them, and that they be not obnoxious for any notorious wickedness. They will admit none, whose sanctity may be doubted; I allow onely such to be reje­cted, whose crimes are notorious: They argue, that because none but such as are fit and worthy ought to be admitted, it is therefore necessary to make tryal generally of the fitness of all, and not finding a competent number of fit per­sons in their proper charges, that they may separate into a new Church, ga­thered and made up onely of such as they judge to be fit; I suppose the falla­cy of the consequent in both, is the first limiting and restraining their proba­tion within anguster bounds (those that are not notorious or not violently su­spected, needing no trial; and those that are notorious, being for the most part past it, and tryed to their hand;) and in the latter I concede no liberty at all, [Page 86]and though de jure and speculatively onely fit persons are to be admitted, yet de facto and practically all intelligent Church-members that have made no publike forfeiture of Church-privileges and interesses, nor of good existima­tion, that bonum depositum in aliorum mentibus, are regularly to be deemed and accepted as fit, and accordingly to be admitted. These are the proper issues between us, and what is heterogeneal to these is ignoratio elenchi; and where they should defend these hypotheses, and vindicate this course of theirs, onely to contend for the power and duty of Excommunication, is it not Andabatorum more, to fight blind-fold? or seeing it to be best for their advantage, to run at tilt, not against a fighting enemy, but a wooden image of their own erecting, fitting the mark to their arrows, not suiting their shafts to their scope; and in effect is nothing else, than as if a Tyrant, to justifie his rapines and persecuti­ons, should plead the just power of Kings to punish ostenders upon lawful pro­cess. For let them punctually answer, are all these jure aut juridicè, excom­municate or suspended, whom they admit not? Are they de facto, grosly igno­rant, or notoriously wicked and scandalous? They cannot say it, and they de­ny that they think it, let them then recount these two assertions, That they ad­mit all, save grosly ignorant, and notoriously criminous; and yet these whom they exclude, are not such. St. Augustine never more urgently pressed Petilian and his Hyperaspist Cresconius, to answer that question, Si Conscientia certè dantis attenditur quae abluat accipientis, &c. than I shall importune the Apologists to satisfie this Dilemma: Those many whom you reject from the Communion, are either judicially sentenced for notorious sinnes, (and then I will confess that they are justly separate from you;) or else not so censured, and then you must confess you unjustly separate from them. To say they are not wil­ling, is to say contrary to what they profess, who complain of being defrauded of what they have such a will to partake, Varus ait, Scaurus negat, utri creditis? To suggest it is their fault that they partake not, is to make them culpable for not taking that which they cannot have; for when had they a Synaxis in their Churches? To tell them they must come at Pyworthy, (where he that tells them so, is Pastor of no Church there; those that are so told, are not the flock of any Pastor there) they might as justly call them to Exceter; and would they come there, they must notwithstanding come under this probation, and wait upon their good pleasure and gracious opinion, which is the thing questio­ned, and sets the business in the same posture as before, after all these pallia­tions. So that in the conclusion, when they tell us elsewhere, he that puts them to prove that persons knowing and not scandalous may be excluded, shall hear of their refusal; we must say to them, we do indeed hear of their refusal, but it is onely to prove this, not to do it, whiles they exclude these whom they dare not say; and if they did, we should knowingly gainsay, that they are ignorant or scandalous.

To the second, that my Concessions look one way, my Arguments another, (as if like the Parthians I turn my face from that mark I shoot at; or like Faustus, that pretended to write against Pelagius, yet half justified him) it had been a just debt, if not to me, that I might see my error; yet to themselves, that we might see their truth and ingenuity, to have instanced in any one ar­gument of mine, that pleads against the power and duty of Excommunication. No, when the Civil Magistrate is become both the Sonne and Father of the [Page 87]Church, I doe not think that the opening of his Praetorium should shut up the Ecclesiastical forum exterius, nor the exercising of his sword, lay the keys aside to rust: Let them not be tryed to open other Locks than they were made for, that Moses may have no cause to say the Sons of Levi take too much upon them; we shall no more repine at Aarons keys or rod, than at Moses sword. I am sensible these are different Administrations, and have several reasons and ways and ends. There are some Crimes which need Censure, and sometime the Civil Laws take no hold thereof, nor can the Civil Courts take cognizance of them; and the Magistrate punisheth, though the Offender repent; and is sa­tisfied when the pain is suffered, or mulct is paid, whether he be penitent or not. The Church hath a contrary method in her punishments, and which are not properly punishments, but castigations; the holy and prudential ends thereof I have elsewhere displayed: I do not therefore hold it fit to excommunicate Excommunication, though I judge the undue conduct and culpable exercise thereof to be suspended. Let it not be 1. too frequently inflicted, it being Medi­cine, not Food; and Physicians tell us, that Medicines lose their efficacy by or­dinary use; and though Cacochymie give indication, yet continual Purgings brings the habitude of the body to a cachexy; and in the Timpany, to let out all the water without stops and intermissions, destroys the Patient. 2. Nor too precipitate, ‘Nulla unquam de hac morte hominis cunctatio longa est,’ And Avenzoar (they say) trembled three days before ever he administred a Purge: 3. Nor ordinarily, until after frequent admonitions, & afflatur omne priusquàm percutitur; let all other good means be used, ‘Cuncta priùs tentanda,—’ Let it be as Physicians say of Antimony, that it must be like a cowardly Captain to come up to the charge last of all, and after all others; let it be onely upon obstinate impenitence, and when it is immedicabile vnlnus, then quaecunque me­dicamenta non sanant, ea sanat ferrum; as saith Hypocrates. 4. Let it not be for any thing, but scelus, or affine sceleri, that which is interpretativa negatio fidei, gross abominable iniquities, whereby the Church may be defamed, and the enemies have cause to blaspheme; and such as may be stumbling, blocks to other mens Consciences; such sinnes as appear omnibus execrabilia, as Augu­stine, and are excessus peccatorum, as Estius speaks: let it be not inflicted for smaller faults, which else would be (as Parisiensis tells us) as if to kill a Fly on the fore-head, we should knock a man in the head with a beetle; and let not such purity be required from men in order to their safeguard and immunity from this Censure, as Anabaptists exact; who, as Marlorat tells us, Marlorat. in 1 Cor. 51. Ball tryal of the grounds of Separat. c. 10. p. 187. Ante Commu­nionem protestantur se tantam habere Charitatem, quantam Christus in cruce pendens. 5. Let it be for such Crimes as are notorious by publike notice; not if one or other, (though perhaps the Minister be one of them) do know thereof; but let them be such as are scandalous in their course, commonly defamed by evidence of fact, or confession or proof of witnesses; and if not by innumeris documentis testibus (que); as Augustine pleads, yet by more than one; for uni testi, ne Catoni [Page 88]quidem, credendum est: even when the great cry of Sodom came up, yet God went down to see, whether they had done altogether according to the cry; Si regnas, jube, si judicas, cognosce. 6. Let it be done humili charitate & benignâ severitate — sine typho elationis in hominem, & cum luctu deprecationis ad Deum; Aug. cont. Par­men. l. 3. c. 2. Tom. 7. p. 13. and as it is said of Augustus, Priùs suas lachrymas quàm alienum sangui­nem effudit; for otherwise,

Let it be thus regulated without humane wrong in hypothesi, and let it in the­s [...] pass as of divine right.

The greater Excommunication I mean; for as concerning Suspension, which they call the lesser Excommunication, I am deceived if it may not be called the least in the Kingdome of Heaven: the Tree from which that Wood was gathered, was of a later rise and spring in the Paradise of God, not of the first planting, and hath no divine ground to fix its root in; if there be any Characters in Scripture asserting expresly, or by plain and easie consequence the divine right thereof, See this am­ply discussed, or any footsteps thereof in the tract and course of all the ancient Church, so as that any were suspended from the Sacrament, that were not sepa­rate from the body of the Church by Excommunication, those characters and footsteps are too small to be discerned by my dimme eyes, §. 15 without the help of spectacles to be lent me, or my Horizon too narrow to reach them, unless their hand, like that in a margin pointing to the places, shall lead me neerer to them. Tertullian I am sure defines Excommunication of what kind soever it be, à Communicatione Orationis & conventûs, & omnis sancti commercii relegatio. I am not ignorant there is frequent mention in the Casuists and Schoolmen, of excommunicatio minor, but these bear no weight, where these men hold the beam; yet notwithstanding it may have place, and be of wholesome use, when men strongly accused, or violently suspected of offences in their nature scandalous, are under tryal, and as it were pendente lite; in which respect it may pass, as gradus excommunicationis, as Ames calls it; and if they will give that name to a deferring to administer to those that are manifestly ignorant, while they are under catechising, I shall not contest against it, and besides I should be no eager Opposite thereunto; because as Alcibiades acquired more esteem, be­cause Socrates loved him; so I should be more indulgent to this act of disci­pline, by reason it hath the favour of some godly learned men, and seems also to march under the Colours of Prudence, and pretends to wear the cognizance of Piety and clement moderation, and onely under the notion of clemency; and upon account thereof, we may give a passport to that, which is the main weapon wherewith the Casuists and School-men fight for the lesser Excommu­nication; and from whose Armory, the Divines of this judgment have borrowed it, That he that can do the greater, can do the less; which having many other li­mitations, must especially be limited to matters of the same kinde; for other­wise (for instance sake) a Justice of peace that can send a man to the Goal for Felony; which is the greater, cannot commit him to the Prison for Debt, nor likewise in matters of the same kind. However it may go upon the account of [Page 89]clemency, it cannot pass upon the score of justice; for a Judge that may for a crime take a Malefactors life, may not nevertheless deprive him of his eye for that offence; yet so as suspension be exercised in such a regular way as excom­munication ought to be, and for such notorious scandals as merit excommuni­cation, (for then the person suspended seems excommunicate, jure, licèt non juridicè, in fieri & si non in facto esse, in actu signato, si non actu exercito, demeritorie, etsi non effectivè, and so our ground may still lye unshaken, that every member of the visible Church, not uncapable through natural disa­bility, hath a right to the Sacrament, while these in such manner suspended, though not fully and formally cut off from the body of the Church, are yet having a virtual excision, no compleat members thereof; and being much loosned, have loosed much of the privileges founded in, and resulting from Church-membership,) I say with these qualifications, though this Jephtha be the Son of a strange woman, yet since he may fight for Israel against the Am­monites, I shall not vote to cast him out; and though like an Heteroclyte, it be among those quae genus variant (having not that kind of evidence and au­thority which excommunication hath,) yet if it do not flexum also (and deflect to any inordinateness, among those which novato ritu deficiunt superant (que)) for my part I shall not proscribe it: Even menial servants merit some respect onely for wearing the Cognizance of noble Families; onely as they distinguish the Romane gods into those Majorum Gentium, & Semi-dei, seu Indigites & Semones; so let there be a distinction among acts of discipline, of those that are original­ly of a divine impression, and necessary, and such as are of later prudential Edition, and expedient onely in some cases.

And to proceed farther, 3. Disp. 7. q. 17. punct. 1. p. 1387. I am not altogether of the judgment of the School and the Casuists that determine, Abstinendum à sententia excommunicationis, quando constaret non modò non profuturam peccatori, sed etiam nocituram, quia scilicet magìs indurabitur; yet I approve it with the limitations of Valentia, Tunc solùm verum esse, quando circumstantiae non essent tales, ut propter exemplum & bo­num Commune redundaturum ex tali Excommunicatione videretur meritò posse negli­gi privatum detrimentum illius. And I do fully consent with Augustine, Si con­tagio peccandi multitudinem invaserit,Contra Par. men. l. 3. c. 2. Tom. 7. p. 13.divinae disciplinae severa misericordia necessa­ria est, — tunc autem hoc sine labe pacis & unitatis & sine laesione frumen­torum, fieri potest, cùm congregationis Ecclesiae multitudo, ab eo crimine quo anathe­matizatur, aliena est — & eum posse tali modo salubritèr corrigi, qui inter dissimiles peccat, idest, inter eos quos peccatorum similiùm pestilentia non corrum­pit, — ne (que) enim potest esse salubris à multis correptio, nisi cùm ille corripitur qui non habeat sociam multitudinem; cùm verò idem morbus plurimos occupaverit, nihil aliud bonis restat, quàm dolor & gemitus. Plures numere tuti inter mul­tos societate culpae tutior. Tacitus. And such a course is not onely suitable to civil prudence, (an example whereof we may finde in Sparta, (a City of the strictest and severest discipline of all Greece) & as the best men, so the best City of Greece, might pass for the best of the Heathen world, (where though he that fled out of the battel carryed afterward the perpetual Characters of Infamy, yet when such a multitude were put to flight at the great battel of Leuctra, Agesilaus thought fit to lay asleep, & suspend the Law for that time. But 2. conformable also to Divine wisdome, Annot. in Mat. 13.41. not onely in respect of what Grotius tells us, Quod ad poenas generales attinet, quales sunt diluvia, incendia, aliaeque id genus pestes, cùm non possunt ita infligi, ut solos improbos contingant, [Page 90]proborum etiam paucorum causâ, Deus iis abstinet, aut certè eas temperat: but in regard of what St. Augustine proves, from the patterne of the Apostle, who though he excommunicated one incestuous person at Corinth, Ubi supra. yet, cùm jam mul­tos comperisset & immundâ luxuriâ & fornicationibus inquinatos, ad eosdem Co­rinthios in secunda Epistola scribens, non itidem praecipit, ut cum talibus nec cibum sumerent, multi enim erant, nec de his poterat dicere, Si quis frater, &c. sed ait ne iterum cum venero ad vos, humiliet me Deus & lugeam multos, &c. per luctum suum potiùs eos divino flagello coorcendos innuens, quàm per illam correptionem, ut caeteri ab eorum conjunctione contineant.

And 3. the contrary course is altogether opposite to the ends of Excommu­nication, either general, as edification; whereas this is vastare civitatem, non sanare (as Salust of Catiline;) & clades, non medicina, as Germanicus in another case; or special, as making them ashamed, whereas the multitude of offen­ders takes away all shame, as among Negroes it is beauty to be black, and they paint Angels of that colour. The civil judgments and Ecclesiastick censures, though otherwise different, yet are both built upon these common grounds, that punishments are inflicted, not because a fault hath been committed, but lest it should be; that the fear of that offence may come to all whereof the pe­nalty hath fallen upon one; and as it fares in the Church, so it falls out alike in a Christian Common-wealth, if the Laws be not duely executed in the pu­nishment of Malefactors, good men are scandalized, and evil are encouraged by impunity; and not onely the Justice of the Nation, but the honour of Re­ligion also is left obnoxious to obloquy: yet however no man contradicts the moderating of civil punishments by clemency, or approves the excess of Ju­stice, which is cruelty, such as the Poet reproved in Sylla,

He must be more than a Cherubin that deignes not to looke to the mercy-seat; Nec quisquam est cui tam valdè innocentia sua placeat, Seneca de Clem. lib. 1.ut non stare in conspectu clementiam paratam humanis erroribus gaudeat. It may fall out also in many ca­ses, what Livy tells us to have happened in that of Q. Maximus, Nec minùs fir­ma est disciplina militaris Q. Fabii periculo, quam Titi Manlii miserabili supplicio; and it is as consentient to prudence, as the practice of States, where there is a multitude of Delinquents, to chuse out the fattest for Sacrifices to justice, and with Tarquin; to lop off the heads onely; and where by a partial or negligent execution of Laws and administration of Justice, offenders suffer condigne pu­nishment, it cannot yet warrant or excuse a denying of subjection, or a raysing of sedition, or an erecting and constituting new Common-wealths in the Com­monwealth, as if men could not live with a good and undefiled Conscience where were any bluntnes in the Sword, or inequality in the Scales of Justice; and why those considerations may not have some place, and the reasons there­of be in some measure applicable to Ecclesiastical censures, I confess I can­not apprehend, but am yet to be instructed.

When the Church had no Civil Magistrate, and very many sinnes there [Page 91]were, which the Lawes took no cognisance of, nor prescribed punishments for, the Ecclesiastick Censures recompenced that defect: Now when Municipall Lawes under Christian Magistrates are multiplied and extended to the corre­ction of most offences, the execution thereof might in some degree supply the neglect of Ecclesiastical censures, and comply with the greatest part of the ends thereof, as to humble, and by shame to reclaime offenders, to inhibit the contagious spreading of the example, and to remove the scandall which Re­ligion might contract, by permitting offences to passe unpunished: for as for pol­lution of others (without society in sinne) false testimony and sealing of blanks and the like, I think the prevention thereof to be no proper end of censures, 1 Cor. 5. nor finde any such thing intimated by the Apostle, where he argueth and rea­soneth for the putting away of that wicked person from among the Corinthians, nor suppose them to be any more effectual meanes to that end, than anciently in Eclipses the resounding of those aera auxiliaria mentioned in the Poets, were to ease the ignorantly fained ‘— solis lunaeque labores;’ Or the torches that were then held up were to reflect light on these great Lu­minaries.

I say the Laws of the Common-wealth might in some degree supply the neg­lect of Church censures (which are to be exercised in palàm facinorosos, ma­ximè si circa hos magistratus officium non faciat, saith Paraeus,) so farre, In 1 Cor. 5. p. 14. 67. as to restrain and withhold men from separation, or (which is the moderne Peri­phrasis and new notion, to blanch and palliate separation) from gathering new Churches. And this is that which to me seemes cardo negotii, and that which I must insist on, that though Excommunication be obstructed or laid asleep, or culpably exercised, and so there be a mixture of good & evil in one Communi­on, yet there must be no separation into the new gathered Churches. The con­trary opinion and practice was the very spirit and extract of the heresy of the Donatists. Calvin tells us, Instit. l. 4. c. 12. sect. 12. that because the Bishops onely reproved some evils which they thought not profitable for the Church to punish with Excommuni­cation, therefore they made invectives against the Bishops, and raised a schisme against the Churches of Christ. Morton grand impost. cap. 15. sect. 25. Martyr. loc. com. part. 4. c. 5. p. 61. Parae. in 1 Cor. 5. p. 467. Augustin. con­tra Parmen. l. 3. c. 1. & 2. p. 12. & 13. tom. 7. And Dr. Morton shewes us that they separated from the other constituted Churches in Africa, especially because of the mix­ture of Godly and wicked professors in one Communion; and Peter Martyr and Paraeus both tell us out of Augustine, that the Donatists objected to the Catho­liques that they had no Church because they wanted Excommunication: but St. Augustine answers them, Dicant ergo si possunt, meliorem se atque purgatio­rem habere nunc ecclesiam, quàm erat ipsa unitas, beatissimi Cypriani temporibus, who yet held communion of Sacraments with men notoriously culpable in una congregatione, paria Sacramenta tractantes, and though, saith he, siat hoc (scil. excommunicatio) ubi periculum schismatis nullum est — salvâ dilectionis synceri­tate, & custoditâ pacis unitate — adhibitâ prudentiâ & obedientiâ in eo quod praecipit Dominus, ne frumenta laedantur; yet as he instances in the case of Cy­prian, Quia non poterant ab iis corporaliter separari, ne simul eradicent & tri­ticum, sufficiebat iis talibus corde sejungi, vitâ moribusque distingui, propter com­pensationem custodiendae pacis & unitatis, propter salutem infirmorum, & veluti [Page 92]lactentium frumentorum, ne membra corporis Christi per sacrilega schismata lania­rent; and to this truth his whole books are but one continued testimony: and for this we have better, even infallible and authenticke witness, for when the incestuous Corinthian was not censured yet, neither did any, how much soever they might pretend to purity, 1 Cor. 5. separate themselves into a gathered Church, nor had any check from the Apostle for not doing so, or command to doe it, no not if in case, as he had judged already, that wicked person should not have been put away from among themselves. And when the Angel of the Church of Thiatyra suffered that woman Jezabel to teach and to seduce, Revel. 2.20. and 24. to commit fornication, to eat things sacrificed to Idols, those which had not that Do­ctrine, nor known the depth of Sathan, were onely commanded to hold fast what they had, and had no other burden put upon them, because they had not separated Jezabel from the Church, either of command to separate, or of ca­lamities and threatnings for not separating, and for being defiled with such communion.

To conclude this discourse, (the thred whereof I have spun into some length that it might reach thorough the whole extent and limits of Excommu­nication, and which is very pertinent to cleare aswel the state of our Contro­versie from mistake, as I my self from misprision,) I shall now winde it all up in this clew; That I approve very well of Excommunication the greater, and condemn not the lesser, but I like not their way of inflicting it, because not like to that course, which I thinke onely to be approved, and as Rectum est sui index & obliqui, that which I conceive right, will manifest theirs to be croo­ked, being too common, and laid on too many, too precipitate and without par­ticular admonition, and inflicted for no grosse and notorious crimes, impeni­tently and obstinately persisted in, but onely because men are not, in their opinion, holy enough, or cannot satisfie them of their holiness: and indeed whereas they insinuate others to be opposite to Excommunication, themselves plainly destroy the nature thereof, not onely because In omni foro ad judicium rectum, In 4. d. 18. q. 2. art. 1.requiritur & cognitio causae, & sententiatio, as Biel speakes, whereas yet they suspend the greater part of the people without either of these, but because the definition (which includes the nature) of Excommunication, is to be censu­ra ecclesiastica privans ab aliqua communione fidelium, &c. whereas they Ex­communicate (with the lesser Excommunication I meane) and exclude from their Communion a multitude upon whom no Ecclesiastical censure ever passed.

Now lastly, for Presbytery, I long since read and took much impression from a passage in Bodin, De method. hist. c. 6. p. 245.Laudabile, si quid usquam gentium, quódque rempub. efficit, si non opibus & imperii magnitudine, certè virtutibus ac pietate florentem, illa scili­cet Pontificum censura, quâ nihil magis divinum cogitari potuit, — ad Christi norman dirigitur, latenter primùm & am'cè, deinde paulò acerbiùs, tum nisi pa­reas, &c. igitur nulla meretricia, nullae ebrietates, &c. And I still approve of Presbytery according to the judgement of Calvin, as a prudent Government, regulated generally by the word of God, and conducible to Truth and Godli­ness; yet not after the opinion of Beza, as particularly injoyned by Gods Word, and necessary to be alone entertained; where Truth and Godliness shall be, Ut ab ea non magis liceat recedere, quam ab ipsius Religionis placitis. I am not against Presbytery, yet I am not so much for it, as to be against all [Page 93]other formes of government beside it. I deny not that to be a good govern­ment, yet affirme not that there is none else that is good. I never voted for exorbitant Episcopacy, nor should I have ever suffraged against a regulated; I would have gladly lived under rectified Episcopacy, and I am content to be under a moderate Presbytery, (for there are rigidi & molles Presbyteri, aswell as rigidi & molles Lutheran [...]) and between regulate Episcopacy and moderate Presbytery is no such gulfe fixed, that there can be no passing from the one to the other, and if they be not like some of the Heathen Gods which were the same deities, but had one name apud superos, another apud inferos, yet sure they are not like Angles made of right, and Angles made of Spherical lines, which can never be made equall; and we will not dispute which is the right line, or which more Spherical, (more known in the Sphere of the world) seeing we endevour to atone them. All things are apt to be soyled by diuturnal use, and mens corruptions will have an influence into their a­ctions. Streames pure in the Fountain, contract some filth by a long course, but accidentall evils may not prejudice what is essentially good: Faults of the concrete are to be sequestred from the abstract, and the miscariages of persons not to be put upon the score of the Office they manage. And Presbyters are men too, and man hath a connotation of frailty, and never comes up fully to the Standard of the Sanctuary, though I think they hold out weight as much, and need as few graines of allowance to make them passable for sanctity, as any generation of men that I know, so that I wish we had more of Presbyters, and am sorry to find so few right Presbyters, and that many passe under that notion, which are but conterfeits and prevaricators.

Even my zeal for the honor of Presbytery transports me into a dislike of those which lapse from their principles, as if they distrusted and were out of love with them, and reflect dishonor upon that name by their recidivations. Nor can I take complacency to find that Cassius, Quicquid velit, nimis velit, and I think it very wise and seasonable Counsell which Galba gave to Piso, Ne­ro à pessimo quoque desiderabitur, mihi & tibi providendum est, ne etiam à bonis desideretur; I should be sorry to heare it said, that Diogenes tramples on the pride of Plato with greater pride, and looke upon it with indignation, when those that pretend to be inimicous to Episcopacy, are suspected not to be so, because as Charles of Burgundy excused himself not to wish evil to the King of France, because in stead of one he wished there were twenty: So they doe not extinguish the Dominion, but change and multiply the Subjects thereof, Magìs alii homines quàm alii mores, as Tacitus, and they doe onely as he said of Mucianus, Vim principis complecti, nomen remittere; and like what Cossitanus complained of in that Historian, Ut imperium evertant, libertatem praetendunt, si perverterent, ipsam aggredientur; or like as Caesar and Pompey contested not to vindicate liberty, but who should seize on the Soveraignty, Caesar would admit no Superior, Pompey no Equal; and Paterculus tells us of the latter, oc­cultior non melior. It grieves me also that in stead of Independents returning to Presbyters, they are too facil and too forward to turne toward them, in a scandalizing complyance, and to be imposed upon, and seduced with their principles, as if (by such a transplantation, as Paracelsus talkes of in natural generations) there were several formes in them, but that still resulteth to give being and denomination which meets with most plenteous and suitable [Page 94]nourishment, Ipsi serviunt temporibus, ut ipsis serviant tempora, like the Hyaena, they are males one yeer, and females another; and like the Mervail of Peru, which every yeer beareth different flowers. This hath been the Gangrene of Presbytery, which spreads and mortifies, and the Worm which hath smote the Gourd, under which our heads hoped to find a shadow to deliver us from our grief; so that now the East Winde and the Sun beat upon us even to faint­ing.

But I shall ingenuously confess, that as my weak understanding cannot dis­cern that the Word of God particularly determines, or absolutely prescribeth any one entire form of Church-government, but onely holdeth forth general rules for the constitution and exercise thereof, as may suit with order and de­cency, and conduce to edification in godliness, and advance of truth and peace; so my tractable will is ready to embrace and submit to any that shall not check with these rules, nor retrench those ends, (as to me Independency seems appa­rently to do; but which else shall be to those ends most subservien, I suppose may be aptly demonstrated ex posteriori, and not obscurely determined by Time the Mother of Truth, and Experience the Mistress of Wisdome) rather than in an unhappy contest about setting on such or such a garment on the Church, to tear her flesh, and scatter her limbes, and in a difference about ma­king the hedge, to burn up or devast the field. And as Discipline seems but as the Garment of the Church: so Joseph may be his Fathers darling, and yet have a party-coloured coat; Epist. 86. Tom. 2. p. 76. In ista veste varietas sit, scissura non sit, saith St. Augustine, and elsewhere in the like case, Omnis pulchritudo filiae regis intrinse­cus, illae autem observationes quae variae celebrantur in ejus veste intelliguntur, unde ibi dicitur in fimbriis aureis circumamicta varietate, sed ea quo (que) vestis ita diver­sis celebrationibus varietur, ut non adversis contentionibus dissipetur. To think to hang the whole frame of a Government upon two or three words onely in Scripture, (as Curio did the people of Rome upon one hook in his Amphitheater) and which may as rationally be understood of, and as properly applyed to ano­ther subject, matter and persons, as those which they expound it of, and which would hardly ever be so interpreted, but by a judgment seasoned with their in­fusions, and predisposed by their glosses, or facilitated by proper affection to beleeve what they would have to be: Truly I cannot but wonder with Cato, that one Soothsayer doth not laugh when he meets another. A wise and lear­ned man tells us, Sir W. Ra­leigh. that Ignorance hath set Philosophy, Physick, and Divinity in a Pillory, and written over the first, Contra negantem principia; over the second, Virtus specifica; over the third, Ecclesia Romana: to which we may adde the fourth (though set there more by Interest and Faction, than Ignorance) even Discipline, and superscribe Jure Divino.

I am not of that Elevation, nor my judgment at that Ascendent, that either should be worth the notice,

and therefore the Greek Ep [...]gran called Silence, Pharmacum tranquillitatis for­tissimum. [Page 95]And perchance the not carrying of a stone in my mouth, like the Cranes flying over the Cilician Mountains, to prevent their cacklings, may draw many about my ears; for to deliver my self in such an opinion, is to set Atha­nasius against the whole World, and the whole World against Athanasius; but because Momus would have every one to have a window in his brest, and the importunity of the Apologists hath coacted me to manifest, that I hold no opi­nion which I dare not own; and as that Romane professed of his house, I could be content my bosome were patent to every man; I have therefore adventu­red to deliver my judgment, as one that am peaceable and faithful in Israel. And though Ursius Crispus found more of safety when

Yet he should have had more honour and conscience, had he been

But yet I do not know why I should not claim my share of that rara tempo­rum felicitas, as Tacitus calls it; and wherein our age exceeds that of Nerva, Ubi & sentire quae velis, & quae sentias, loqui licet.

But

Who can patiently hear the Apologists traduce others as averse from Presby­tery, when that disaffection lies in their own Wallet, More vulgi suum quis (que)Contra Ruffin. l. 3.fla­gitium aliis objectantes, as Tacitus in the case of Vedeius Aquila; yet forgetting that caution of Hierom, Caveas in alterum dicere, quod in te statim detorqueri po­test; and what is their opinion of, or affection to Presbytery, make judgment (as they did of Hercules) by this foot-step: they tell us that Mr. §. 37 Jeanes hath his ad­vantage upon his adversaries (among whom it seems they rank themselves) by this, P. 170.that he holds them strictly to Presbyterian principles (from which it appeares they would go loose) whereas they think it safer to transgress a disputable prin­ciple of Presbytery (so as it appears they are not convinced of the certainty of those principles, which by being still disputable, are onely problems, and not principles) than to offend against the light of the word: Whence it follows, that a man cannot keep close with Presbyterian principles without clashing with the Word; and then also these principles are not disputable, but undoubtedly and indisputably false and vitious, if they cannot adhere to them without receding from the holy Scripture. When they can wipe off and expiate these blots which their Pens have drop'd upon Presbytery, and point out any as black and odious shed from mine, let them mark others with a black coal or their black Ink, for adversaries to that way; in the interim,

[Page 96]Besides, how little their model and course symbolizeth with the Presbyterian way, he may reade that runs it over. Rarely do the Presbyterians use Cen­sures, and on very few do they inflict them. Who ever in any of those forrein Churches of that Discipline hath found the farre greatest part of their people under suspension, or any suspended, but upon regular process, for the scandal of some notorious evil, obstinately continued in after admonition? Because they turn aside from this way, we walk not with them, who should easily be at agree­ment, did their way agree with the Presbyterian.

SECT. X.

THE initiation of this Section of theirs is like an initial Letter, which is fairly flourish'd, but signifies nothing (viz. to the point in hand) Our heat of pursuit after the main question, will make us separate those Heterogeneals, and taking no notice of their shoots at Rovers, we shall onely gather up the Arrows, which they have aimed at the mark. They first ask us, How know you that Christ did not examine his Disciples, since the Evangelists tell us, that all that Christ did was not written? How know you that? 1. Ad hominem. §. 12 I pray them to tell me how they know it; for they say it, and I trust they are men that know what they say. ‘— Dicit (que) tibi tua pagina; —’ They tell us that St. Paul prescribed no other but self-examination to the Co­rinthians, because he ey'd Christs performances with his Disciples, whom he needed not to examine, being known to him; as therefore he that being rough­ly [Page 112]asked by one of King Ptolomies Courtiers, Who let him into the Palace? an­swered nothing, but ran to the wall, and with a Coal drew his Portraiture in black lines: so we need make no other answer, but draw forth their own lines, to shew how we might have known this, themselves (very credible men in their own judgment) told us so, An ignorabas apud Lucullum coenare Lucullum? The Argument of the Paper was built on this ground, that the action of Christ in the first Institution of the Sacrament, was the Archetypon, and exemplar cause of all subsequent Administrations: so that herein matter of fact being matter of Law and Rule; as well what Christ did, as what he did not, being in some sort Dogmatical (for we are thereby taught that it was not necessary to be done) and then in Laws, not to appear and not to be, being equivolent (Lex saith Ga­briel,Biel in 3. dist. 37. q. vinc. art. 1.Est signum notificati, nam quia nulla Lex obligat, si notificata non fuerit: therefore upon this Foundation, this was our Architecture, viz. What was not recorded to be done at the first Institution, it is not necessary to doe in the following Dispensations, this being a conclusion resulting from the former prin­ciples: so as then to ask, how we know that Christ did not examine his Disci­ples, is virtually and in effect to demand, how we know that all which Christ or­dained as necessary, to be done, is recorded in Scripture, and so to put us to prove the perfection of Divine Writ; but they say, the Evangelists tell us that all that Christ did was not written; true, but it follows not, all was not written, therfore all things necessary to be done, or beleeved are not written. The Evangelists are very punctual and exact in setting down things circumstantial, & cannot there­fore be piously imagined to have omitted matters more substantial, & what was necessary to have been done, was of necessity to be written for our example and learning, without yeelding a deficiency destructive to the perfection of Scrip­ture; wherefore grounding the assertions upon the next verse of the same Evangelist, Tract. 4.9. Such Iohn. Augustine tells us, although Christ spake and wrought some things which are not written, yet those things which seemed unto him sufficient to the salvation of Beleevers were selected to be written; and Cyril assures us, that so much as holy Writers judged sufficient for good manners and godly faith are written, Cyril Alexan l. 12. John c. ultimo, cited by F. White, answ. Fish. to the end that we shining in right faith, good works, and virtue, may attain the Heavenly Kingdome. If therefore pre-examination had been so necessary to those ends as they suggest, doubtless Christ did practise it, and that practice would have been registred, since his example was to be part of our rule, as themselves confess, and therefore to be made known and laid before us; so as they need not scornfully put us to prove that Christ did not examine his Disciples, since it may be well concluded, he did not, because they cannot finde it registred that he did; had it been necessary to be done, it had been re­corded; and not being recorded, he thought it not necessary. But that he might notwithstanding examine them, is as rationally suggested out of John 20 31. Many other things Iesus did which are not written: As rationally indeed as the pack of Popish Traditions, is thereby confirmed; for proof whereof this is one of their common places. But whereas they tell us, that they cannot finde that Christ examined not his Disciples, unless on the back-side of Constantines Denation, which the Paper mentioned; Rather as the challenge of the power to compell all men to submit to their examination, proceeds from the like ambitious spirit, as did that forged Donation, so the concession thereof is either some interlining, or endorsement of the same charter.

They next teach us, that argumentum à Scriptura negativè, non valet, which being delivered generally and unlimitedly or applyed to the special point in hand, where the fact is constitutive of the rule and dogmatical, impresseth some wonder in what School they learn'd such Logick, or such Divinity, which is not taught by any Protestant. The Papists who shame not to profess that many Doctrines of Faith are neither openly nor obscurely, expresly nor involvedly, contained in Scripture, In Thom. 22. q. 1. art. 10. (as Bannes in terms) and that therefore to tye our faith to Scripture onely, is to play the fool, and marre all Religion, (as is affirmed by Coster) I admire not, if they decry these Arguments ab authoritate Scripturae negativè, that so they may better advance their common topick of traditions; and therefore it is not strange, that their Logicians Hunnaeus, Litelmau, Tom. 2. contra. 3. de missa. l. 1. c. 24. p. 706. and Fon­seca deride them, but also their Achilles, Bellarmine magisterially tells us, Illa argumenta negativa (non habetur expressè in Scriptura, ergo non est fastum) jam ipsis pueris ridicula sunt. But such Arguments having for their basis the per­fection of Scripture, as the rule of all things to be done or beleeved; or of Faith and manners (as Augustine speaks) and which could not be the rule, if it were not commensurate to both, nor perfect, if it wanted any thing. Surely for these that with Lyrinensis confess the Canon of Scripture to be perfect, and in it self sufficient for all matters, yea more than sufficient, to explode or cen­sure these negative Arguments, is to betray the Fortresses of the Faith, and make over the Armory of the Church to the Enemy, Keckerman. Alsted. which in the Common-wealth the Law makes Treason. But notwithstanding not onely our celebrious Lo­gicians in their Topicks, assert and verifie them, our famous Divines generally in their Disputes against the fifth Gospel of traditions, doe practically approve them, the ancient Fathers use, and authorize them, as the Scripture denieth what it noteth not, saith Tertullian; We beleeve it not, because we reade it not, saith Hierom; we ought not so much as to know these things, which the Book of the Law contains not, saith Hilary; but even the Scripture it self affirmeth and argueth for such Negative Arguments, yeelding examples of them; Jer. 19.5. Joh. 8.40. 1 Cor. 11.16 Heb. 1.13. as which I com­manded not nor spake it: this Abraham did not; we have no such custome, nor the Churches of God; to which of the Angels said he, &c. And as judgment often varieth with interest, and things acquire the price not so much for what they are really in themselves, as for what they are relatively to our ends and turns; so that which is no good money when they should take it, Norton pre­test. appeal. l. 2. c. 7. S. 9. &c. 25. S. 12. is currant coyn when they should pay it. Not onely Rellarmine himself, as also other Pontificians like this Weapon well enough, when they think they can give a blow with it, and do make use of such Negative Arguments, as a very learned Divine at large declareth; but even the Apologists themselves, though they here expel this Iephta, as the sonne of a strange woman; yet when they have need of his help in their distress, they court him again in this same Section; so as that Irae­neous saith of some others, Cùm arguuntur à Scripturis, convertuntur in accusatio­nem Scripturarum, so onely they are against those Arguments, when such Argu­ments are against them.

Next, I do not know how to understand the Apologists, when they say, It is too confidently affirmed, that Christ shewed (his Disciples) the nature and end of the Sacrament, which seems to me as the refuge of a person desperate of help; and then etiam ad novaculam, as if they would catch hold of that which would cer­tainly wound, and uncertainly relieve them; for if they suppose absolutely and [Page 114]generally that our Saviour declared not these at the Institution, how can that consist with the wise and holy and perfect discharge of his prophetical office? for if he taught it not then, where did he unfold, or where else did he deliver that Doctrine? How could the Apostles have that competency of knowledge which might render them capable to discern and partake of the Lords body? and how was that a Sacrament, Sacramentorum verò ea natura est, ut non modò non cognosci, sed ne esse qui­dem omnino sine verbo que­unt. Thes. Sal­mur. part. 3. S. 15. pag. 34. si concionari est explicare seu vivâ voce, seu ex Scripto ver­bo divino con­gruenter, quae fuerit Dei vo­luntas in insti­tutione Sacra­mentorum, concionatorum omnino verbum requiritur — ut enim verbi Dei voluntas nullo verbo de­clarata nequit efficere ut in signi materia quidquam praeter eam materiam intueamur, quae ipsa per se materiam signi vel Sacramenti non habet. Ibid. S. 35. pag. 11. Instit. l. 4. r. 14. S. 4. p. 472. In 5. ad Ephes. Tom. 4. l. 1. c. 15. S. 9. p. 16. In Evang. Tom. 4. l. 3. c. 2. p. 75. Piscator in Matth. 26.26. p. 280, 282. without accession to the Element of that word, which was to be not onely constitutive of the Sacrament, but also declaratory of the mysterious Rites, and the thing represented, and also promissory of the graces thereby exhibited? For sine doctrinae copula, attoniti undo aspectu sensus nostri redderentur, saith Calvin; and in another place, Sola mysterii explicatio, facit ut mortuum elementum incipiat esse Sacramentum; for the elements and actions being no natural, but instituted signs, there must necessarily have been a concurrent Word to manifest the reason and end of the Institution, and the things which they were instituted to signifie; for, Signa indeterminata ex se, ad significandum determ nantur per verba quibus instituuntur, as Chumier; and cor­respondently Barradius tells us, Cùm panem benedixit gratiás (que) patri egit, animos discipulorum verbis praeparasse. And to supersede any larger demonstration there­of, a most logical and very learned Divine hath collected the definition (inclu­ding the nature, use, and end) of the Sacrament, out of the very words of In­stitution, the Genus, and the Difference, taken from the various Arguments; as not onely the adjuncts, the matter; not onely that of Bread and Wine, but the matter of another kinde, in breaking and pouring forth of them, (where con­sists part of the use) the form, viz. the relation of the Elements to the things signified and sealed by them, (in both which is very much of the Nature) the Ends being four; the representation of Christs death, the testification of the fruit thereof, the vivifying and consolation of the faithful, and an excitement to Thanksgiving: and so thus concludes his explication thereof, At (que) haec est doctrina simplex ac salutaris de coena domini ex ipsis v rbis institutionis deprompta, ejusmodi certè ut fideles omnes meritò in ea acquiescere possint, omissis quaestionibus aliis non necessariis, &c. And if we may acquiesce in the Doctrine of the Sacra­ment extracted from the words of Institution, then the nature, end, and use of the Sacraments must be held forth in, and may be collected from these words, else we could not rest in the Doctrine contained therein.

But if the Apologists intend (and it is onely charity which formally respe­cteth their good; not justice which relates to our debt, that must incline us so to understand them) that the nature, use, and end of the Sacrament was not shewed by the washing of the Disciples feet, it is like the Rainbow, Thaumantis silia, and very wonderful how any that hath common sense, could impute that sense to me: but it seems if they could not finde, they would make somewhat which they could confute: but they have therein onely done, as if Antipheron should have charged fiercely upon his own phantasme. Was there any colour that having said, Christ shewed his Disciples the nature, end, and use of the Sa­crament, that I did infer or conclude it out of his washing of their seet? As [Page 115]there was no causal or illative particle exprest that might insinuate that sense, so a conjunctive particle onely was understood; and to his shewing them the nature, use, and end, out of the words of Institution, I joyned also his teaching them the duty of preparation in order to the right use, by the lotion of their feet, with an implication likewise, that this being specially recorded, it was as likely that the particular pre-examination of them would in all probability have been as well recited, had it preceded, or been so necessary: And yet nei­ther did I relate that as my proper sense, or that I supposed the washing to be directed, as a type or emblem to that signification.

But 1. I reminded, Potest aliquae interpretatio esse secundum quid hoc estjuxta analogiam fidei & Scripturae, si ei non repugnet, quae tamen non sit vera sim­pliciter hoc est, juxta genuinum sensum alicujus loci. Paraeus in Gen. c. 1. v. 1. p. 30. Mede in 1 Cor. 10.3, 4, 5. Diatrib. p. 598. that some of the ancient Fathers did so allegorically in­terpret and apply it; and if their Interpretations be true secundùm quid, though not simpliciter, I am not very willing to check with them.

2. Though the Fathers are of little reckoning, and stand in the lowest place of account, where these men dispose of the Counters, yet farther I remembred it to be the sense of divers modern Theologues; and among the rest, of one higher by the head than the ordinary rank, surmounting them, ‘Quantum lenta solent inter viburna cupressi.’

The washing (saith he) of the Disciples feet before Supper, what doth it else call for, but a cleansing of our hearts before we communicate? And though I would not willingly erre with Plato, and doe reckon Truth a greater friend, yet I would not willingly quarrel with Plato, when he crosseth not my way.

3. I finding some thus to judge thereof, who are of somewhat like judgment with the Apologists in this Controversie, I took it up as an interpretation ad ho­minem, non ad rem; I alledge it ex hypothesi, non thesi, for as long as a Dog is not like to bite me, what need I hold him by the ear? and I thought perchance they would have given a more favourable reception thereunto for their friends sake, since it falls out often what Stapleton adviseth to, Olim quando (que) in Ecclesia re­ceptum fuit pe­des lavare ante sacram Com­nionem, Du­rantus de Eccl. ritibus, l. 2. c. 55. Sect. 10. p. 816. which sprung from this mystical consideration. That men look rather who speaks, than what is spoken, and imitate the Athenians, who approved that speech in one mans mouth, which they liked not in anothers. The truth is, I have elsewhere contradicted this reference, and shewed it not to be the mystical sense of Scripture, but the artifice of the Interpreters, and the application or di­latation of the proper sense, and an allegory illate, not innate; and therefore, ‘— Viderit utilitas,’ Let them of whose interest it is to assert that allegorical sense, endeavour to vindicate it, if they can; for my part I shall not feather Arrows to be shot against me, and then be put to ward their stroaks: here the Apologists and I shall easily concur, and our lines meet in angles, however elsewhere they runne parallels; but though he washed their feet to teach them humility, which is the figurative sense or application which they onely or especially contend for, yet it follows not, that no other was meant or intended. Augustine teacheth us, that tanta est ubertas divinarum Scripturarum, De Doctri. Christian. l. 3. c. 27. Confes. l. 12. c. 24.ut saepe eadem verba pluribus modis in­tellecta, plures sensus sine falsitate recip [...]ant, (which is to be understood of my­stical or figurative senses.) That their feet were now washed, might lesson [Page 116]them the preparatory, cleansing of their affections; that Christ washed them, might learn them humility.

But if not Sacramental preparation, yet that somewhat else was intended then an example of humble and charitable condescension, the Fathers long since collected, partly out of v. 10. Ye are clean, but not all, chiefly out of v. 8. If I wash thee not, thou hast no part in me, whereby is understood, not that he should not partake of the Sacrament, as Cajetan straightens it, but should have no part of his felicity in his Kingdome, or (which typically and symbolically to him was the same) in his familiar conversation and necessitude, from which he should be ejected. Wherefore factâ anagoge ab externa lotione ad internam, ex tulit Sermonem, and speaking to all, in his speech to Peter, by the externall lotion, shadowed forth and signified the internal, either purifying of the affecti­ons, and cleansing the stain of sinne by grace of repentance, or purging of the soul from the guilt of sinne by his blood; (as Origen, Cyprian, Ambrose, Augu­stine, Gregory, Bernard, Piscator, Cajetan, Jansenius, and their own Margine takes notice, that the late Annotations so expound it) and the spiritual wa­shing, either to be wholly by regeneration, (Christ hereby reviving the signe that is given of it in baptisme, as Diopate) or dayly, whereby quotidian lapses are cleansed, this being as the fruit of Christ, his advent into the world, and of his passion, saith Bucer; so that this sentence contains a general doctrine (saith Calvin) that we are all stinking and defiled before God, untill Christ absterge our filthiness.

If some have supposed this washing to be after the Sacrament, the summe is small for number (onely Cyprian among the Ancients that I can recognize) and their reasons of as small waight: that which imposed upon and mislead them was vers, 2. Supper being ended, but I hope my Essayes elsewhere have not left it improbable that this Supper here mentioned, was not had in the Paschal night, or if it should have been so, yet coenâ factâ, no more concludes the close of the Supper, then die facto, the end of the day; and some of the Learned ren­der the sense of the Greek by coenâ paratâ; but if that construction be not plau­sible, others reade inter coenandum, or by a Synecdoche integri, understand the first part of the Supper ended, for at the Passeover were several suppers or ra­ther courses, so as it might have been after one of them, or after all, and yet before the Supper of the Lord. Besides it is expressely recorded, that afterward he sate down again, vers. 12. and that he sate at Table, vers. 23. because John leaned on his bosome; but whosoever be of that judgement, that this lotion was after the Sacrament, I hope the Apologists will not consent with them after they have been prompted (which they were not caute and provident enough to foresee) that it will then follow that Judas was admitted to the Communion, for vers. 13. we read, when Jesus had thus said, i.e. spoken so much of this washing that preceded, he afterward discovered the Traytor, and dealt him the Sop.

That (wash one anothers feet) signifies, examine your selves, is no mans in­terpretation, but their proper fiction; but yet if Christ his lotion of their feet had been figuratively instructive to the cleansing of their hearts, in order to a Sacramental preparation, self-examination had been either a part thereof, or means and help thereunto; and if they had been onely lessoned to examine themselves, and nothing else been signified, then it might perchance, as they [Page 117]say, have stood better, if they had been bid to wash their own feet, but the exam­ple of Humility and Charity could onely be propounded by Christs doing it, and the spiritual washing of regeneration was now aptly represented, while he made the external lotion, who merited and applyed the internal, and exami­nation of the Minister may better discover mens preparation, but the generall Exhortations best prepare them; and if they shall tell me, That Exhorta­tions are or may be intermixed with Examination, yet formally it is the Ex­hortation instructs, and Examination tryes the proficiency, and there is a ne­cessity of the instruction, none of the tryal; and why a general Exhortation may not without farther tryal, fit men for the Sacrament, as well as for other duties, and while it expounds and lays open and applyes the Word of Institu­tion (as it ought to do) as well dispose us to recieaing, as the very reciting of the words did prepare the Apostles (for we read of no other preparatory in­struction, which they had) I should be glad the Apologists would give a ratio­nal account before the Greek Calends.

If Christ did not examine his Disciples, doth it therefore follow, that they may not examine some or all in their Assemblies. Ignorantia elenchi is commonly that Ink which this Sepia sheds to facilitate an escape; let them bethink themselves, is it our question (even as themselves would state it) whether the Minister may examine, or whether of necessity he must? I grant he may examine some, I deny it to be necessary that he must all; and so much I inferred, because Stripture is silent that Christ examined his Disciples, and the consequence is bottomed on this positive Doctrine, current among Theologues, that what­soever is Essential, or absolutely necessary to the Sacrament, may be colle­cted out of Christs doings and sayings at the Institution.

Christ administring onely to his Disciples, teacheth us rather to exclude the Igno­rant. Let them do it, we shall not quarrel them; but will they say that all are such whom they exclude? How constantly they hugge their dear Ignoran­tia elenchi! The strength and consequence of the Arguments drawn from Christs admitting none but Disciples, I have elsewhere examined, and shewed that by the concurrent testimony of Orthodox Divines, Tom. 4. l. 8. c. 3. Sect. 25. p. 292. the Disciples then re­presented the whole visible Church, not (as they would have it) onely the invisible Church, and such as were real Saints.

The great Chamier distills a more pure and wholesome Doctrine from Christs administring to his Disciples, eo docuisse neminem admittendum qui non sit in numero fidelium, at (que) indè abstinere jubemus omnes excommunicatos. But they say (as if they would ribbe or buttress the former Argument, which hath been the sand whereon they have laid the Foundation of their discourses on this subject) that he admitted not onely Disciples, for then all Christians may come in under that notion; but that he admitted onely his choice Disciples, he had the 70. and others, but those as more infirm were not admitted. What proficiency the Apostles had then attained to, we have elsewhere discussed; Infirmi erant, Advers. Anna. bapt. l. 6. c. 9. p. 233.meticulosi, infirmi etiam in Charitate, & aliis virtutibus & in hac ipsa caena inter se contenderunt, quisnam maximus inter ipsos foret, saith Bullinger; but turdus sibi malum ejicit, Golias his sword shall cut off his head; for may we not reminde them of what they have so soon forgotten, and in their own words answer, How know you that? viz. that none of the 70. were admitted? The Evangelists tell you, that all that Christ did was not written, &c. they might be present for [Page 118]ought they can prove. Except (while they have the abomination of divers weights, one weight to take in, another to put out by) a Negative Argument be of force, when it will make for them, and invalid, when it will be against them, or be more conclusive in things meerly historical; which having no direct concernment with faith or manners, are not so materious to be recorded (of which kinde is this,) then in such things where the fact should help to consti­tute the rule, and therefore ought to have been registred, if they had been done. If Chemnitius think the 70. or any other beside the 12. were not ad­mitted, I have elsewhere shewed, that men as learned as he (though he was eminently such) doe suppose that some of them might have partaken, Tom. 5. l. 8. c. 3. Sect. 29. p. 202. And of this judgment also is Dr. Fulk, Rhem. test. in Mat. 26.20. though it be not expressed. Of this judgment among the ancient, is not onely Euthy­mius, but Chamier tells us, that the Liturgies of Peter, Clemens, James, Mark, Ba­sil, Chrysostom, expresly mention that the Disciples communicated, as well as the Apostles, at the first institution of the Sacrament; and though it be said, Iesus sate down with the 12. yet there is no exclusive particle, nor is it added, (and none else.) But if Chemnicius suppose the 70. were not admitted, let them consult him, whether Iudas were not one of those that had admission; and then casting up the reckoning by his Counters, tell me what they shall gain by not casting in the 70. But I cannot divine what authority or reason the Apologists had to affirm, that the 70. were excluded, because more infirm (& so not capable it seems.) I had thought, that if none but the 12. or 11. (as they would have it) did communicate, it was because they onely were Christs con­stant Family, as it were, and the Passover was to be eaten by one Family to­gether, if they made up 10. persons; and Christ passing from the Passover, and translating it to his Supper, admitted no more at the latter, then he took to the former; and seeing that it was a Jewish Canon, that not above 20. should eate together of one Paschal Lamb, our Saviour could not perhaps admit of many more than the 12, for that reason, if (as it is likely) he conformed to that observation.

But it seems then by the Apologists, that those whom they admit, are as it were in the notion and capacity of the choice Disciples, those whom they re­ject, of the infirm 70. Yet to accommodate it more aptly to what they have said, that Christ thereby teacheth us to exclude the Ignorant and Wicked, they should say not blanchingly, the infirme, but the ignorant or wicked 70, for such they im­ply them to be by being excluded; and therefore those whom they reject may comfort themselves with that Martyr, to be stock'd in the same hole with Phil­pot, and to be in the same condition with the 70 (whom Christ chose notwith­standing) and to be no otherwise Dogs or Swine, then they were; but if Christ called not those that were infirm, §. 17 they profess not to follow his pattern, for they say, they exclude not the weak, this strengthning appointment (as they call it) being proper for them.

They assure us, they examine none that are taken to be Disciples, that is then, none that be Christians, (for Christian and Disciple in Scripture idiom, are synonimous) or perchance none that be their Disciples, though many that be Christs: but how do they know them to be Disciples, before they have exa­mined them, if that be true which often they inculcate, That they cannot judge of mens fitness without examination?

Real Disciples will not refuse to satisfie the Church, and encourage weak brethren by a voluntary profession of their Faith. True, if the Church doe need, and shall have just cause to require such satisfaction, but as the Church can receive no satisfaction, by a kinde of auricular examination taken in privare oftentimes by themselves, unless like the Pope, themselves are the Church virtually, or the Church must be satisfied, because they are so; so why should the Church need farther to be satisfied from such; of whose knowledge they cannot doubt? this were to render the Church, like those remindless persons, whom we sometimes see to go about to seek that which they carry in their hands; and if they are already taken for Disciples, how can it be doubted that they are not knowing?

2. Real Disciples will not refuse to make such profession of their Faith, when those that are weak want encouragement in the Faith, but such an en­couragement is not to be given by a submission to examination. G. de Valentia 2.2. disp. 1. q. 3. puur. 2. p. 328. 321. Valentia and Sylvius determine it generally, Oportet instare casum aliquem necessitatis confi­tendi fidem aut ex divino praecepto, aut humano obligante regulariter, quando non subest justa & rationabilis causa omittendi illius observationem. Aquinas limits it more specially, Ubi fides periclitatur, quilibet tenetur fidem suam aliis propalare, vel ad instructionem aliorum fidelium, sive confirmationem, Sylvius 22. q. 3. art. 2. p. 31, 32. Aquin. 22. q. 3. art. 2. Filiuc. cas­tract. 22. c. 3. S. 74.vel ad reprimendam infidelium insultationem, and when by his silence, ex hoc crederetur, vel quòd non haberet fidem, vel quòd fides non esset vera, vel alii ejus taciturnitate ever­terentur à fide; or as Filiucius more abstractly, Quando proximus per confessio­nem fidei quae ab aliquo fieret, facilè traheretur ad fidem, — item quando ali­quis versaretur in periculo negandi fidem, & alius posset propriâ confessione id dam­num impedire: And when they have defined in general, that confession is ne­cessary, when by omission thereof, subtrahitur honor Deo debitus, vel utilitas proximo impendenda; yet they adde, Quocirca illud verbum Subtrahendi accipien­dum est hoc loco, vel contrariè vel privativè (i. e.) vel deum affici ignominiis, &c. vel quando aliquis à fide avertitur, aut retardatur, &c. non negativè, ut sit non ex­hibere honorem Deo vel non impendere utilitatem proximo, &c. Baldwin. cas. l. 2. c. 1. c. 10. p. 81. & 79. And to like effect doth Baldwin resolve, who also tells us, Cùm extra statum Confessionis fides no­stra alioquin satis nota, non opus est perpetuò iteratâ confessione, quae jactan­tiae potiùs speciem, quàm virtutis Christianae laudem habet, but among all the Casuists of one side or other, which have punctually determined of, and limited the occasions and circumstances wherein profession of Faith ought to be made, it is a marvellous thing, that not one of them (that I know) hath stumbled up­on this case, or reminded to define it necessary at admission to the Sacrament; whereas rather the very coming with desire to participate thereof, is without more adoe a reall profession of Faith, and accommodates and complies with those ends, in order whereunto the Casuists teach, that profession of Faith is needful, as before was shewed.

And if weaker brethren are hereby encouraged to make like profession, or to un­dergo what is equivalent thereunto and instead thereof (viz. Examination,) they onely can thereby prove, the one ought to be done in order to the doing of the like by the other, whereas we deny the necessity of either; and they should first have evinced the later to be a duty, and then have injoyned this as a means ordinate to facilitate it; the end failing, the means cease to be neces­sary. But as the setting up of a Dictator at Rome, put inferiour dignities to silence; so the precedent of more knowing persons, I should think, might ra­ther [Page 120]discourage the weak, who cannot write Iliads after Homer, ‘— Ne tu divinam Iliada tentes,’ Nor write after that Copy, which the other have given in more perfection then they can imitate. See S. 18. However, they may paint the matter with colours fetch'd from pretended ends or intentions, examination (and consequently such an imposed profession, which is tantamount) hath a connotation of suspicion; we do not inquire, where we do not doubt; and therefore to reduce men under such tryal doth ex natura rei imply, that they are suspected, or doubted to be ignorant; and this is to render them infamous, ignorance when it is (as in this case) pravae dispositionis, being a sinne, and whatever they may speculatively opine, yet interpretatively and practically they do thereby hold them as igno­rant, and therefore rob them of their good fame, that proprium bonum deposi­tum à natura in aliorum mentibus, Sylvins 22. q. 60. art. 3. conclus. 4. p. 316. and that jus quod habent, ut bona de iis opinio concipiatur, quàm diu contraria manifestè non probatur; and therefore to compel them to come under this Inquisition, that by such encouragement those which are weaker may be mollified and sweetned, is but burnt-offering out of rob­bery, to do real wrong to prevent an imaginary, and to avoid scandalum accep­tum to fall upon datum, and is as if they should break one mans head, to give another a plaister; and in a Taliacotian way of cure, to slash and cut off one mans flesh to salve anothers deformity; or in a more obvious resemblance, having their purse cut in a throng, to search every known honest man there, that the thief may take no exception.

Yet elsewhere they are confident to tell us, That this is a small matter, so as it seems to come to plead for it self in forma pauperis: but as Plato answered, The Custome of small things may be a great matter. Solinus tells us, Brevissi­ma apud Amyclas vipera est, & proptereà dum despectui est, faciliùs nocet; and St. Augustine of the Cynifes in Africa, which are almost invisible, quae tamen cùm inserueriut corpori, acerbissimo fodiunt aculeo. Yet if the smallness of the thing should facilitate any to undergo it, let it perswade them not so eagerly to press and contend for a small matter; if it be a small thing that is required, it is as small, that is denyed; and therefore the denyal should not merit so great a penalty, as suspension from the Sacrament: and with what Conscience can they drive off men from so necessary a Duty, and rob them off so great a bene­fit, for a small matter?

But yet great motions are made by small Wires, Raynolds Confer. with Hart. p. 318. and huge Weights hang upon Gemmeys; a little Spark may be so fuelled and conducted, as to set the whole World on fire. Sorcerers, they say, beg and are spleased with small things to be given to them, but thereby get a power to work what mischief they please upon the givers. The Rent is oftentimes small, but Homage and Fealty and Wardship be of great consequence. It was a small matter, and seemingly pious and advantageous, for the Emperour to receive his Crown of the Pope, with a benediction; bul in process of time that drew on and counte­nanced [Page 121]the construction, that the Pope gave him the benefit, and bestowed the Crown of the Empire upon him; and afterward it was thence inferred, that he might deprive him thereof, and otherwise dispose it. And abstracted from these formidable consequences; there are many other Reasons, why such as are real Disciples may yet not forfeit such esteem, and yet refuse to take on this yoke. Some perchance wave this profession and examination upon the same score that Luther sometimes omitted Confession before the Communion, lest it should be brought in as a thing necessary; and because, as the same man hath taught us, that Nihil pestilentius in Ecclesia doceri potest, Quoted by Mr. Baxter. Saints Rest, Ex Hofner. part. 1. p. 138.quàm si ea quae necessaria non sunt, necessaria fiant, hâc enim tyrannide conscientiae illaqueantur, & libertas fidei extinguitur; and others perhaps upon that account, whereupon men of publike spirit oppose inclosures, lest the Poor be injured, though them­selves lose nothing by it.

Christ had communicated before with those Disciples in the Passeover, which was the same in substance with this Institution, therefore he needed not to examine them, that were admitted before. Albaspin. de vet. eccl. rit. l. 2. obs. 23. p. 327. Statue­rat ecclesia ut easdem lectio­nes poenitentes memoriâ custo­dirent, & iis­dem doctoribus quibus cate­chumeni subji­ciebantur, eru­diendi trade­rentur, — de integro om­nia fidei prae­cepta & prima rudimenta eos ediscere & au­dire volebat; — quòd opi­naretur eos qui se flagitiis mortiferis ob­strinxissent, di­vinae supremae (que) justitiae cogni­tione aliquâ (que) scientiâ von tinctos. Instit. l. 3. c. 4. S. 13. Either the same dispositions and qualifications re­quisite to the Lords Supper, were required to eating the Passeover, or not; if so, then they ought to have been examined before they were admitted to that, and that would have been recorded for our direction; if not so, then though ad­mitted to the Passeover, they ought before admission to the Lords Supper to have been examined, and that would have bin registred for our example. But if the Apologists will assume liberty to inferre, that having been admitted to the Passeover, the same in substance with this Institution, they might without far­ther examination have admission to the Lords Supper, I hope they will give us leave to conclude, that Judas having partaken of the Passeover, it was all one as if he had communicated of the Supper of the Lord.

The most zealous Assertors of examination presse it not after once admission in a due way; but unless all be agreed upon what is the due way, a man may be of­ten examined, upon pretence the former was no due way of admission: but if they were all agreed upon the due way, as some that are ad­mitted at one Church will not be (I know) at another; yet my understanding hath not light enough to discern, if there be at one time, why there should not be at other times a necessity of examination, since man (which carryeth a con­notation of lapsing) hath a natural tendency to his first principle of nothing, and is apt to decrease in goodness, and fall to worse; and (as Ockham tells us) mali mores excaecant intellectum, and therefore intellectual graces may decay with moral: And also by neglect of reading, and careless hearing, knowledge will be impaired, since as the soul is called at first abrasa tabula; so when it is written on, yet the letters (as in Table-books) will wear out in time, without new impressions; and as the flying fish cannot hold his flight any longer than his wings are wet, and therefore is still dipping them; so must notions be of­ten renewed, or they will at length be antiquated; and upon this account a reiterated examination may seem at least expedient, and accordingly a book of discipline in Scotland requires all Masters and Mistresses of what age or condi­tion soever, to come once a year before the Presbytery with their Housholds to be examined personally, whether they be fit to receive the Sacrament, in re­spect of their knowledge; And Calvin, who wisheth ut sistant se oves Pastori, de­termines it, quoties sacram coenam participare volunt.

SECT. XI.

IF they could be blasted by the prejudice and foreboding of the Apologists, our endevours to prove Judas to have participated the Lords Supper, would be very unsuccessfull, for if we could lay and keep that ground, yet after all our culture it would beare us no other but Sodom-fruit, which we might paint faire, but it would prove but dust. Nothing they say, being thereby conclu­ded against their judgement or practice; but I feare this dust is in the Apologist's eyes, & ‘Non vereor nè quid portendant omina veri.’ They adde, though Christ saw Judas to be an hypocrite and admitted him, it onely followes thereupon, but that hypocrites may be admitted, and who thinkes the con­trary? But they might have had enough Logick to have discerned, or ingenui­ty to have confessed that somewhat more is thereupon consequent, to wit, that (known) Hypocrites may be admitted, and to this the Apologists think the contrary and profess it. They speake of excluding prophane and ignorant persons, and are told an hypocrite was admitted, and this they say in truth is to paint an house that hath no foundation. Truely there is no colour for it, that this were painting howsoever, but it had been an improper material to build with, if, as they speak of excluding onely prophane and ignorant, so they did exclude no other, but though they have obdured their hearts to the exclusion of them that are not such, will they also harden their forheads to say they exclude none but such, and that all are such whom they admit not? If they dare not say that all excluded are such, why doe they say they are speaking of such, when they should (as we doe) speake of such as they exclude? If like the Lamlae they have eyes prying abroad, and layd up in boxes at home, yet can they vainely think, that others have not eyes in their head, to see that they exclude not only such as are ignorant and prophane, but those also which by submission to tryal give not satisfaction of their knowledge and sanctity? And doe but observe when elsewhere they distill the Argument of the Paper, how they more rightly [Page 123]give us this for the Quintessence, Christ admitted Judas to the Communion, therefore what need this prying? and not as here they would suggest, therefore ignorant and prophane may not be excluded; so as it seems not onely by their discipline, but by their arguings, they suppose all men ignorant, else they would not dare to argue so imposterously.

Neither is the Argument altogether wide the mark whereunto it was aymed; for if Christ exhibited it to Judas whom he knew to be ungodly, then the Sacra­ment is not the Privilege onely of the Godly, nor is the distribution thereof, to such whose hearts or lives answer not their Profession, a partaking of their sinnes, or a false testifying or false sealing, neither are convincing signes of the sound work of grace upon the heart, that which gives the capacity or right of receiving; all these seeme to be concluded from this instance, and all are against their judgement and practice.

Were they of my opinion, they should manage this argument about Judas, in another sort? We might suspect the Apologists did smacke of some of the Paracelsian notions, and were facil to beleeve that strong imaginations elevated either by conciliation of an amicable intelligence (as they speak with Avicen) or by Ap­plication of its Spirit to the Spirit of the World (as Ficinus prompts them) can worke Masteries upon another mans fancy, and make him contrary to his proper notions to beleeve or imagine what they list: for how else can they be so confident to impose (Erastianisme) on me, an opinion to which I have so often and so plainly professed my self to be diametrally opposite? how well they can manage an Argument, we shall have tryal enough, but let us confider the management they would have made of this.

Christ knew Judas to be a wicked man, yea a reprobate, yet admitted him, there­fore Ministers may not keep back such as they know to be wicked; thus the Erastians. If this be the best managery they can make thereof, we finde little encourage­ment to trust an Argument in their hands, that will so soon decoct and evir­tuate the force thereof, and vitiate and betray it into a fallacy of the conse­quent: for from Christs admitting Iudas known to him to be wicked, it follows not that Ministers may not keep back such as they know wicked, but onely that they may admit them. There is a disparity between the freedome and the neces­sity of admission, but if they understand by the Ministers knowing them to be wicked, a private knowledge, then I shall profess it to be my opinion, that a Minister may not keep them back; and Christ his admitting Iudas whom he knew to be wicked, will suppeditate an Argument for proof of this opinion, which will not tremble in its arraignment at the barre of reason, unless ignorance or passion usurpe the Bench; and this opinion is also seconded with the authority of divers Casuists elsewhere cited, whereunto I adde the suffrage of a grave and learned Divine that tells us, Sinners are secret, not of publicke notice, Mr. Balls Friendly tryal of the grounds of separation. pag. 187.though one or other (perhaps the Minister) may know them, in their course scandalous — they are not to be repelled, if they offer themselves, because though one know them to have sinned, thus and thus, it is unknown to others, and so the sinne is pri­vate, and not generally known — otherwise liberty should be given to wicked Mi­nisters to punish with this punishment whom they please: but if they meane a pu­blick knowledge either by evidence of fact, Confession or judicial sentence, men so known to be wicked, may be repelled from the Communion by the Mi­nister, and the contrary, which is the judgement of the Erastians, as it falls not [Page 124]into my opinion, so it flows not from the example of Iudas, whose crimes were not then so notorious.

Aeneas Sylvius (when he was more Godly in truth, and before he was ius in name) he used to say, It was a subtile artifice of the Popes, to set the Lawyers to dispute, whether Constantines Donation were valid de jure, thereby to in­troduce an Hypothesis, that such a Donation there was de facto. The Apolo­gists follow the contrary Method, and spend most of the Section, to disprove that Iudas communicated, and say lesse to the consequence and refult of that example; We have elsewhere anticipated and forestalled all or most of their Arguments, and applyed Answers, and so having cut down and crop'd their harvest, we shall have lesse trouble with the Gleanings.

After an heedful search (with others eyes) they cannot finde the consonancy spo­ken of among the Ancients, (for Judas his participation of the Lords Supper.) But have all their researches found any Father of the first six Centuries that sings a Note which breaks the symphony, (Hilary excepted) whom though Algerus thinks by a benigne interpretation might be reconciled to this opinion; yet Vasquez confesseth the words admit it not, and Suarez saith his endevours are frustrate. Advers. Ana­bapt. l. 6. c. 9. pag. 230. But howsoever Bullinger expressely tells us, Sententiam suam nullis firmis argumentis probat, propter quaeilli credendum. Unity is no number, one is next to none, as in Musick when many sing to one Tune, one antiphonous voyce cannot spoile the Harmony. What like point can they instance in, wherein so many lines of the Antients are concentred? and an opinion of a thing not in termes revealed, but collected by discourse and abstractive knowledge, which passeth with a nemine contradicente, is a rare Phoenix, or rather a bird of Para­dise (if that place admitted that way or manner of knowledge.) But those Fa­thers that vote with the paper, are ballanced by multitudes of the best modern lights. Perhaps there is Romana statera, where according to the distance from the Cen­ter, one ounce may be weighed against a pound, and the Earth against a Bar­ley-corn, as Archimedes boasted. But it shall be as vaine, as odious, to enter upon those Staticks, and to make comparisons whether the Ancients were Gy­ants, the Neotericks but Dwarfes, and Dwarfes may see farther advanced on Gyants shoulders, according to the trite Allegory; or whether the modern lights are great, like the Moon, because so near us, and have greater influence, although they borrow their light from the Sun, that yet appeares lesse. I shall not therefore dispute of this, but not quarrelling that hypothesis; yet when that constellation which gives light to Iudas his Communicating, is beside the an­cient, made up of as many, yea more new Starres, than the other that hath an opposite aspect, I hope those modern lights alone (with Hilary onely among them) cannot ballance so many of the Ancient and Neoterick both together.

The Fathers might receive this from one another without due looking into the Text. The Fathers might? it hath indeed no absolute impossibility, but they might not also, and that hath more verisimilitude, it being not like that so many of them had so little of judgment and so much of Credulity, to precipitate their Sentence without examination, or were so negligent in consulting Scripture in this, wherein they were assiduously conversant, and whereunto they so pa­thetically excited others to have recourse, but the Fathers are still much in their debt, for the honour they doe them. Bullinger saith, in this case, Iis ideo fidem habemus, quòd ea quae scribunt, Evangelio nitantur, I shall yet grant the [Page 125]Fathers might be confirmed in this truth by Tradition, which in things histori­cal is a very good Topick, and consequently contributes some strength to this opinion, and those that were nearer the Fountain, had the streams thereof more pure, and clear, than those at greater distance; as in multiplicity of Echo's, by reiterated repercussion of the sound, the later is more weak and dull than the former, and in plurality of Rain-bows, that which is by immediate reflection of the Sun, is brighter and stronger than those which rise from reflex of each other. Bannes jeasts at Pighius in the case of Honorius, as if he could better tell whether that Pope were an Heretick or not, than all those Councels and Fathers that lived neer his time; we may note the like vanity in this point, and as our Di­vines subtilly observe, that whether those Councels and Fathers erred or not, concerning that individual Pope, and in judging Honorius an Heretick; yet from that judgement it follows, that they thought the Pope might erre; so if the Fathers were mistaken in determining Iudas to have participated, yet it is consequent that they supposed such as Iudas was, one without sound grace or satisfactory signes of conversion, and yet not duly censured for scandalous crimes, might without any pollution to the Ordinance or others, or prostitu­ting the Privileges of the Godly, or false Testimony, or partaking of sinnes, participate the Sacrament.

They are conceived to erre in this point, by taking the Sop to be the Sacrament, so doth Augustine; Resp. In some places he doth indeed seem to suppose so, L. 5. de Bap­tism. parvulor. c. 8. & tr. 62. in Ioh. & tract. 26. Super illud, Patres vestri. and so doth Beda, to whom Augustine was, as Tertullian to Cyprian, Da magistrum, but in other places Augustine asserts the contrary, and as I know not of any other that so thought (except Origen perchance seem to doe so) so I deny that such misprision was the source of the other Truth, which was bottomed upon pre­gnant Arguments collected from the Text, and wherein those that doe con­ceive them to erre, doe but as the Aethiopians, who sentence candor, for de­formity.

The Ancients not consonant to this opinion, are set down by Mr. Gallaspy in his Aarons Rod. Resp. But sure his Rod is not Virgula divina, it hath detected no hid treasure, In 3. Aquin. in Evangel. tom. 3. these testimonies were long since laid open and discovered by the Schoolmen, (who profligate them) and by Barradius and others; neither is his, like Aarons Rod, in this particular, but as the Magicians Rod, having brought forth things not true and real but counterfeit, ‘(— hîc dormitabat Homerus.)’ We have brought them elsewhere to the Test, Suarez 3. q. 73. art. 5. disp. 41. sect. 3. Vasquez in [...] q. 81. art [...] disp. 217. c. Ibid. c. 1. pag. 481. & 482 Sylvius in 3. q. 81. [...] p. 331. and we hope have sufficiently an­swered them, and more we could say, especially to that of Dionysius, whom not onely all his Commentators, saith Suarez, interpret to hold Iudas to have com­municated, but Vasquez and Sylvius copiously vindicate and bring him off, to our side, as the former also turneth the edge of Rupertus his testimony against them, who is alleaged by Mr. Gallaspy, though omitted by the Apologists, Ru­pertus (saith he) similiter, (scilicet) solùm refert utrámque sententiam, nullam tamen earum, ut propriam pronunciat, qui solùm contèndit ut is qui velit senten­tiam Hilarii defendere, simul etiam asserere debeat nemini nisi de crimine convicto & confesso communionem denegandam esse, (and were their judgement and practice such, we should not quarrel them:) but indeed to adde more in this [Page 126]point, the work would not be worth our lamp, onely whereas the Apologists citing foure Testimonies onely, out of Mr. Gallaspy (for as I take it he men­tions not Theophylact) viz. Hilary, Clement, Dionysius and Innocent: they tell us they have examined some of them by their own Books, but though we cannot recon­cile this with what they say a few lines before, That Theophylact is in their own hands, others they have transcribed upon the forenamed Authors authori­ty; yet we should be glad to be assured such ancient Authors did finde place among their Books, if the one half of them were not counterfeit. But sure Dio­nysius his Testimony is none of those they have examined, otherwise they would not cite it under the name of his Commentator Pachymeres, and for Innocent we are informed by Sylvius, Ita propendet in unam partem, ut alteram non rejiciat.

But Theophylact is in their hands; In 3. q. 81. art. 2. p. 331.Habeo Themistoclem Atheniensem: he that shall survey divers of their quotations, will be facil to suspect they cannot say of many of their Authors, as they doe of Theophylact, and it was incautely said so of him alone, for as Exceptio roborat legem, in rebus non exceptis, so men­tioning him to be in their hands and no others, it may perchance be construed they could not say the same of others, otherwise they would have said it of the rest of their Classicke Authors also.

But what saith Th [...]ophylact, Some say Christ gave the Sacrament to his Disciples, when Iudas was gone forth, and doubtless they were Godly and eminent Divines in or before Theophylact's time, for he judgeth them worthy of credit, and makes Christs practice according to their interpretation, a rule to beleevers, to doe the like, and put evill men from the Sacrament.

Resp. 1. It seems rather those some that said so, were not viri nominis in the Hebrew idiom, but ‘— sine nomine turba,’ Or ignota capita, after the Romane Periphrasis, unless perhaps he meant it of Hilary, whom straying from the common opinion of the Fathers he named not for honours sake (as those which think that in the 16. of Luke to be an Histo­ry, supposed our Saviour named not the rich man, because he spake in his dis­praise) and though Hilary be but one person, and Theophylact speakes in the plural number, yet such Enallage's of number are as current, as common. But if they were any of his own (who lived in the tenth Century or thereabout, for there is some difference about the precise time) it is lesse to their credit, that being the infelix seculum, as Genebrard, infelix & indoctum, as Bellarmine, obscurum, as Baronius, exhaust and destitute of learned and ingenious Men, and Writers, and whatsoever these some were, as omnes urgentur ignoti longâ nocte; so it seems their authority weighed not much with Theophylact, nor so as to in­cline the beame of his judgement to that opinion; for however here he deter­mine not the question on either side; but leaves it in the middest; yet else­where upon that of Matth. 26.27. drink ye all of this, he seems to affirme that Iudas was admitted, though he have a singular opinion, that he onely drank of the Cup and reserved the Bread; and though here, as they say, he make an inference from the Hypothesis, yet that is ordinary among such, as yet lay no great weight on the Thesis; and whereas he infers that therefore we must put evil men from the Sacrament, either he understands close and undiscovered [Page 127]evil men, (such as the Apologists say, Iudas was) and then he checks with them that say hypocrites may be admitted, it being not in mens power to di­scern or exclude such, or else known evil men, and then the exclusion of such cannot be inferred from the expulsion of Iudas, who was not such: so as by the vouching of Theophylact I conceive they have gotten nothing, but to let us know he is in their hands; Benè habet, Presbyter creatus est Campianus ab Antonio Archiepiscopo Pragensi, as once said Whitaker.

They next array and empanel a jury of twelve, the most eminent of our mo­dern learned Writers, hardly to be matched, which oppose, or leave doubtfull, Judas his receiving, and upon their verdict they give judgement in despight of all Writs of Error, for who, say they, would not erre with such? A strange line drop'd from their pens, that so much avile all humane authority, & si ego id dixissem. But indeed, ‘Pauperis est numerare pecus, —’ And though they say, they could double the number, besides learned Papists not a few,

I am confident they would have then made them legible, had they been Clas­sical, for however some are nomina quibus assurgo, and such as ‘— nunquam sine laude loquenda,’ Yet they have drawn very low for others of them, & Pastor qui proprias congre­gat oves, quas relinquit, agnoscit alienas; for me, ‘— inopem me copia fecit:’ And though I could have held forth some late luminaries beaming light upon this Truth (among whom I think I might as rationally and as solemnly have fixed, Mr. Prynne, as the Apologists have done Mr. Gallaspy) more for num­ber, not lesse for weight, which will be assented to by any that findes Zwin­glius, Calvin, Cranmer, Whitgift, Iuell, Hall, Whitaker, Bucer, Bullinger, Martyr,Harm. c. 171. p. 454.Paraeus, Aretius, and Chamier among them, besides Willet, Ball, Hammond, T. Blake, and Ravanellus, &c. (and even Beza himself is alleaged by Gerhard to be of this minde;) yet I chose rather to produce constellations, as many, as they have held forth single Starres, as beside these more than twelve Signes thereof, in the modern Zodiack now discovered.

2. The whole Syntaxis of the Fathers (without any heteroclyte, Ubi supra. save Hilary) whereof Vasquez particularly quotes Cyprian, Origen, Cyrill of Hierusalem, Chry­sostom, Hierom, Augustin, Theodoret, Leo, Beda, Euthymius, Rabanus, Theo­phylact, a full Jury.

3. Besides Justinian (which makes it current by the stamp of Imperiall au­thority) in his Edict and Confession of Faith, with divers more of later birth, [Page 128]whereunto not onely Valentia annumerates Sedulius and Remigius, but another learned Man hath added Ambrose, Mr. Prynne. Maldon. in Matth. 26.20.Nazianzen, Haymo, Victor Antiochenus, Occu­mensus, besides Bernard, and others; and Maldonat tells us, Omnes quos legeri [...] auctores.

4. All the School (omnes qui de hac re meminerunt, saith no pedary School­man) and though a late Writer mention Durand, Vasquez ubi supra 4. d. 9. q. 4. p. 701. & 4. q. 5. p. 703.Salmeron, and Barradius, to be of contrary judgement; yet as I wonder, why the two later are ranked in this Classe, being onely Commentators, and not of the School; so it is more wonderfull, he should vouch Durand to warrant that opinion, when it is mani­fest he was of our part, saying in one place, Sancti dicunt, quòd Judas prodi­tor sumpsit in coena corpus Domini cum caeteris Apostolis; and in another, Christus hoc Sacramentum dedit Judae, quem sciebat esse in peccato mortali.

And 5. the Canonists generally, and (since the Apologists have prayed in aide from the Church of Rome) I might have affirmed it to be the common opinion thereof.

Not onely (6.) their Expositors (ex recentioribus expositoribus ferè omnes, as Vasquez witnesseth, and I recognize none Enantiaphonous, save Barradius and Salmeron) but also the chief Pillars and Pinnacles thereof (as Baronius and Bellarmine among others) asserting it.

But 7. the Church hath inserted it into their Missalls, Psalters, and Hora­ries, as

And therein running in consort with the Old Christian Poets, that sung, ‘Bis sex cum sociis epulatus nocte supremâ;’ And among the Reformed Churches I cited the Articles of the Churches of (8.) England, (9.) Ireland, the Confessions of (10.) Belgia, & (11.) Bohemia, and might (12.) have instanced also in the generality of Divines of the Augustan Confession (not one dissenting, Ubi supra. saith Gerhard, that he knows) in which Sphear shine many great lights, though they have their spots, like the Moon, and so perchance hath the Sun too (for so some Astronomers tell us) though we cannot discerne them by that light onely which beames from himself. So as we may reverse the verdict by an attaynt of their Jury, and return more then 24. as a new Jury to doe it; and as the Apologists are bold to say, that the Fathers are conceived to erre by the mistaking the Sop to have been the Sacrament; so I may with lesse presumption affirme, that modern Writers have been misled by a misprision, that the Sop was exhibited to Judas before the Sacrament, and upon reception thereof he went out so immediatly, as to leave no interval of time for the administration, neither of which is proved nor scarce probable.

I espied the Basilisk before he eyed me, and have elsewhere answered their Arguments before they produced them; onely there is one, which I had not wit enough to foresee, and perhaps wit (if I had it) were not so likely to ap­prehend it; as upon a deliberation in the conclave of sending a Nuncio to a certain Kingdome, one being commended as a wise man, it was replyed, That a [Page 129]wise man was not fit for the imployment, because he could not conceive or imagine what such a people designed. It is an Argument, §. and they blazon it for considerable, (and so it is indeed for the vanity thereof) taken from the note of the last Translaters of the Bible, and set to Luk. 22.21. to shew there begins another matter, not a continued History orderly set down.

I perceive Sixtus Senensis (as learned as he was) was deceived, when telling us of a Stygmatical or punctuary interpretation of Scripture, he addes, that it is peculiar to the Hebrews, and our Divines need not to be longer puzled what Campian means by saying Omnes res & reculae made for his Religion, for it is like he meant some such Notes as these. But if the Apologists are in earnest (as we thought they had jested, when heretofore they used this Argument to some Gentlewomen) we shall tell them, that these Notes are set to shew a di­verse Subject matter of the relation, though orderly continued, but never used to manifest an hysterology, or transposition of things; and if so obvious a thing have not fallen under their observation, let them consult the recital of the Decalogue, Exod. 20. where the same Note is not prefixed to the fifth Comman­dement, which I think is yet set down in order; and in that one History of Da­vid's duell with Golias, not delivered but according to the order of things, they will finde it very often affixed, and it will introduce an intolerable confusion in sacred Writ, if this note shall allwayes remarke things transposed.

But would they please to have more of the Textuary, than of the Cabalist, the particle [...], veruntamen, the first word of the Text, hath farre more force to approve a continuation, and that the words were spoken after the Con­secration, than the note hath to assert a transposition, or that they were ut­tered before it; for if the words of Consecration had been set down by anti­cipation, the adversative particle had been unfitly set there; for in the judge­ment of the learned, Quoties aliqua per anticipationem priùs narrantur simpliciter tantum, per particulam continuativam aut copulativam, narrari solent. St. Augustine tells us therefore that this of Luke doth evidentissimè demonstrate Judas to have been present; and Suarez resolveth, Veruntamen, Suarez. 3. q. 73. art. 5. disp. 41. sect. 3. Sylvius in 3. q. 8. art. 1. p. 331.aptè indicat hoc esse dictum in ipsa communione Sacramenti, nam sensus est perspicuus, Trado vobis corpus & san­guinem, quamvis non ignoro inter vos esse qui me tradit, unde sancti advertunt, illa verba dicta esse à Christo, tum ad commendandam charitatem suam, tum ut emolliret cor Judae, ut resipisceret & non indignè communicaret. And Sylvius addeth, ut di­scamus nihil ab eo praetermissum quod ad emendationem pertineat.

That Judas departed before the administration, appears, because having received the sop, he went out immediately, and what that signifies every Englishman knows, that is, instantly, forthwith. That the Sop was exhibited to Judas the same night of the Institution, and before the Sacrament instituted (which is implyed in this cryptical Syllogisme) is no such principle, as to be evident in it self, and to need no proof; and I am deceived if I have not formerly manifested, that it was dealt him at another time; and if it were given him in that night of the celebration of the Lords Supper, yet that it was done after it was ended, is to the judgement of Augustine, Beda, Hugo, Thomas, and others, as Vasquez quotes them, and of Cyrill and Chrysostom, as Suarez alleageth them. Ubi supra. For the terme immediately, Customary use ‘Quem penes arbitrium est & fas & norma loquendi,’ [Page 130]hath rather evidenced it, that when we say, we will immediately or instantly come or goe or doe a thing, we doe not binde or conclude our selves to a pre­cise and punctual instant, but think we have complied with our engagement if in a short time we performe it; and the use of the word in Scripture doth af­ford such latitude, and thereof may be vouched a multitude of instances. When our Saviour tells us, Mark. 4.29. [...] that when the fruit is brought forth, immediately he put­teth in the Sickle, we do not see nor can imagine that the husbandman watcheth to reap his Corn in the first instant of its ripening: Luk. 19.11. they thought the Kingdome of God should immediately appeare, I presume not in an in­stant, but after a short space, John 6.2. Immediately the ship was at the land. not in an instant by miracle, but by a speedy, yet successive motion; Acts 17.10. Immediately they sent away Paul and Silas, but such a dispatch could not be prepared in a moment; Mar. 1.28. Immediately his fame spread abroad thorough all the Region, which could not be carried so farre, but in some length of time; Mark. 4.5. Immediately the seed sprung up, where immediately can onely signifie speedily, for seed doth not pullulate but after some little time; and that which our translations render straightwayes, is in the Greek for the most part [...], the same which they here translate immediately, and he that considers the things mentioned to be done straightways, Mark. 2.2. and 3.6. and 15.1. will be facil to belevee, that they could not be set about and entred upon, and expedi­ted in lesser time than our Saviour might have administred the Sacrament af­ter he had dealt Judas the Sop. Nay we finde that the Sacrament of Baptisme is in the preparation for it, and administration thereof said to be done straight­wayes, as Acts 16.33. it is said that the Jaylour and all his were baptized straightway, the word in the Original is [...], which as it signifies in praesentia & subitò, so here the Vulgar and Castalion render continuò, so doth Beza in some Editions, in other illicò, as doth Piscator, and by the same word Continuò, doth the Vulgar, and sometimes Beza translate [...]: here, John 13.30. in some Editions he reades statim, as Piscator doth also; so doth the Vul­gar elsewhere, as in that of Mark. 4.29. turne [...] into statim, which in John it translates continuò, so as it seems the words are all Synonimous or indifferent. But then it is not imaginable that all the Jaylors family could be convened and prepared, and things accommodate for their baptisme in an instant, and therefore Tremellius out of the Syriac, as he renders [...] eâdem horâ, the same houre in that of John 13.30. so doth he also in that of Acts 16.33. translate [...], eâdem horâ.

But if we should confine immediatly to an instant, yet the Apologists cannot make it cleare when that instant commenced. For (not to insist, upon the sense of Baronius and Maldonat, that he went out immediately before Christ his so­lemn Sermon, and was no partaker thereof; Continuò (saith the Cardinal) so­lùm significat Judam non exspectasse prolixam Christi concionem;) it is observable what Vasquez prompts us with, that it is not said, he went forth immediately after he had received the Sop, but, having received it, acceptâ offulâ, as Beza and Piscator: or cùm accepisset, as the Vulgar reade the Greek particle of the Ao­rist [...], and after the mention of giving the Sop, Satan is said to have en­tred into him, and Christ said, what thou doest, doe quickly: now it is likely that between the Sop and Christ his Speech was Judas confirmed in his wicked pur­pose, by being possessed of the Divel, to perpetrate it, and after Christ his Speech [Page 131](from thence the instant commencing) then immediately he went forth, not immediately after the Sop, but chusing that opportunity to goe off, to escape farther discovery, seeing his going out might be interpreted to be by reason of being sent by his Master to doe some service quickly; and so the Paraphrase of the words will be, when Christ had said what thou doest doe quickly, then imme­diately Judas having already received the Sop, wherewith the Divell entred to spurre him faster to his treason, went forth. And so the mention of the receipt of the Sop at his going forth, shewes not the moment of the time, but the cause of his Exit, the Divel driving him, that entred with it. But whereas, Dictator­like, they tell us that those words, what thou doest, &c. were spoken before the Sacrament, we desire we may be excused to suspend our Faith, untill they prove what they say, or prove that all they say is Oracle.

They think he spake well that prompted them to say, that Judas was but [...] had Porter to let in men to the Sacrament:

Judas was not he that lets in, but he that entred, not he by whom, but after whom others may seem fit to be admitted. To prove that others besides such as have approved signes of holiness may have accesse, it had been unapt and in­congruous to have produced the example of an holy Man, but the instance of such a Son of perdition is a very proper example; but what rigid and injurious Porters are they, that shut such as are not notoriously wicked and scandalous out of that gate, where Judas had entrance?

There was no visible cause for his exclusion: Then we trust it follows after all this bustling to the contrary, that he was admitted (or else Christ excluded him without visible cause, and then sure he could be no patterne to us, as they say he was, for I hope we may exclude none causelessly;) but then let them also exclude none but such as they have visible cause to repell, and not require such a visible cause (as plaine Evidence of their conversion) before they admit. Advers. Ana­bapt. lib. 6. c. 9. p. 230.

The Apostles thought wel of him, without any suspicion. Bullinger is peremptory, Judae malefacta in mensa commemoravit, adeò aptè, ut nihil clarius dici potuerit: but if they knew not in individuo signato, who it was, they did in individuo vago, and that one was not clean, and was a Traytor and Divell, and yet they were not startled, nor scrupled to communicate all together, and therefore sure had no impressions that to participate with such was a pollution to themselves or the Ordinances, or any prostituting of the privileges of the Saints, or setting of the seale to blancks, &c. Besides seeing some of these sad effects depend upon the nature of the thing, viz. the very sumption of the Sacrament by wicked men, more than our knowing them to be wicked and to receive, these mischiefs would have resulted, though they were ignorant of the rise thereof, Balls Tryal grounds of s [...] ­paration. p. 198. and the Ordinance seems to be polluted though they were not; but therefore it seems from hence to be a necessary consequent, that the simple presence of unworthy or wicked men defiles not, for then our Saviour had spoken a contra­diction, when he said, Ye are clean, but not all, John 13.10. because if one had been unclean, all had been defiled: No, neither our knowledge of their un­worthiness and wickedness, for then Judas had stained the Ordinance to Christ [Page 132]himself; nay, the notorious knowledge thereof doth not pollute, where there is no power (through non-establishment or obstruction of discipline;) nor op­portunity (when at the time of communicating there cannot so suddenly be admonition or judicial process had,) nor conveniency (through danger of Schisme) to repell, nor leave from Christ to separate.

Judas was knowa to Christ as God, and he dealt Ministerially as man.

First, it is not absolutely and universally true, that Christ in this Ordinance dealt as man, but rather as Mediator, God and Man; for none but God could institute a Sacrament, whose blessing onely can conferre the grace which is si­gnified, and sanctifie, and virtuate the Signs and Elements into an aptness to those ends whereunto they were instituted, and none but Man could have administred them; besides if he knew Judas his treason as God, yet notwith­standing, he made it known to men.

And 2. it is not pertinent to dispute of the Principles of his knowledge, or formally how he knew it; it is sufficient, that he had knowledge thereof, and might have made it known to the Disciples and told them thereof, and in all likelyhood would have done it, had his partaking with them been so mis­cheevous; and the Apologists confess, nay contend for it, that he made this dis­covery before the Institution, and whether they understood at the time of ce­lebration, of whom he spake particularly or not, is very disputable among lear­ned Men: So then, if none but Saints ought to have been admitted, how could our Saviour have given admission to one whom he had publish'd to be a Divel? Judas non possit illis annumerari, Advers. Ana­bapt. l. 6. c. 9. p. 230. saith Bullinger, quorum peccata levia & occulta sunt; praeterea Johannes ante coenam eum manifestum furem fuisse scribit, Joh. 12. and he cites Augustine, saying, Dominum, cùm haec sciret, nihilominus ipsum in coena tolerasse, ut nos doceret & exemplum nobis praeberet, malos tolerandos esse, eós­que etiam si coenae intersint, bonos tamen non polluere; and if herein Christ dealt ministerially, then he was a pattern to Ministers, how to comport themselves in like cases, which is not to repel those who by a notorious knowledge appeare not to be wicked, however privately they may be known to him for such.

3. The sinne of Ananias and Saphira was in secret and not known to Peter, but by Divine revelation; yet the first in every kind being the measure of that which follows, that we might take notice of the greatness of the sinnes of lying, avarice, hypocrisy, and sacrilege, Ut incuteretur metus & firmaretur discipli­na, illo exord [...]o legis Evangelicae, say the Fathers, Peter made known his sinne, and that by a signal judgement; and upon the like account of reason, if it were so necessary to repell all but real Saints from the Sacrament, doubtless (as the Greeks call punishments [...], examples) our Saviour by such a Standard of example, as the punishing of Iudas, by express casting him out, would have measured out, and established that discipline in his Church.

4. I think they would say, or at least it were better said (wherein we shall consent with them) that Christ rejected not Iudas, because he knew his wicked­ness onely as it were per scientiam privatam, he did not know it, nor could then give the Disciples knowledge thereof, per scientiam publicam & notoriam, that is, neither by evidence of fact, Aquin. 3. q. 81. art. 2. Similiter Suarez ubi su­pra. confession, or judicial conviction, and quia nobis debuit esse exemplum justitiae, non conveniebat ejus magisterio, ut Judam occultum peccatorem sine accusatore & evidenti probatione ab aliorum communione separet, ne per hoc daretur exemplum Praelatis ecclesiae similia faciendi, as the School long [Page 133]since determined. If they would suite their practice to this method, and regu­late it by this principle, (as it is evident they doe not, nor dare they say they doe) I had never set forth to charge them, and should soon sound a retreat; and as they say, Christ was a pattern to us, who are to admit visible Disciples, not being able to descend into their hearts: so correspondently would they worke according to this pattern, and give admission to all that profess to be Christians (for Christians and Disciples are univocal) and which by notorious crimes obstinatly continued in, doe not blot their profession, and not make the Sacrament, which Bullinger so much disresents, and whereunto (he saith) it was never instituted by Christ, Ut sit ventilabrum aut cribrum, Epist. Petr. Da­theno.quo cribrentur aut dispergantur ab invicem homines, sed synaxin (i. e.) coagmentationem, societatem, communionem, & con junctionem, would they doe this, I shall ‘— compescere limina Jani.’

The not condemning of the adulterous woman by our Saviour Iesus, Iohn 8. is not paralell, but hath great disparity with his not repelling Iudas, unless we shall thinke it all one, not to doe a thing when it is proper to his office, and when it is not agreeable thereunto. In discharge of the woman, he dealt not so much like a man, calling for her accusers, and when none came dismissing her, but he acted like a man that did relinquere suum jus Magistratui, as Brentius; In locum.& no­luit munus legitim judicii abrogare, as Musculus; Sicut reliquis suis exemplis aut Evangelicae doctrinae praeceptis, nullum voluit facere praejudicium eorum quae cuique ex officio pro salute reioub. conveniunt; ita nec hoc suo facto, as Iansenius; and because Hoc non erat ejus officium, as Piscator, & non venerat ut esset externus Ju­dex scelerum, as Iansenius, or suum munus cum ossicio Magistratûs consundere, as Aretius; whereunto are consonant Estius, Barradius and Deodate. And the power of inflicting capital punishments being then taken from the Jews, as they confess it was not lawful for them to put any man to death (though I know also some learned Men give another reason of that Speech;) it is thought they brought the adulterous woman in regard thereof, thinking thereby to have ensnared him; and to evade that snare and frustrate their designe, he condemned her not; It was not then for want of Accusers, for they had formerly testified her offence to have been notorious by evidence of fact, shee was taken in ipso facto, or furto, as the Greek is, by a Synecdoche speciei [...], but being gone off, Christ asked where they were, and whether any had condemned her; onely that in absolving her he might defeat the designed surprise of the Pharisees, Ii te non condemnant, neque ego te condemno; quod illi faciunt, ego facio, objicere in me non possunt, leginos repugnare, in the words of Barradius: you may see then how Diaphonous the example of the adulteress is to that of Judas.

But it seems the Apologists are like Blondus, of whom it is said that he cared not quàm vera, but quàm multa s [...]riberet.

Yet Horatius will lend Dioxippas a Sword to cut off his head, as it is in the prophane Story, suitable to that of Golias and David in the sacred; for if Christ could not judge the woman to punishment, because there were no Accusers, and no man had condemned her, why doe they then punish with loss of the Sacra­ment, those that have had no accusers, nor have been condemned by judicial process.

To their Epiphonema, or rather Io-poean in the close of the Section, attending their triumphs over so poor and despicable an Argument as this, I shall onely say,

And I shall conclude with that which Bullinger alleageth out of Zuinglius, Bullinger ad Petrum Dathenum ad­vers. Anabapt. l. 6. c. 9. p. 230. where­unto are perfectly consonant what himself delivers against the Anabaptists; Apertum esse satìs, quales ipse Dominus primae suae coenae (quae haud dubiè omnium fuit absolutissima) adhibuerit convivas, ne (que) decere ut nos Dei filio (qui solus corda filiorum hominum perspecta habet) acutiores nobis sumamus oculos, aut nobis ipsis in coena sumamus judicium, quod ille nobis ne (que) praecepto ne (que) exemplo de­dit.

SECT. XII.

WHat a learned man saith of 1 Cor. 7.14. Baxter. I doubt I may adde of this Text 1 Cor. 11.28. against which men do wilfully cavil as if they were sorry, that God speaks it so plainly; and I doubt not impartial and judi­cious men will discern, that notwithstanding all their bustle and ratling, the Apologists are but like that Goth in Procipius, who though he fought fiercely, yet had the mortal Arrows sticking in his Helmet, whereof he soon after fell. They say they concede the fulnesse and sufficiency of the Scripture, but they forthwith interpretatively and by consequence retract that grant, while they deride an Argument from the authority thereof negatively, which necessa­rily hath its foundation upon, and result from the sufficiency thereof in genere regulae, as I have formerly shewed.

But this sufficiency (they added) is in the whole, but all of any one matter is not contained in any one place, what is wanting in one, is supplied in another. The Scripture in the full latitude of a rule is no otherwise sufficient than colle­ctively, tota Scriptura, non omnis, as we answer the like cavil which the Papists have to 2 Tim. 3.16. where [...], omnis is tota; but yet distributively every part is sufficient to that whereunto it was intended, and contains a full di­rection in that which it undertakes to teach; and therfore the Apostle here edo­ctrinating the Corinthians that examination was necessary to precede the Sa­crament, if any other probation than every mans of himself had been requisite, he should have injoyned that, or else he sufficiently taught them not their whole duty; and I suppose it will not be easie to instance wherein the proper seat (as I may speak) of any doctrine, Eccles. pol. l. 2. S. 6. p. 67. where it is professedly and designedly taught, that any necessary point thereof is in that place omitted, and supplyed in another. Of the thesis, or matter in general, hear judicious Hooker, because [Page 150]the things that proceed from God are perfect without any manner of defect or maim, it cannot be but the words of his mouth are absolute, and lacke no­thing which they should have, for performance of that thing whereunto they tend, whereupon it followeth, that the end being known whereunto he dire­ceth his speech, the Argument negatively is evermore strong, and forcible con­cerning those things that are apparently requisite to the same end. And for the hypothesis, Epist. ad Bezam. or this special subject in hand, let them hearken to Gualter, I [...]ta certè quae infinitis exemplis tam veteris quàm novi Testamenti probari poterant, nos movent, ut privatum illud examen, quo quis (que) seipsum probet, secundùm Pauli praecep­tum, sufficere putemus iis qui ad Domini mensam volunt accedere, nam si quod prae [...]erquàm voluisset fieri Apostolus, magna erat illud praecipiendi occasio, cùm ex Professo de legitimo coenae usu dissereret, apud eos qui innumeris erroribus at (que) vitiu polluti, ipsam quo (que) horribili usu prophanarant, sed vidit proculdubio quàm peri­culosum sit aliorum conscientias rimari velle, quando nihil facilius est quàm seve­riùs in alios animadvertendo, sanctitatis majoris existimationem venari, & saepe tentationum lineis metiuntur per importunos illos Censores, qui consolatione potiùs sublevari, & confirmari debebant, ideo in hac ipsa causa graviter monebat viden­dum esse ne à Sathana occupemur, cujus machmationes nemo Christianus igno­rat.

It hath been the ill hap of all the Arguments hitherto alleaged, to dash upon that rock, ab authoritate Scripturae negativè. It hath been their ill hap to be guilty of a palpable and gross mistake, for the Argument collected from the admission of Judas was not such, nay this very Argument in hand is not such; for though we say we finde a precept, Let a man examine himself, none that he should passe the examination of another; yet we do not argue, that because the Apostle hath onely commanded the one, therefore the other falls not under precept; but we thus reason, the Apostle requires a man to examine himself, and permits him having done so, to receive the Sacrament, which is the natural analysis, and ge­nuine paraphrase of the Text; and if any other examination were to intervene, then having examined himself, Answer to chall. Josuit. p. 8. Senensis bibli­oth. l. 6. p. 527. For denying the necessity of Confession before recei­ving of the Sacrament, Cajetan his Commentary on 3. q. 80 art. 4. is left out of the Roman Edition. Syl­vius in 3. q. 80. art. 4 p. 311. yet (So) nevertheless he could not be permitted to eat and drink: and thereupon, not onely the glory of this Nation, and our Age, Bishop Usher, doth from hence extract this Porisma, That in the Apostles dayes when a man had examined himself, he was admitted to the Lords Table; but the great Cardinal Cajetan (though cross to the interest of his Church, and his fellows are angry for it, especially his constant evil genius, Catharinus) was sensible of the force of this consectary, and concludes, Dicendo (Sic) &c. by saying (and so) he signifieth that to a worthy receiving of the Eucharist it is sufficient that a man have examined himself, and useth this as a medium to conclude against necessity of confession, and is therein applauded by one of his party, viz. Petrus, Soto.

Secondly, had they been all such Negative Arguments, I think they had not dashed upon a rock, but been built upon it, being founded upon the perfection of Scripture, as I have formerly asserted.

Thirdly, in the controverting of this question I am for the negative, and Po­nenti non inf [...]cianti, incumbit onus probandi, per rerum naturam, factum negantis pro­batio nulla sit, saith the Law; I had complyed with my part, if I had shewed their model of Discipline had no foundation in Scripture, to shew there was no ne­cessity thereof that was enough; for the Scripture denieth what it noteth not, [Page 151]saith Hilary, and we beleeve it not, because we reade it not, addes Hie­rom.

Fourthly, would I use such wanton and licentious Arguments, as the Apolo­gists doe, setting the Scripture upon a rack, and violently forcing it to speak what is not in it, not giving, but making the sense of Scripture, and so ex Evan­gelio Christi facere Evangelium hominis; as Hierom, and Scripturarum verbis pro esca uti, as Athanasius, we could not want superfluity of Arguments from Scripture authority affirmativè; perhaps we might bring forth some of theirs, as apt for our purpose, as applicable to theirs, if not more, and might make such Idoll-Mercuries of most of the Trees in the Paradise of God; but God forbid we should so take his Word in vain, and abuse both Scripture and our Readers, as it is sadly evident to me, the Apologists have done, which we shall hereafter ma­nifest; and whereof, if they shall not take shame, we shall be ashamed in stead of Cato.

That nothing can be necessary about the practice of the Sacrament, which is not there express'd, they see no reason to yeeld; but they should have spoken more ratio­nally, if they had shewed reason why they should deny; but though they fall short of that, yet they go too farre another way, when they talk of no other thing necessary, which they should limit to no other probation.

They are sure there is elsewhere, which is not there, (that is certain, but they should have said of this concernment) and all is necessary that is revealed, re­dundancy being a blemish to the word as well as deficiency; although I am not willing to fall into Parerga's, and to contract Pyrrhus his fault, to be diverted by every petty occasion from the main; and shall not therefore insist on, rectify­ing this sorry expression, yet I must touch upon it. All that is revealed in Scri­pture is not necessary to be known, or explicitly beleeved; as that Paul left a cloak at Troas, yet all that is known and sufficiently declared, and particular­ly offered to consideration, is necessary to be beleeved: for the necessity of be­leeving results not from the matter great or small, but the formal reason or ob­ject (and objectum formale quod, est Deus in essendo, sub quo, Deus revelans, say the Schools) and this is the same toward all the material objects, so as the smallest matters revealed, and sufficiently propounded are to be beleeved ne­cessitate praecepti, although not medii; and though not revealed, because necessa­ry; yet are necessary, because revealed, and particularly declared, consequent­ly and accidentally necessary, as secondary objects of Faith, though not of themselves pertinent to the object of Faith; Aquin. 22. q. 2. art. 3. for Nihil per se pertinet ad objectum fidei, nisi per quod homo beatitudinem consequitur; but without this particular de­claring and propounding, all that is revealed is not necessary to be beleeved, but in preparation of mind, and by Faith implicite, tanquam particulare in uni­versali, by a general virtual negative Faith not to gainsay it; and therefore sure it was not so clearly and accurately delivered that all that is revealed is necessary.

Besides, though the Scripture be more than sufficient, as Lirinensis, not pre­scribing more things than are necessary to be beleeved or practised; Antonius Perez. but in fre­quent repeatings, and deliveries of those things, more than had been simply necessary; yet I will not say as a Papist doth (which is the more strange) that the Scripture is superfluous and redundant (much lesse that the knowledge of [Page 152]most things in the same are unnecessary) quia instractionis varii sunt gradus, ut alia sit plena, alia uberior & amplior, & disertiùs quaedam explicata, as Chamier observes. Tom. 1. l. 8. c. 2. S. 3. p. 104.

But if they mean onely that some other tryal is elsewhere prescribed, be­sides self-examination, though not here mentioned, and therefore necessary, because by Divine Revelation commanded; as they do not bring it forth, nor point us where we may finde it, so I know they cannot finde it, (for Scripture being most perfect truth, cannot contradict it self; and if some other probation were injoyned him that had examined himself, he could not (so) eat, which would check with St. Paul's direction; and therefore if they have found such a command, I doubt they read it with Gregory and Bede's Spectacles, wherewith they saw things that had no existence, or else met with it in the Gospel of the Hebrews, the Acts of Paul and Tecla, the Epistle to the Laodiceans, or the Acts of St. John, according to Cerinthus.

Here the Apostle mentions no tryal by others for two Reasons; First, because the Corinthians to whom he speakes were newly admitted to Church-fellowship by pro­fession of their Faith, and needed not to be called to this again; but in our Church true discipline hath been neglected, and many are unfit: I have formerly superse­ded this answer, and shewed the impertinency thereof, and shall not actum agere: onely since they know that we cannot swallow what they offer without chewing it, they should have brought some proof that the Corinthians did make such a profession of their Faith, as they require in order to admission to the Sacrament; for we finde cause to doubt, that there was no such discipline pra­ctised in the first times, since when three thousand were baptized in one day, and added to the Church, we cannot imagine it facible, that every one of them should make such an explicite verbal profession as they require, and there could not sure be such an Evidence of the ability of all those Corinthians, that they should be all taken to be such Disciples, as they say are not to be exami­ned, but the profession of their Faith is sufficient.

But since the Corinthians were so ignorant (not convinced of the Resurre­ction) and so criminous, as the Epistle chargeth them to be, if yet upon self-examination the Apostle permits them to communicate, that liberty cannot ra­tionally be denyed to those, who doubtless are not so culpable as they were. The Precept, Let a man examine himself, is universal and catholique; and why then should the permission to communicate upon self-examination be peculiar onely to those Corinthians at that time, and so to separate what God by St. Paul hath joyned together? To restrain and limit Divine Rules to particular times or persons, without cogent circumstances, sets open a desperate way to evade the force of Arguments deduced from Scripture, and to betray or make brea­ches in the Fortress of Faith: and though the Apologists to escape out of a pre­sont strait [...], to serve a turn, take that way, yet when they have soberly re-minded themselves, they will finde this path leads to a preci­pice; and that hence some may take the advantage and encouragement to tell them, that Excommunication was onely a temporary discipline, in joyned while the Church wanted a secular Magistrate.

If some in our Churches may be suspected to be unfit, it may perchance be fit to bring them under tryal by examination; but why paucorum crimen should [Page 153]be attended with paena in omnes, and the unfitness of some should introduce a necessity of examining all, I am not acute enough to discern the conse­quence.

2. The Apostle here eys Christs performances with his Disciples, whom he needed not to examine, being known to him. We are fully reconciled to this assertion, that the Apostle reflected upon the actions of Christ as his pattern, and delive­red onely what he had received of the Lord; but then it seems that neither in what he received, nor what he delivered, is any the least hint of any other, save self-examination: Cranmer De­fence true and Cathol. doct. of Sa­cram. p. 5. And then the Morning Star of our English Reformation having explicated what the Evangelists and St. Paul in this 1 Cor. 11. have left written of the Institution, concludes, That things spoken & done by Christ, and written by the Holy Evangelists, and St. Paul, ought to suffice the Faith of Chri­stian people, as touching the doctrine of the Lords Supper, and Holy Commu­nion or Sacrament of his body and blood; as Cyprian had long before assured us, that in sacrificio quod Christus obtulit, non nisi Christus sequendus est; so that we are safe enough, if we beleeve and practice so much as either in the Evangelists describing Christs Institution of the Sacrament, or St. Paul repeating and ex­plaining it, and directing to the right administration, and due receiving thereof, we finde to have been done or prescribed; and we may hope sooner to finde pardon for not advancing beyond what we have their example or precept for, than they can to obtain excuse for seeking to lead us farther.

If the Apostles needed not to be examined, because known to Christ, then without examination mens fitness may be manifested, and such as are known need no farther tryal; but if the Apologists would condescend to be as gently and familiarly conversant with their people, as Christ was with his Disciples, perhaps they might have as much knowledge of them also, or infuse so much knowledge into them, as to prevent and fore-stall examination. Yet according to their model, the Apostles howsoever ought to have made a publick profession of their Faith, though they were not obnoxious to examination. And if they tell us in earnest, that for example sake those whose knowledge is elevated above suspicion, yet ought to submit to examination, I hope they will yeeld there had been far more reason for our Saviour, whose practice was to be our pattern, and whose example was to pass into a Law, to have examined his Disci­ples, though he actively, or they passively, needed it not; yet because we nee­ded it, as a standing influential example, since that being the first administra­tion in that kinde, was to be the rule & measure of all to follow. And surely it is not easily imaginable, that where professedly the Institution is recorded by the Evangelists, and repeated by the Apostle, with directions for the fit reception of the Sacrament, that there being the proper seat of such Doctrine, there should be no one word of previous tryal, and that it should else-where hang upon a long chain of consequences; and by several distillations be extracted from such places of Scripture, where is no mention at all of the Sacrament, or any preparation thereunto. The celebrious name of Zanchy is mentioned, not to reflect light, but to raise a cloud, for they neither produce his words, nor direct us, where we may take view of them.

If none of these Reasons were of weight (as they cannot but sense enough to distrust, for sure they will not turn those very scales at Sedan, which Capellus tells us would break with the four hundreth part of a grain) yet why may not [Page 174]examination of Pastors and Church Officers, stand with that of a mans self, these being not contrary, but subordinate, and the Precept being not exclusive, Let a man examine, &c? They are so accustomed to ignoratio elenchi, that it is passed into their nature; we doe not say those two are so contrary as to be incompatible; nor argue, that because one is injoyned, the other is excluded: but we reason thus, that the liberty of communicating onely upon self-examination granted by St. Paul (so let him eat) cannot consist with the necessity of passing first the tryal of another before admission.

Small hopes of his self-examination, that cannot bear the friendly tryal of his Mi­nister, (it seems now without the Elders:) This is like, as to say, there is little hope he will prove a good or penitent Emperour, that with Henry the fourth, will not wait three days barefoot in the acerbity of Winter-weather, at Pope Hildebrands gate, to be restored to the Communion of the Church.

This self-examination is meant onely of secret sinnes, and sincerity of graces, which men cannot see, and that their examination is for the satisfaction and honour of the Church, and is of that which may be known and judged. However, they may con­fine or limit the examination here commanded; yet no other besides this falls under the command, and their limitation is grounded onely on their voluntary assertion, which limits not our judgment; and this self-examination is not pri­marily of sinne, but faith, whereof knowledge is an integral part, Examine your selves whether you be in the Faith, 2 Cor. 13.5. In 1 Cor. 11. Hom. 28. Tom. 4. p. 112. (by which Text Chrysostome explains this) and if they will not inquire concerning secret sinnes, we forbid them not to judge of notorious, and of the sincerity of grace, if a self-examination be suffi­cient, why require they a probation of the sound work of grace upon mens hearts, before they admit them? As for the satisfaction and honour of the Church, we have elsewhere taken them under disquisition; it tends perhaps to swell them with honour and greatness, (non magnitudo, sed tumor est;) but for the Church, it cannot be for the honour thereof, to have so many for ignorance or sinne uncapable of the Sacrament, or to lye under such a suspicion, as to need farther tryal, before they are admitted.

They ask, Whether a godly communicant be bound to no other duty then is parti­cularly exprest in this Scripture, and they hope prayer and other duties may be regar­ded and practised, being warranted else-where, though not here mentioned. How they still claspe their favourite, Paralogisme!

For first, though it is one thing to say, no other duty is necessary but self-examination; another, that no other examination is necessary, beside that of a mans self.

Yet secondly, although self-examination have several parts, and divers ad­juncts, (which we shall not frigidly say, may, but must, be regarded and practi­sed,) yet all need onely to be done in private with a mans self, without others privity, Homil. 28. in 1 Cor. 11. Tom. 4. p. 112. within thine own conscience, none being present but God, who seeth all things, Enter thou into judgment, (saith Chrysostome,) the Apostle non publicum faciens judicium & sine teste argumentum, as he elsewhere hath it.

Among those Concomitants, prayer (which is Sal omnium officiornm) is one, and this is cultus natural [...]s, non institutus, and spreads it self, and is ingredient or united to all duties, as Mercury is joyned to all Mettals, being to them, as Parmenio was to Alexander, without whom he could do nothing; and like The­mistocles [Page 175]in the honour of the battel of Salamine, in all account the Second, who­ever be the first; but if they think that in the recital of the institution, and rules for the celebration, and receiving of the Sacrament in the Evangelists and St. Paul, there is no command, or example for prayer to be used, more than for examination by others, they might easily have adverted, that Christ (cu­jus exemplum pro imperio est; and who is that Elen or lapis funiculi mensorum, as the Chaldee reades that of Gen. 49.24. because his example is to be the mea­sure of our actions) did begin with blessing, [...], as Matthew and Mark, & benedicere est bene precari; as the Hebrew, Beracha, Benedictio, is de­rived from barac, precatus est, & benedictio panis & calicis est invocatio divinae beneficientiae super illa (as Jansenius) and the sanctifying thereof to that spi­ritual end and use whereunto they were designed, and with giving of thanks, In 1 Cor. 10.16. p. 306. [...], as Luke and Paul; which also Matthew and Mark mention at the taking of the Cup, (as indeed both blessing and giving of thanks are signified by the same Syriac word, Non quòd eadem, sed quòd conjuncta, tanquam ejusdem orationis partes seu membra quidem ex quorum utrolibet, Synecdochicè totum possit intelligi, nec non alterum ex altero, as Estius: And giving of thanks is a subje­ctive, if not integral, part of prayer; In Matth. 26 Homil. 83. Tom. 2. p. 174. and from thence the whole action is de­nominated the Eucharist; and Christ (saith Chrysostome) gave thanks, to instruct us how we should celebrate this mystery.

They yeeld, some Fathers and others gave the same gloss of those words, as the Paper doth, not in that sence, which seems to smack of the Rhemists, who tell us, Rhem. Testam. p. 433. that every one must assure himself, that if any thing (in the Scripture) sound to him as contrary to their (which they style the Catholique) doctrine, he fai­leth of the right sense: but if I had prompted or dictated to those Authors, they could not have written more clearly to my sense, or more expresly for my purpose.

They do not think men onely prohibited to busie themselves about others, negle­cting of their own condition, or forbidden to rest upon other mens opinions of them; (having learn'd the knack it seems, which the Belgick Expurgatory Index pre­scribes, when any of the Fathers is opposed in disputation, to excuse and ex­tenuate it, and seign some convenient sense) as if this were all which they col­lect from the Text. St. Augustine upon another occasion tells us, that Curiosum genus hominum ad cognoscendam vitam alienam, is always desidiosum ad corigen­dam suam: yet however, a curious busying of themselves about others, whether they neglect their own condition or no, is culpable; and the reproof thereof may perchance hit with them, for curiosity is one ingredient, though I fear ambition be the basis in this composition, and a considence of themselves ill grounded on others flatteries, is no more peccant, than a distrust and suspicion of others, resulting from their own malignant or arrogant censoriousness, but the Authors cited doe in terms tell us, that St. Paul (whom we must recognize to give precepts concerning right and holy communicating) commands onely self-examination, injoyns no one to examine another, no not the Priest or Mi­nister, but prescribes the sciutiny to be private and without witnesses, not pub­lick. And whereas they tell us, that Chrysostome speaks onely of private exami­nation, which should be secret, but that which is for information and satisfaction of the Church, should be with witnesses: Sure they found this in the glosse of [Page 156] Orleance, which corrupts the Text; for Chrysostome sayes, that no other but examination without witnesses is prescribed; and then for them to inferre that another examination must nevertheless be with Witnesses, is such another in­terpretation of Chrysostome, as the Pontificians give of Pope Telesephorus insti­tuting Quinquagesima for the Clergy, whom they make by the word Statuimus, to mean Abrogamus.

If Clemens counted every mans conscience his best Director, they hope he meant it not of men void of true conscience, as all are, whom they willingly keep off. Resp. Clemens doubtless speaking so generally and indefinitely, thought he was obli­ged in humility to judge no mans conscience, and in chairty to judge every man conscientious, who by notorious sinnes had not forfeited that reputation; and to say they repell none but such as are void of true conscience, let them examine their own consciences, how this stands with truth, or consists with what elsewhere they say [That they doe not judge all those to be wicked whom they ad­mit not] unless perhaps they can think to salve themselves by saying, They un­willingly keep ost those that are such; but since we see they admit them not, we cannot beleeve they doe that unwillingly, which we know no necessity in­cumbent on them to doe, and finde to be done towards so many, so common­ly, and so constantly. We could stick more flowers on the garland of autho­rity, wherewith the Paper sought to crown the sense which it rendred of this place.

To omit the Ancients, Durant deritib. Eccles. l. 2. c. 55. S. 10. Chem. exam. concil. Trid. part. 2. p. 140. Hist. Sacram. l. 4. p. 366. Answer to Je­suites, p. 99. Epist. ad Petrum Dathenum ad­vers. Anabapt. l. 6. c. 9. p. 229, 232. Epist. ad Bezam. Gualt. Epist. ad comitem Wity­enstein. among whom Athanasius comments on the words, I would propound no man for thy Judge but thy self; and Theodoret, Be thou thine own Arbiter; and Theophylact, I give thee no other Judge, I commend thy self to thee. Chemnicius affirmeth, Ex interpretatione Pauli habemus illam dispensatio­nem panis & poculi ex praecepto Domini debere fieri, omni homini probanti se, item omnibus qui invocant nomen Domini. Hospinian more punctually, Probet seipsum quisque, non igitur sacerdotibus, aut aliis, hoc munus demandat, sed sibi quemque vult esse probatorem. And as expresly B. Usher, who recounting the suppressing of Confession, in Nectarius his time; and thereupon the giving liberty to eve­ry one upon the private examination of his own conscience, to resort to the ho­ly Communion, he addes, which was agreeable both to the Rule of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 11.28. and to the judgment of the more ancient Fathers; and as fully Bullinger, Ut quilibet juxta Canonem Apostolicum suae relictus conscientiae; ad caenam accederet, dicente Apostolo, probet autem homo seipsum; and elsewhere expresly saith, non debet ab alio probari; and again, Probationem, Ministri aut Ecclesiae judicio non relinquimus, ut tum demum aliquis ad coenam Domini accedat, cùm Minister vel Ecclesia ipsum satis dignum, fidelem & sanctum judicaverit. And he cites Zuinglius, advising Oecolampadius, Ne nimis rigidè ageret, & mysticam coenam pleris (que) redderet ingratam, adeó (que) difficilem & morosam. And Gualter is no less full in the consort, Nec ego videre possum cur conscientiarum carnificina ex eo fieri debet, quod ut fidei confirmandae & recreandis af flictorum conscientiis, à domino est institutum; and in another place, Non abs (que) causa quaeritur, an caena Domini, quae ut communionis & societatis christianae Symbolum sit, uti (que) fidei confirmandae serviat, à Christo instituta est, in usum planè diversum, adeo (que) Christi instituto contrariun converti debeat, ut interim dissociationis & exclusionis organum, & conscientiarum carnificina fiat, deinde annon cum Pauli regula hoc pugnet, qui ut [Page 157]quis (que) seipsum probet, non ut aliorum conscientias curiosiùs scrutemur, jussit? Apparet (saith Musculus) necessariam & utile esse eorum s [...]udium qui neminem adcoenam Domini admittunt quem ipsi auteà non probaverint, si modus & discretio adhibeatur, nec velut universali lege indiscriminatim omnes etiam qui inculpatè se gerunt in Ecclesia ad hujusmodi examen constringantur, verùm juxta timendum est,In 1 Cor. 11.28. p. 438, 439.ne institu­tum hoc, quàm nunc magni aestimatur, tam olim in priscam servitutem ecclesiam Christi reducat, et noxium reddatur, sanè Apostolica institutio nihil hujus requirit, sed hortatur unumquem (que) ut seipsum probet — sed quid si Minister Ecclesiae hac Apostoli sententiâ nolit esse contentus, nec admittat nisi eos quos ipse explorat, item quid si fidelis ad panis tantum & non etiam poculi dominici communicationem admittatur, sicut in papatu fieri videmus? Respondeo, ubi nec domini ea institutio nec apostolica do [...]trina servatur, ibi non est ut communicaret fidelis, sinat magistra­tus illos regnare in Ecclesia, donec visum fuerit domino modum imponere illorum dominio. This voyce is Bath col, which comes with thunder, yet is that Ful­men, which Seneca calls Monitorium.

But however they may despise or avert their ears from the voyce of others, yet Paraeus hath such honour, that they are content to hearken to him, the words cited out of him in the Paper they acknowledge to be his, non dicit Apo­stolus, sacerdotes probent, &c. But they say Paraeus speaks this:

1. Of Popish Priests.

2. Of Auricular Confession.

3. In the following words he is theirs, Examina publica vel privata commu­nicantium minimè improbamus, sed requirimus.

To the first, though the Libertines boast, that what is sinne in others, is not in them; and the Popish Canonists tell us, that though it may be a wanton and impudicous act in another to kiss a woman, yet a Priest doing it, it is to be pre­sumed he doth it onely to bless her; yet we think it abominable to have such divers Weights, and divers Measures; and therefore cannot denominate good and evil with respect of persons, nor conceive that what is not just or warranta­ble in Popish Priests, should yet be so in the Apologists; and if a man after self-examination may so communicate without further probation by a Popish Priest, we have not light enough (unless they reflect it) to see, why he may not do so too without more tryal by any other Minister.

To the second, If he that hath examined himself may so receive, that (So) is exclusive of any farther examination, as well as of confession; and though Paraeus alleage and apply the Argument, to refute the necessity of confession, which he pertinently saith, ad hanc probationem olim instituta fuit, and his con­clusion is specially against that; yet the medium is general and extensive, and applyable to all of the like kinde (universaliter applicandum, quod particulariter dictum.) And by the analogy and proportion of reason, it may as effectually be urged, and accommodated to frustrate the necessity of their pre-examination, since all the particulars are involved in, and may be collected out of the gene­ral; and out of one principle may several conclusions be extracted and apply­ed to divers subjects. And whatsoever plausible reasons, or specious preten­ces, they can muster, to elude the force and energy of this Argument; and notwithstanding the liberty granted by the Apostle, to maintain their proba­tion as necessary, the same or the like, doe and may the Papists muster, to sup­port the necessity of confession.

To the third, Paraeus indeed owns the words they cite, and the Paper runs not discord with them, which disallows not, but supposeth pre-examination may be requisite, as an act of prudence, ad hic & nunc, in order to particular persons who may rationally be suspected to be of incompetent knowledge, but not as an universal and unlimited Empire over all, with power to make re-search of their lives, and the signes of saving grace in them, as well as disquisition of their knowledge and intellectual gifts. Paraeus hath no spice that relisheth of this, and if his sense were not, as we have interpreted, we must dosiderare Paraeum in Paraeo, and the weapon he hath sharpned against the Papists, would be turned upon himself; for if he think it required of the Minister, to make probation of all, how can it hold coherence with that which he saith, Est (que) doctrina gene­ralis de legitima & salutari usu Sacramenti, probatio sui praecedat, postea veniatur ad sacrum hoc epulum — non dicit Apostolus, sacerdotes probent, explorent communicantes, sed quis (que) probet seipsum. And though he approve of some kinde of examination, yet he would have it such, from which absit tyrannis & supersti­tio, & ducantur afflictae conscientiae ad Christi corpus & sanguinem; And though we shall suspend to asperse tyranny or superstition on their way, yet we are con­vinced, to say it is out of the way of drawing men to the Sacrament of Christs body and blood, and rather drives them from it. And though examination may in some respects and circumstances be requisite, yet Paraeus warrants not that it is so necessary, necessitate medii aut praecepti, as if it be not practised, or cannot conveniently be effected, that either the Ordinance may be suspended from administration, or any from partaking.

They think it hinted that their probation hath risen out of the ashes of auricular confession; and we cannot dissemble, that we conceive those ashes to have im­proved their grounds, and that out of those ashes they have made glass for this Prospective, for that they have built upon the same foundation, and propt their Fabrick with the same but tresses, we have evidenced out of Valentia, (whereof they have, I suppose, more out of cautness, than contempt or negligence, taken no notice) and in like manner, as Bellarmine, Lorinus, and others, argue from Levit. 13.5. for proof of confession, so do they also dispute for their examina­tion, and I might adde, that as they conclude because persons ignorant are to be excluded, therefore they must examine all, or else they cannot make judg­ment of their knowledge; so both Bellarmiue and Vasquez, pleading for the necessity of confession, Bell. de paenit l. 3. c. 2. p. 231 Vasquez in 3. q. 90. art. 1. dub. 2. p. 184. say, the Priest is to judge who ought to have absolution (without which none can have admission to the Sacrament) but ne (que) sacer­dotes judicare possunt, nisi peccata cogno cant, & incognitâ causâ, non potest fieri ju­dicium.

But though confession and examination are pitch'd upon the same ground, and perchance have the same prospect, and after look the same way, (v.z.) to­ward power and greatness, yet we never said they were in all things of the same model and form of building; and therefore they might have superseded their Parergon, and spared supervacaneously to shew us the differences between their probation and Popish Confession, though Amasis his famous Basin and Idol, were formed of the same mettal, it doth not follow that they must have been of the same figure. As the Arguments rallied for their probation, are to my sense (and I hope to make it evident to others) as loose and wanton, as those the Papists arrang for Confessions, and some of them are the same (as [Page 179]that of making judgment of, and shutting up the Leper) and theirs of Jeho­shapha's Porters, weighs just as much as that of the Papists, concerning God's asking Cain where his brother was; so auricular Confession hath as specious pre­rences of Reformation, and Godliness to usher and attend it, as they can pal­liate their examination with, (which is oftentimes, if not always, auricular too, and acted by themselves alone in private) as besides the disposing for the Sa­crament, that it must needs give a bridle to sinne, and a stirrop to holiness and perfection, when a man takes so frequent a survey of his actions and passions, censuring them with grief, confessing with shame, curing by counsel, and ex­piating with punishment, and redeeming with resolution to offend no more.

Confession was first onely publick recognition for publick scandals, and then inlarged and extended to private sins, but voluntarily undertaken, not impo­sed, of Consilium Ecclesiasticum, it becaine at length Praeceptum Ecclesiae, then in­joyned for all sins quoad substantiam, at length quoad circumstantias, and con­fession, as Luther calls it, degenerated into carnificinam cruentissimam conscientia­rum; and this was that prisca servitus whereunto Musculus feared this exami­nation was like to reduce us. The Keys at length got new Wards, and instead of opening Consciences were used to unlock Cabinets and Kingdoms, and they that carryed them, hereby became Masters of the house, and kept all men under their girdle by the keys that hung at it.

The Presbyterians profess they examine none but children; but some of ours of that notion, spread and dilated their examination to all, though adult in knowledge, as well as years.

The Independents enlarge and extend this tryal to their lives and gracious conversation, not onely to exclude them for the scandal of notorious sins, Bayley Dis­swas. c. 7. but not to admit them without approved signs of Holiness, and to reject them not onely ob evidentiam juris aut facti, but upon suspicion.

And lastly, that which was at first onely commended, as adjumental to Godliness, is now become, as it were, the form thereof, giving the name and essence thereunto; for let a man walk harmless and blameless without rebuke, yet if he walk not with them in this way, he is but a morral man onely, and hath not yet commenced religious, as if it might be said of this discipline, as St. Au­gustine speaks of discretion, tolle hanc & virtus vitium erit, and an inconformity thereunto, were like the slaying of Callisthenes to Alexander, a blasting of all graces, or an alloy to all endowments.

But nevertheless this new Light makes all to shine that walk in it, like the bright light of the Sunne, which gilds all his spots, and makes them invisible, which some by their Prospectives discern in the body thereof. What farther rise it may have, or progression make, we cannot certainly fore-tell, but may solicitously fear, since men of these principles are like the Crocodile, which ne­ver ceaseth growing, while he lives; so doe they still increase in new singulari­ties and humours, and pretended discoveries; yet I hope they will also be as sagacious as the Crocodiles of Nilus, who never hatch any thing, but they lay it without danger of being hurt by the rising flood: yet in the interim, an ordina­ry judgment may easily discover, that a Fortress founded in the Conscience, and raised on the advantage ground to command our reputation may keep all the parts adjacent in subjection, and bring them under contribution.

And seeing Priam at this age was not unhappy, and confession it self in so short time had neither so enlarged her phylacteries, or out-grown her girdles (which was punish'd with death among the Gaules) as this probation hath done, there­fore we fear the Year, when the Spring is so nipping; and it is more like to be a sharp Thorn, that pricks so soon. And since we see that not onely by an ex­traordinary power, as in the time of Elias, but (as Fromundus tells us) by natural course, a small Cloud may soon over-cast our Heaven, and of a small Seed (as Mustard) a Tree may spring up, wherein the losty and high soaring Birds may build their Nests. We may be excused, if we cannot make light of this cloud, with a nubecula est, citò transibit, as Athanasius of Julian; and if with the Ant, we bite the seeds, that they grow not. However they may seriously and plausibly talk to us here of reformation, and satisfaction and honour of the Church, and elsewhere of the smallness of the thing required; yet ‘— Timeo Danaos & dona ferentes.’ Or (perhaps rather) petentes. We remember what the shepherd in Aesop said, who beholding the smoothness and tranquility of the Seas after a former Tempest, which enforced him to cast all his Dates over-board, which he had sold his Flock to buy, and adventure in the way of Merchandize, Palmarum fructus concupiscit opinor, ac tranquilitatem propterea praese fert, and we cannot be so simple, as they say the African Dabath is, who is so charmed with Musick sweetly sounding in his Ears, that he the whiles suffers his feet to be fetter­ed.

SECT. XIII.

FOr the congregating of Homogeneals, we have formerly in another place taken under examination the beginning of this Section, and in hypothesi have made libration, what weight the judgment and practice of the ancient Church doth bear; here in thesi we shall perpend on which side that weight lyes, theirs or ours, and how the Beam inclines.

They are irritated that in relating the History of Nectarius his putting down of Confession, we have mentioned the defilement of the Gentlewoman by the Deacon, What else, say they, serves that Story of uncleanness for, but to cast an odium on the Ministers? My reverent and affectionate respects to Ministery are as well known, as I am: As Virgil, when Filistus calumniated him, said, He would be silent, because Augustus and Mecaenas would answer for him; so I may spare to vindicate my self in this, because so many Ministers of my ac­quaintance will doe it for me. And if I should appeal from Philip asleep, to Philip awake, I presume the Apologists themselves will acquit me of any odium toward Ministry; I wish some of them were not more culpable for inodiating Ministers, and censorious vilifying their persons and pains, that themselves may attract more esteem and dependencies, who (like the men of China) though they may think the Presbyterians to have one eye (as the Chinois say of the Europeans,) yet they conclude all the World beside to be blind. For my part, [Page 186]I desire to receive a Prophet, in the name of a Prophet, and not of a concurrent in this or that way, Tros Tyriúesv, and love and honour the Minister, as Cyrus did the King; they onely doe (as Hephestion did Alexander,) as he is a friend to their ways; yet as much as I honour them, yet I cannot doe to some of them, as the Peguans did to their Pagodes, pull out their eyes, and give them up in sacrifice; or as other Indians to their vast Giantlike Idols, who when they are carried in triumphal Chariots, cast themselves under the Wheels, and are con­tent to be crush'd and broken to pieces. And I shall farther be led by my plain­ness to confess, rather than by any cautele or politick closeness [...]o dissemble, that I have this principle, that they should have much reverence, large mainte­nance, but no great power; for as most Nations have been still set on fire by the Coales of the Altar; so when the flame there riseth too high, it reflects the less light, but occasions no little combustion; and it is out of love to them also, that I entertain this perswasion, since Amare, est velle honum alicui, and it is for their good to be moderated and contracted in their power, least as some herbes growing too rank, they become degenerous and evirtuate; and not onely like Cypress trees be fair and tall, but fruitless, but also runne more hazard to be shaken for their heighth, and to be maligned for their over-dropping. And let me humbly, and without offence, beseech them, without passion or prejudice, to consider and set upon their hearts, whether according to that righteous sen­tence, He that exalteth himself shall be abased, by a just hand shaking a Rod, (which God forbid should be ever laid upon them, and through them upon this poor Church, which cannot stand without them,) whether the grasping of too much power, hath not of late put them in danger of holding none, and their straining to reach too high, hazarded the setting of them out of joynt. Whether their debarring so many of their right, may not have occasioned so great in­trusion into their peculiars, and their casting off so many from the Sacrament, have not brought into question their casting out of the Land, Judicia Dei multa occulta, nulla injusta.

And as for what they here charge upon me, he that knows my heart doth know, there was no such thought therein; I inserted that of the Gentlewoman as a constitutive & commonly known part of the Story, requisite to manifest the occasion and reason of the fact of Nectarius; but he that did not know the Apo­logists, might be apt to suspect that they had the same cause of anger against me, that Bessus had to the Sparrows, as if they accused him for what he was se­cretly guilty of: And not onely say out of Tacitus, Reperies qui ob similitudi­nem morum aliena malefacta sibi objectari putant; but take up what Salvian hath said, Nec ego de nilo dico, nisi de eo tantùm qui in se quod dico esse agnoscit, si enim extra conscientiam suam sunt quaecun (que) dico, nequicquam ad injuriam ejus spectant cuncta quaedico, si autem in se esse novit quae loquor, non à mea sibi hoc lingua dici aestimet, sed à conscientia sua; but I not onely hope, but am assu­red of better things of them; & however they are faulty so to suspect my mean­ing, I am not culpable to insinuate any such suspicion; but perhaps they would in this also be like the Donatists, those among them called Circumcellions, of whom St. Augustine tells us, Cogunt eos quos in viis invenerint, laethalia iis vul­nera inferre; so they will enforce me to would them whether I will or no, and though I have as little cause, as will, to doe it in this particular.

They acknowledge repentance to be as necessary a disposition and qualification to receiving, acknowledge; and a part of examination to be that of repentance; but when they should have answered our inference, That then it carrieth equall reason to urge and practise a tryal of mens repentance antecedently to the Communion; and that this must introduce as great a necessity of bringing men under confession, as under their examination, they keeping close to their familiar ignorantia elenchi (which runs thorough all their discourse, as the string of poyson doth thorough a Lamprey) instead of answering, whether it be uni­versally and absolutely necessary, doe onely tell us, that Confession in a right and rectified manner (and we fore-stalled them in these qualifications) hath been, and is practised in some difficult cases, and they dislike it not.

And truly so much we shall say and grant them of their examination, if they would require no more, and let it be moderated and regulated as our Divines prescribe for Confession, whereof Luther saith it is Utilis, non necessaria, Instit. l. 3. c. 9. S. 12.debet esse libera, & nemo cogi; wherein Calvin is Symphonous, saying, Si ita privatim angitur & as flictatur peccatorum sensu, ut se explicare nisi alieno adjutorio ne­queat, and adding, iis tantùm modò commendetur, Exam. conc. Tri dent. part. 2. c. 5.qui eâ se opus habere intelli­gunt, because (as Chemnicius rationally asserts) non est mandatum, ut corda scrutentur; so let their examination be proposed as profitable, not imposed as necessary; let it be somewhat of their prudence, nothing of our bondage; let it be exercised toward such as may justly be suspected of gross ignorance or exi­tious crimes (for such a just suspicion onely is principium inquirendi, as Vasquez speakes) and others left free, that are elevated above such suspicion, and we shall be as perfectly reconciled to their examination, as they or our Divines seem to be pacified toward confession.

But in the interim, the Argument remains unshaken; If repentance be as necessary a qualification to receiving, and as essential a part of examination as knowledge, then there is in order to communicating no less reason to introduce the discipline of confession, than of examination; if the one be set up, the other must also be imposed; if the one may be omitted, the other may be laid aside; if the one be but profitable to some, the other is not necessary to all: these two being like the subcelestial Gemini, which appear ominously and unluckily, the one without the other.

They assert their Principles in their separation and examination not to be Romish; and we suppose by former instances, we have demonstrated the contrary. They profess to abhor the Church of Rome, her ways, and friends, and to be able to main­tain their cause without the Philistines forge, however the Apologists may have a file for sharpning some of their Weapons; yet in several subjects their main Armature was forged, & hammered out by the Pop [...]sh Philistines, for there was no Smith in Israel wont to own it: Nevertheless, they are no farther off from Popery, than we are from any suspicion that they are thereunto affected, one ei­ther practice or opinion gives not rise to a denomination.

But secondly, we know, though Saul had put away those that had familiar Spirits and Wizards out of the Land; yet being in a strait and exigence, he had recourse to one of them for counsel; and I might say, did I not doubt it might irritate, that two Foxes, though looking several ways, may be conjoyned in a Fire-brand.

Thirdly, besides that which is opposed directly, may be farthered obliquely, and by accident, and some men may suppose they are in the way to Dothan, when they are going to Samaria, and suffer like delusion with those in Athe­naeus, who supposed themselves to be at Sea in a Tempest; and casting out the Utensils of the house, thought they had eased the ship of her luggage, and were plying hard their Oars to attain their Port, whereas all was but the effect of their cups; and such Impostures may be occasioned by the golden Cup in the hand of the woman full of abominations, though insensibly and unawares sip'd off, as to make men dream they are doing one thing, when they are acting ano­ther. And as the Rabbins (though vainly) expounding Exod. 32.24. say, that Aaron intended not to make a Calf, but cast the golden Earings into the fire to consume them, but by the operation of Sathan, working by some Aegyptian Magi­tians in the Camp, the form of a Calf came forth; so it is neither impossible nor unusual for some proling men, by over-witting and under-acting them, to make their enemies unwittingly to drive on their designs, and unwillingly ad­vance their Interests: as it was said of Pompey the Great, Miscriâ nostrâ Magnus est; so what sage man fears not, that our divisions do more occasion and facili­tate an union with that Kingdome, which is not so much divided within it self; and that not onely because the Trumpets must be of one peece that can call to the Assemblies; but we see that water which is in an entire body, is not so subject to the impressions of Air, yet being scattered into drops, is easily preyed upon, and absorp'd by it; and when a besieged City is set on fire, the ene­my, who upon this account helps to blow and foment the flame, may more easi­ly enter and surprise it amidst our confusions.

And verely the unchurching of so many may make them more malleable to temptations to step aside into the Roman Church, which is ready to spread her skirt over them, in which respect he that put away his Church from this ordi­nance (the Canon of the Nicene Councel saying, Matrimonium inter Episcopum & Ecclesiam esse contractum) saving for the cause of fornication, that is, some no­to rious sin, causeth them to commit adultery; or lastly in so little freedome to partake of the Ordinance, and so great liberty to take up any wild and extra­vagant opinions, truth and godliness may finally fall under such an eclipse, as the glimmering of that Popish gloworme may be a comfort in so great darkness, and such an ignis fatuus followed as a guide, when there is no better: and upon this score perchance, these cunning juglers, (like Boris of Muscovy) clande­stinely cause and help to set our houses on fire, that they may get honor and power by rebuilding them: Wisemen will finde these no idle feares nor ground­less jealousies, but as in that famous automaton, the spheare of Cornelius Bezael, there was an igneous spirit inclosed in the center thereof, which caused the motion; so time may discover, that though some others are the maine spokes, yet the fiery spirit of the Jesuits lying hidden in the center, have wrought in this sphear these rotations and circumvolutions, and it may too late appear that unadvisedly all this while we have plowed with Popish heyfers, and after all our turning up and harrowing of the Church, they may reape the harvest of all those sowings.

The paper recording the discipline of the ancient Church, asserted, That from the Communion (as customarily and indeed antonomastically we speake, [Page 169]though properly the Communion and the Eucharist were farre differing things) it excluded onely the Catechumeni, Energumeni, persons excommunicate, pe­nitents, &c. and thereupon inferred, That seeing they eject very many which fall not under any of those notions, their practice is not conformable unto (but disagrees from) that of the ancient Church.

Hereunto instead of giving an answer, they onely say, that A smatterer in an­tiquity (and whether they be of that lower forme or no, the reader will by and by have trial) may know the ancients rejected and suspended divers sorts of men, under sundry considerations, and were exceeding cautelous about admission to this ordinance, no print whereof is to be seen in the common practice of our assemblies, (& that is as true indeed of their assemblies as of any others) where such orders and distinctions of men as are named may be fonud: And then next they make us their catechumeni, in describing to us what they were, (but whether themselves may not in some respect be penitents for such descriptions the reader shall judge,) and the care of the ancients to keep off ignorant and unfit, shames the ordinary administrations in our Parishes, where no such things are thought upon, but All to the Sacrament is the plea and practice; and then they take the boldness ‘(— Nimium ne crede colori.)’ to say, thus farre antiquity is for us, rather than against us. There is no good soule but is anhelant for the restitution and erecting of collapsed discipline, and when other petitions may be frustrate, yet (as Philo comforted his coun­trymen, that God would heare them, when they could not be heard at Rome, so) we must take the better way to it, by petitions preferred to Heaven, ‘Coelo restat iter, coelo tentabimus ire.’

But I must tell the Apologists, that I doubt they are parcel-guilty of the ob­structing of this work, and they will finde somewhat thereof upon their proper score, who have laid aside the right reynes, and caught hold of the false, and neglecting that discipline, which is rooted in Scripture, hath flourished in the purer times, and brought forth sweet fruits where ever it was cultivated, have bestowed and engaged themselves in the grafting and dressing of an exo­ticke plant, which they have no warrant to set; nor hope it should beare much or good fruit, since it is too close and contracted, not spreading its arms and braunches abroad, and like the Clove tree ingrossing all moysture to it self, makes all other to wither about it. To graspe too much is the way to hold lesse, and in this sense perchance, the half may be more than the whole, and to draw the wires too high, is the way to crack the strings, not to tune the in­strument, ‘Est modus in rebus, —’ And as Cyneas told Pyrrhus, he might have been more happy had he been con­tent with Epirus, and not attempted the conquest of Italy and Sicily; so had the hedge of ancient Discipline been onely repayred and kept up, and not ray­sed higher, and set farther out beyond the old line and landmarks, the seeds of [Page 170]peace and Godliness might have been more happily sowne and more prospe­rously flourished, in the field of the Church, which now lies lesse manured and more full of tares and noysome weeds, ‘Moribus antiquis res stat, —’ And a famous man saith, Sir F. B. That women are sometimes more fortunate in their cures, than learned Doctors, because the one keep the old receipts punctual­ly, which the others magisterially take liberty to vary from, and to alter the simples; so the Physick of ancient Discipline in all probability might have cured our Distempers, citò, tutò & jucundè, whereas these new recipe's (like the Paracelstan prescripts of Mercury sublimated and calcinate, and such violent re­medies) in stead of proving Medicines grow to be maladies, and to cure the disease, kill the Patient, Ut anteà vitiis, ità nunc remediis laboramus.

I shall not press or insist upon that of Bullinger, Potest in Ecclesia justa consti­tui disciplina,Epist. ad Beza.ut interim coena Domini libera maneat omnibus illis qui se juxta Pau­li doctrinam probarunt; but with hands and feet (asserting my self, and joyning with and drawing others, embracing and also propugning it,) I shall descend into that opinion, that persons notoriously wicked and scandalous should be cast out.

And whereas in the close of the Section they say, They wish they could see this done in the Assemblies about them (which would beget better thoughts in them of some mens spirits, than now they have) but thereof they know the contrary. I shall tell them, that I wish they would consent that none but such, as easily as I shall grant, that all such, ought to be ejected: If some would have done it, and want power to do it, it is their affliction; if any have the power, and do not ex­ercise it, it is their fault; but yet to hold Communion with those Assemblies, where it is not done, St. Augustine warrants them, it shal be much to their praise, and nothing to their prejudice; and they have almost as much to plead for themselves, as he had to justifie the Catholick Church against the Dona­tists: And for my part, I profess I had rather, All to the Sacrament, than any to Schisme and Separation. And for their thoughts of others, they are no mans Tribunal: They that know their Witness is in Heaven, with such it will be a small thing to be judged of them; neither are they such Cato's, as that it should be punishment enough to be condemned by them; their teeth are not like the Tygers Claws, wherewith whosoever is wounded, can never be healed, nor doth afterward prosper; nor, I hope, are the Images or Conceptions, which they form of others in their Thoughts and Intellects, subject to the like fate, which (they say) those Images are, which are made by Witches, where the hurts and usage done to the Image, pass and are transferred to the man whose Image it is.

I might dispense with my self from making any animadversions upon their descriptions of Catechumeni, Energumeni, and Penitents; it is enough that my Ar­gument stands free, and that they confess the ancient Church separated none but of such denominations, and cannot say that those whom they suspend are onely such, but then so confidently to conclude, that because the ancient Church removed such sorts of men, therefore Antiquity is for them, they must pre-suppose us bred up in the Rabbinical Schools, where the Disciples are taught to beleeve that white is black, if the Rabbi tell them so.

With as much colour of reason doe the Papists conclude, because they finde the word Tradition in Scripture and the Fathers, and Merit, and Satisfaction, and the like in ancient Writers, that the same names must needs be of the same things, and were understood and taught in the same notion, which now they conceive and hold; could they produce any Records, that all passed examination in point of knowledge, or any, save the Catechumeni, stran­gers to the Church and Faith, and Children (who were a sort of Catechumeni;) or any at all underwent a probation of their lives, or were separated, because they were not convincingly holy, and not onely because they were notoriously wicked, that in any Church, onely one of an hundred was admitted, and a sepa­ration made from the rest, either negatively not to communicate with them, or positively to constitute new Churches; they should then hit the Bird in the eye, whereas now they doe not so much as beat the Bush; Tiberius. but doe onely like that Romane Emperor, Cui proprium erat nuper reperta scelera priscis verbis obte­gere.

Suspension the ancient Church practised and commended, not in that notion and manner, nor of such persons as the Apologists do use it, but because they finde the word of suspeusion in the Monuments thereof; to conclude that their disci­pline is found there, is somewhat like him, that reading Missa fuit Romae, in the subscription of some of St. Paul's Epistles, inferred that that Masse was then said at Rome; or because some kinde of suspension is laudable, that theirs must be as commendable, is not unlike to Caracalla, who supposed that because one Alex­ander was a brave man, none of that name could be bad: but seeing they are not Popes, who are to be beleeved absolutely, simply and without condition, whose Will is in stead of Reason; and it is not for us to judge whether they speak consentaneous to Reason; but it is Heretical to think they may not de­termine, as they have determined, we shall desire them to shew us out of any Records that the ancient Church practised or commended suspension, as now it is understood and practised, ‘Et vitulâ tu dignus. —’

It may yet reflect some light upon our subject, to make some observations upon their expresses concerning the Catechumeni, Energumeni, and Penitents.

The first, they say, were such as the Church nurtured in the fundamentals of Re­ligion, being unbaptized (as they suppose) the children of Pagans. I shall not in­stance any case, wherein a Catechumen unbaptized, might yet have been a child of Christian Parents, as particularly if his Parents had died before the times of baptisme (which were usually but twice in the year) and then his next of kinne being a Pagan, had detained him from the bosome of the Church: nor shall I insist upon it, that Children in years, though born of Christian Parents and baptized, did also pass in the rank of Catechumeni, and went out at the Ite, missa est: nor shall I rectifie their judgment, by shewing that some Catechumeni were the Sons and Daughters of Jews; I shall onely observe, that had there been in [Page 172]those days any Anabaptists or Independents, the Catechumeni might have been the Children of Christians, and yet unbaptized; for the one would have bapti­zed no Children at all, and the other, none but those whose Parents had been gathered into their Churches.

Secondly, it is observable, that those Catechumens, as soon as they were bapti­zed, Tract. 11. in Johan. Chemnicius exam. part. 2. p. 101. Gerhard loc. com. vol. 2. p. 1. Durant cited before. Casaubon. ad annal. Baron. exer. 16. S. 36. pag. 378. Notae in quos. canon. concil. Gal. p. 167. Albaspinus de veter. Eccles. ritibus, l. 1. ob­ser. 19. p. 142, 143. Patrem vocas Deum & fra­trem mox vitu­peras, si vero non est frater tuus quomodo dicis pater no­ster? Chryso­stome. were admitted also to the Eucharist, which not onely appears by that of Augustine, Transeant per mare rubrum, & baptizentur, & manducent Manna; but by what Chemnicius cites out of Chrysostome, and Gerhard out of Justin, Ambrose and Theodoret, and Durantus out of others; and by what Casaubon tells us, Vetus Ecclesia semper adjecit baptismo participationem corporis Christi, (but where he addes praesertim adultis, some learned men think it was tantùm adultis, that which was given to Infants being onely the Wine (for so Hugo asserts) and that scarce formally, as the Sacrament, but as they used to give them milk and honey;) and how little time was allotted for instructing the Catechumens, and what a small viaticum of knowledge was required to carry them to the Sacra­ments, I have formerly shewed; and surely it could not be imagined that they who were strangers to the Christian Faith, and bred up in other Rudiments; and who, when they came over into the pale of the Church, in the first times, as it seems, were neither admitted to the reading of the Gospels, nor the Sermons and Expositions thereof, (which, Albaspinus saith, may be known by these words in the Sermons of the Fathers, Norunt fideles) and which said not, nor learned the Lords Prayer, till they were baptized, (for they were not called Brethren, that were not admitted to the Eucharist,) and in that respect joyned not in say­ing Our Father (which perchance hath brought us to stumble on the reason, why the Lords Prayer is never recited in the Churches of the Apologists, be­cause there are so many present, who being not admitted to the Eucharist, may not be called their Brethren, nor have God to their common Father) I say that it cannot be imagined that in so short a time, with so slender means, they could with as great a summe (of knowledge) obtain this freedome of the Sacra­ments, as the generality of our Congregations have, who (like Paul) are free­born, & Ecclesiae cives nati.

The Energumeni (they say) were men supposed to be possessed by Sathan, or men excommunicate, because such are delivered unto Sathan; and they derive Energu­meni ab energia, and out of Altenstaig tell us, Illi dicuntur Energumeni, qui interiùs laborant per vexationem daemonis: But observe, first, for the notatio nominis, how they institute a new Grammar, deriving Participles from Nouns, and not from Verbs; I should have rather thought it more proper to have fetch'd it from [...]

Secondly, for notatio rei, whatever Alstentaig tell them, who compiled his Lexicon out of the School-men, (who were not always over-excellent in Lan­guages or Antiquities) persons possessed were but one species., and included not the whole latitude of Energumeni, Ideots and Lunatiques coming also under­that generical notion. Whether to deliver one unto Sathan, were directly to put him under the corporal power, possession and inflictions of Sathan, as a sad consequent of Excommunication in those times, (as the Greek Fathers sup­pose,) or onely to excommunicate, which is a delivery up to Sathan by conse­quent, a declaring him to be subject to the Kingdome and Power of Sathan, and no longer to appertain to the Kingdome of Christ, and not a cutting him off [Page 173]from one Ordinance (for that could not be said to be a tradition unto Sathan, but a depriving of all the means useful to eject Sathan, Dr. Ham. An­notat. in 1 Cor. 5. E. and the power of his Kingdome out of the heart (as the Catechist that instructed men and fitted them for Baptisme, was wont to be called the Exorcist, that cast Sathan out) as the Latine Fathers, and modern Expositors, both Protestant and Popish, conceive,) I shall not dispute; this is beside my subject, and there was never a triumph for any victory, out of a mans proper Province; onely I shall observe, that though excommunicate persons had been so under the afflictive power and possession of Sathan, yet all that were so were not excommunicate, and yet those that were not compotent of minde, if they were not born such, but fell into any di­stemper, after they had first received the Eucharist, Aquin. 3. q. 8. art. 9. Vasquez in 3. Tom. 3. q. 80.9. disp. 212. c. 3. p. 442. Valentia 3. disp. 6. q. 8. p. 2. p. 926. Albas. not. in Canon. quos. Conc. Gall. 7.1616. Communior ta­men ejus usu recepta senten­tia est, dandam illis esse com­munionem. Sylvius in 3. part. Aquin. q. 80. art. 9. p. 319. Filiucius cas. tract. 4. c. 7. n. 190. p. 49. Casaubon. exercit. 16. S. 43. Albasp. l. 2. obser. 4. Bellar. de poenit. l. 1. c. 22. many of the School-men (how justly I shall not dispute) incline to grant them the Sacrament, at least for a Viaticum at their departure; and as for those that were possest, to whom indeed that name of Energumeni is more commonly applyed, the first Councel of Orange allowed them in some cases the Eucharist, if they were not perpetually vexed, Si lucidis gauderent intervallis, saith Albaspinus, so do many of the School­men and Casuists by warrant of some later Councels and Fathers, and though some sinne occasioned the possession, yet (for which there is the authority of Cassian, and an instance of Prosper) if they were not delivered up to Sathan for any great crimes, and so were in the condition of persons excommunicate; and si de purgatione curent, si vita sit purgatior, si non blasphement, si non enuncient, (that is, ut explicat Balsamon) si tempore quo non vexarentur, docent alios, quae ipsi à daemone didicerunt, they were not altogether excluded; generally they agree it ought not to be denied them dying, so as we see, that the far greatest part of their Parishes are thrust into a worse condition, than the Energumeni.

The Penitents were communionis Christianae velut candidati, as a learned man calls them, and in a medious state or condition between the faithful and Ex­communicate; for with Penitents there was allowed a civil converse, and to­ward them might be vouchsafed all Offices of Humanity; but with persons excommunicate, as men polluted, it was piacular to have any company or com­merce, they were not safely to be looked upon, but weae universally shunned, and not held worthy of the light.

The Apologists very pertinently observe, that men were put under penance, for being scandalous in manners and opinions; and I wish their discipline had been conformed to this pattern, and exercised onely upon such and no others, espe­cially since they confess it is not necessary they should assigne other qualifications (of such I suppose they mean as are excluded) than Antiquity did; but where­as they undertake to instruct us in the ancient course of admitting Penitents, and say, They were first admitted to the limits of the Church. 2. To lye down in the Church-porch. 3. To the hearing of the word, but not to stay at prayers. 4. Next to the Sacrament. A smatterer in Antiquity (to retort their own phrase) would not have given so incurious and imperfect an account of their method of discipline.

For, first, however the foot-steps thereof are not so plainly to be traced in the Latine Church, (and yet Albaspinus finds them in that of Tertullian, Haet expectat, haec exorat poenitentiam, quandó (que) inituris salutem) yet in the Greek Church, the Monuments thereof are so frequent, that to him that hath seen things but per transennam, or tasted them onely tanquam canis ad Nilum, it is ve­ry obvious, that there were four degrees or states of Penitents (not three as they limit.)

First, such as were Flentes or Plorantes, who stood and sometimes lay down without the Church, weeping, and requesting those that entred to petition the Lord for mercy toward them, (which at first was not imposed by Law, but arbi­trarily assumed.)

Secondly, Audientes, who stood in the Porch, and heard some portions of the Scripture (not all that was read;) l. 2. observ. 29. p. 390. and Albaspinus supposeth, that in the first ages, Missarum concionibus, quae lectionem Evangelii consequebantur, interesse non potuerunt, but they were not permitted to joyn in prayers, either those of the Church and faithful, or those of the Catechumens, nor yet to pray among the latter.

Thirdly, Prostrati, or succumbentes, who were admitted to a place behind the Pulpit, or behind the Quire of the Church, called Catechumenium, (for there the Catechumens stood also) who were permitted there to kneel, & pray amongst the Catechumens; but (as some suppose) were permitted onely their own prayers, not those of the Catechumens, and they went out with the Catechumens, or (as some think) after them.

Fourthly, Stantes, who I conceive were also called initiati, who were admit­ted to joyn in all Ordinances with the Congregation, save the Eucharist, which standing by, they might onely behold others (viz. the Consummati, as they were called, answerable to the Epoptae among the old Heathens) to receive, but themselves might not partake; nor beside were they permitted to bring their oblations, nor participate of what was offered and blessed (which some have mistaken for the Eucharist) neither had they the kiss of peace. These two last steps the Apologists tread over, and the second they divide into two, as little caring to understand the ancient discipline, as to model their own in conformi­ty thereunto.

2. They do truly observe, and we think it very observable, that such a course the ancient Church took about admitting Penitents (and therefore Albaspinus tells us, poenitentiam quasi ad quendam catechumenatum repraesentandum institutum esse) and from thence shall re-minde them, that those several degrees were onely such as whereby Penitents were re-admitted, not whereunto they were directly and immediatly censured; but having been first excommunicate in order to their restoring to the Communion of the Church, they had the favour of being admitted by these several steps of penance, and none were Penitents, that had not been first excommunicate, which is diametrally opposite to their way of su­spension, whereby men are immediately and only made stantes, that were never excommunicated, nor passed the other degrees of penance.

I shall conclude this History of the ancient discipline with that of Hospinian, Historia de re Sacrament. l. 2. p. 40.Catechumeni & poenitentes, finitâ concione, templo jussi sunt egredi, antequam sacra peragerentur, ne cum reliqu's fratribus communicarent, ex quo liquidò claréque evin­citur, caeteros qui remanserunt omnes communicasse: and besides them of those [Page 175]notions, he tells us, Admissi sunt ad coenam, l. 3. p. 185.quicun (que) doctrinam Christianam sunt amplexi, so that though onely persons fit and worthy were admitted, yet it is hereby manifest, that they accounted all such fit and worthy, as were neither Catechumens nor Penitents.

Next, they take hold of what the Paper grants, that the Primitive Church saw the use of publick confession; it did so; but it also saw the abuse, and thereupon abolished what had been formerly introduced; but that was done, they say, after the abuse appeared, whereas now they say men sweat at the sight of the saddle, or ra­ther bridle, to curb their lusts. The confusion and abuse of their way is as appa­rent, and therefore consequently it is to be laid down,

And besides, the wisdome of prevention is better than that of remedies, as Hy­gieina is a safe and happier part of Physick than Therapeutica; but if any sweat at the fight of the saddle or bridle, which have been ridden and galled with it, it is no marvell, since neither are made onely to mount and manage an unruly stubborn horse; but the one is a Pack-saddle, fitted onely for an Asses back (by supposition of a general ignorance) and fashioned to be capable to take any load or burden that may be laid on; and the other to check and turn and lead us where they list, so as indeed it is like to become our bridle and their reins.

Their examination, they say, is little more than publick confession; I think upon examination they ought to make confession of a palpable error, who igno­rantly or wilfully mistake confession of sins (which the Paper saith, the An­cients saw the use of) for confession of faith; the admitting some of their members onely upon publick confession of faith, we have formerly traversed. That others have done the same thing privately before two or three witnesses (whereof sure their Elders have sometimes been none) hath been (they say) in tenderness and conde scension to their bashfulness. If they did this to any for­mally as bashful, they should doe it to all of that condition; for quicquid prae­dicatur per se, praedicatur de omni; I beleeve of men, and am very confident of women, the greatest part are bashful; yet I cannot learn they shew such ten­derness or condescension to the greatest part, which may render it doubtful that it is done to some with respect to the Gold-ring; and because Heliogabal'us sil­ken Nets are more proper to catch such Fishes, as St. Peter took.

It is for the honour of Antiquity, that as all the different sorts of Philoso­phers at Athens pretended to follow Socrates, so the new coyns of doctrine and discipline would seem to bear the ancient stamp; the Apologists, that have much nibled at, and detracted from Antiquity, would yet give their discipline for its better pass, a Testimonial from the ancient Church. They formerly bid us to remember the Gibeonites, and we cannot forget them, while their like pra­ctice keeps up and refresheth the memory of them, by such a counterfeit pre­tence of Antiquity, but rather it is the misfortune of this age, that their myste­ries so long hidden, were now first published, which hath been like the opening of the Chest in the Temple of Apollo, that Rhodiginus speaks of, or the breaking [Page 176]up, by the covetousness of certain souldiers, greedy of spoil, of the Image of Apol­lo Chomeus, which, as Ammianus Marcellinus tells us, was brought from Scleuoin to Rome, from whence issued forth pestilent vapours, which infected the adja­cent Countries.

The Antients removed some few from the Communion, and those onely by judicial sentence; for the scandal of some nefariousness, either evident, coniest, or proved by Witness; whereas these suspend at once their whole Congrega­tions, as if they were guilty of one common Apostasie, not judicially, but arbi­trarily; not for notorious crimes, but upon suspicions; and admit none of them, till they have approved themselves to their good opinions, by demonstra­tive signs of holiness; and till they doe so, they separate from all Communion in this Ordinance with them, (which suspending first, and then making tryall and probation afterwards, methinks holds some resemblance with Lidford Law, whereof in our Countrey they say proverbially, That they bang and draw in the morning, and sit in Judgment in the afternoon;) so as therefore, though we should be unhappily obstructed and retrenched from the like disci­pline, as the ancient exercised (which is our great sorrow, and not a little their fault (as I have shewed) who seem like an hard-galloping hot-spur, that asked if he might attain such a place before night, and it was answered, Yes, if he rid softer) yet farther to excite others to a compliance with their way, and to com­plain of inconformity to it, and pretend it little varieth from the ancient, they have therein as much of reason, as the Grand Signior had to pretend the Turks descended from the ancient Trojans, and thereupon to invite the Italians to assist them in the wars against the Greeks, the Enemies of that Nation, from whence they had one common origine. It affects them to reade in the few An­cients they converse with Sancta sanctis, pronounced by the Deacon before the admi­nistration; but they that are not conversant with many of the Ancients (though it had been more happy for them, and us too, had they been acquainted with more) have, (it seemeth) not learn'd that this was onely in order to the dis­mission of the Catechumeni and Penitents, Exam. part. 2. p. 109. Chrysost. Hom. 3. in Ep. ad Ephes. c. 1. Tom. 4. p. 356. ad inquis. Jan. c. 13. Lilius Gyrald. syntag. de diis, p. 498. Syn. 17. Alexand. ab Alexand. dier. gen. l. 6. c. 19. p. 709. Servius in Virg. Aenead. p. 1017. and no others, the rest being under the notion of Sancti, and was but equivalent to the Ite, missa est, and [...], and also served to prompt the rest to examine themselves, as they might have read in Chemnicius: And they might also have learned from Chrysostome (if he be one of these few Ancients that they converse with) that the Deacon also proclaimed, You that cannot pray, depart; so as they were thought to be as indis­posed for prayers, as for the Sacrament; And those that were not under pe­nance, were not thought unholy or unworthy of those holy things, as they might have found in St. Augustine, Hoc enim est indignè accipere, si eo tempore accipiat, quo poenitentiam agere debet.

The very Heathen had one to cry, Procul hinc, Be gone you that are profane: But first this was not extensive to all their Holies, ad [...] sacra profani ad­mittebantur, saith Gyraldus. Beside, to keep analogy with that custome, they should (as the Heathen did) exclude those whom they judge prophane, from the Temple, and from all sacred actions, not one alone; and hence is profanus quasi porrò à fane; and therefore in that of Virgil, ‘— Procul ô, procul este profani,’ [Page 177]There is also added in the next Verse, ‘— Toto (que) absistite luco,’ And that conclamation too, was after the sacrifice ended, ‘Adventante dea, procul ô, &c.’ And farther by profane the great Grammarian Servius understands such one­ly as were not yet initiated into their Rites, Lil. Gyrald. ubi supra p. 498. Sueton. in Nerone, S. 34. and those were answerable to the Catechumeni, and the procul hinc was therefore equivalent to their Ilicet, and to the Christians Ite, missa est: Others think it meant of such as were polluted with homicides and flagitious villanies, (such as Nero was, who durst not (saith Suetonius) enter the Fanes, through conscience of his Crimes) such as corre­spond with men among us cast out for notorious crimes; and so learned Casau­bon supposeth the Procul ô, procul este profani, to bear fimilitude with that in the Leturgy pronounced by the Deacon, Omnes Catechumeni, Exercit. 16. S. 43. p. 399. &c. discedite (where­of were sundry formes) and had the force of an excommunication; but there was no examination of mens lives, it was enough when it was aloud said [...]; to answer [...], without farther scrutiny. And some farther think this was onely an usage proper to their Eleusinia sacra, where he was pro­fane that was not wicked; and indeed there was little less impurity in most of their Rites, for as for sins of the flesh, Alexand. ab Alex. dierum Genial. l. 6. c. 26. p. 747. Dr. Hammond Tract. of Idol. and Annot. in 1 Cor. 5.10. Antiq. Lect. l. 12. c. 2. (notwithstanding their Pontifician Law in Tully, Deos castè adeunto, &c.) omnes ferè mortales in templis coire & nefandis li­bidinibus commisceri nefas non putarent, saith Alexander Neapolitanus; and there­fore a learned man supposeth, that in the New Testament, as Fornication is commonly joyned with Idolatry, so sometimes by Idolatry is meant sinne of uncleanness, which always attended upon Idol-worship; and as for Drunken­ness, it was so common in their Sacrifices, that Aristotle's [...] inflexum pu­tat, (saith Rhodoginus) quòd ebrii fierent [...], that is, post sacrifi­cium; and both the one and the other recommended under the opinion of Re­ligion, and the prescribed way of worship.

The Ancients are censured for going too far this way; perchance they are so, but for going too farre not in theirs, but in a different way: Their rigour was in excommunicating some for smaller offences (for as farre as I can discover, ‘Si redeant veteres, ingentia nomina, Patres,’ they would say, Excommunication we know, and delivering to Sathan we know, but for suspension, who are you?) and in inflicting penance for so many years; to make men Flentes three years, Audientes so many more, Succumbentes as many, Stantes for two years, and in keeping some for more grievous Crimes from the Communion till death; and then sometimes giving them onely abso­lution and benediction, but not the Eucharist, and granting no absolution after a second lapse, which as it gave an occasional Rise to Novatus his Schisme, (there being but this difference between him and the Catholiques, that he de­nied the power, and they often exercised not the act of remission; they did not, and he taught they could not, absolve;) so it hath onely that of Innocent [Page 178]to excuse it, Apud Albasp. ubi supra l. 2. obser. 5. p. 248. Coactam compulsám (que) Ecclesiam severiùs animadvertere in delinquen­tes, quò atrocitate disciplinae austerioris invectâ in officio continerentur fideles, con­tra persecutionum fluctus, and lest they, to escape and decline persecution, should comply with Ethnick Idolators.

But this was not the general Rule of Discipline in all the first Ages of the Church; but acts (in the nature of an exception) suited onely to times of Per­secution, no constant method, but temporary and occasional, not of the sub­stance thereof, but accidental, pauca admodum vi tractata, quo caeteris quies es­set, as Tacitus in another case, and was like Galen's drawing blood in some de­sperate pestilent Fevers, Us (que) ad animae defectum, which is not to be exemplary or regular in ordinary practice, the like discipline being not warrantable but in the like times, and with the like reasons. And as rigid as they for that time were, their rigour onely extended judicially, to reject some for manifest and scandalous wickedness, not all till a manifestation of their real holiness; nei­ther doth it follow, that if some few known Malefactors were then too severely castigated, that now many that are not such, have no just cause to complain for suffering (though) a lesser punishment.

And whereas they plead their distingue tempora too, for their actings diffe­rent from the Ancients, in gathering and ordering Churches, in respect they live in a corrupt Church, which is not therefore to be stood upon: perchance it were not, if the Innovation stood upon a bottome of more Reason, than the retention of the ancient Discipline could doe: but for ought they have yet proved to the contrary, the new seems to be as far from having a better Basis than the old, as it is now at last by their confession, from having any buttress to support it, from a similitude with that ancient way, from the causes which constituted it, and from the effects flowing from it; there are clear demonstrations of the excellency of the one above the other; and such constitutive causes as the old had, the new cannot have; and the old may have the same effects influent on our times which it ever formerly had, that though we shall not say with Taci­tus, Scito super omnibus negotiis meliùs atque rectiùs olim provisum, & quae conver­tuntur, in deterius mutari; yet in this particular, we shall call for the old wine, as the better, (the new being heady, flatulent, and too much purging.) Of the corruptions of this Church we have formerly considered, and shewed those cor­ruptions ought not to be the Generation of their Separation, which though they call a gathering of Churches, yet by a denomination taken from the major part, may be rather called a dissipating, or a gathering onely of Ears, and scattering of Sheaves, to be snatch'd up for some other strange Barn. And be the Church distempered by corruptions, yet we shall be more glad to see the Cure undertaken in the way of the old approved Methodists, or Dogmatists, ra­ther than of Empericks, (who are all for the knife,) for we fear those new Phy­sicians that practise onely on a new Church, must according to the German Pro­verb, have a new Church-yard.

To shew what Spirit the best of the Ancients were of in this matter, they re­hearse the testimony of Albaspinaeus (as they of late call him, though in the el­der Editions of his Works, he be named Albaspinus) viz. They thought it dete­stable to God and Man, not onely for them that were defiled with lesser sinnes; but if under a Cloud of suspicion, to come to the Eucharist, and judge it dangerous for ab­solved Penitents to touch those things, if not thought holy enough by them, to whom [Page 179]the care of the Sacrament was committed. Next, they cite Chrysostome, who, say they, is as full as can be wished (whom therefore they wonder should be brought in for this suggested liberty) he admonishing Ministers not to deliver the Eucha­rist to the unworthy; though he wear the Crown, thou hast greater authority than he, no small punishment hangs over our heads, if we suffer any to come that we know to live in any sinne, not saying, If he will not submit to tryal, you have freed your soul, if you exhort; but saith, his blood will be required of thy hands.

These being the onely stakes in their hedge, cut out of the Forrest of Anti­quity, we shall more diligently examine their strength.

First, concerning Albaspinus, I must re-minde them, that he speaks this of such as had been first excommunicate for some scandalous offence, and then were put under penance in order to their restoring; for he delivers it in answer to the question, Why after the first three degrees of penance, the fourth was ap­pointed? so as this will be extra aleas, in respect to any defence of their way, who discommon men from the Sacrament, that were never thus censured for any scandalous crime.

Secondly, they shew a respect more partial to their Cause, than just to their Reader, by imposing on him in the Translation; for levissimâ maculâ inquina­tum, is not, defiled with lesser sinnes, but with the least, or lightest stain, viz. of their former sins (which in all likelyhood were great:) for those staines the An­cients thought to be purged and expiated by penal acts (not the offence, as an offence to God, or the punishment due to sin, which are opposed to justification, but only the spot consisting in an habitual pravity, & opposed chiefly to justifi­cation) and repentance and sorrow to be instrumental causes, Dr. Chaloner, origen and progress of Heres. p. 133. whereby grace be­came effectual in destroying these sinful affections, so as the meaning of levissi­mâ maculâ infectum, is in effect, defiled with the least affection to his former sins.

Secondly, Maculae nebulâ offusum, is but the same thing in Hyperbole; and though it should properly be rendred a Cloud of stain, and virtually may signifie a suspicion of a stain, (not as they would have it a cloud of suspicion for lesser sins) notwithstanding lest Nebula so interpreted, should prove (as it also sig­nifieth) a Road-net to catch Woodcocks, and might seem to give some confir­mation to what they practise in suspending men, because they suspect their lives; it must also be known, that this was onely a suspicion of one that having once been duly convicted to have fallen, might be doubted not to be perfectly recovered; and the Law determines, Semel malus semper praesumitur esse malus, in eodem genere mali, and there is great difference in the reason of delaying up­on suspicion the restitution of one that hath notoriously sinned, and suspending one onely upon suspicion of sinne.

Thirdly, Those absolved Penitents, were absolved onely of three degrees of penance; not the fourth, as is evident by the Context, and the Ancients thought a reconciliation or restitution, per saltum, to be the restoring of a man not per­fectly cleansed, but of one bringing back his spots upon him; this is that which Cyprian complains of, that when nondum restitutâ Ecclesiae pace, ad communicatio­nem admittuntur, & offertur nomen eorum, & nondum poenitentiâ factâ,Epist. 10. pag. 30.nondum exomologesi finitâ, nondum manu eis ab Episcopo aut Clero impositâ, Eucharistia illis data; and saith he, Haec qui substrabit fratribus nostris, dicipit miseros, ut qui pos­sunt agentes poenitentiam veram Deo patri ad misericordiam precibus & operibus suis satisfacere, seducantur, ut magis pereant, & qui erigere se possunt, plùs cadant.

Fourthly, The Imposture is more gross when quod non satìs sancti & sancti­ficati censebantur, quibus tanta res committeretur, is thus translated, That they were not thought holy enough by them, to whom the care of the Sacrament was com­mitted; whereas it rightly should be rendred, Not holy enough to whom so great a thing should be delivered. And whereto their changing of the words and sense doth tend, may be pertinently remembred, when we come to examine, whether their way smack of Diotrephes, it being onely regni causâ, for which it seemes jusjurandum violandum est; whether the Apologists themselves perused this Au­thor, or it were a quotation lent them, we know not; but I now finde it requisite that we should peruse those which they quote.

But for Chrysostome, whose words might have been long enough sought for, by their quotation of the 38. Homily on Matthew, (which though I am easie to excuse as a Pen-lapse, (whereof in this kinde they have many,) yet it seems not such by a second referring us for them to the same place; but however we know he owns them, and delivers them in the 83. Homil. on the 26. of Matthew, and some of them else-where also.) Biblioth. l. 6. Annot. 152. p. 481. And for answer to them, I shall not need to bring forth that Rule of Senensis, Non esse concionatorum verba semper eo ri­gore accipienda, quo primùm ad auditores perveniant, multa enim declamatores per hyperbolen enunciant, & hoc interdum Chrysostomo contingit: Themselves have taken notice of my answer, That Chrysostome speaks of notorious sinners, (which are not pleaded for,) and as for their Reply, That others are not pleaded against or excluded, but only put under tryal for example: those empty husks have bin so often ventilated, that I shall not spend more breath to dissipate them; onely I shall confess, that Chrysostome saith not, If they will not submit to tryal, you have freed your soule; for he could not say any thing of that, which was not, and which he dreamed not of; for I shall desire them better to quote me, where he speakes of any such tryal which they ought to make, or submission which we should yeeld.

In the same Homily, indeed, he explains himself, to intend all this of notori­ous offenders, and so Peter Martyr understands him, saying, Quòd si quis venerit cum sordibus, Loc. com. part. 4. p. 63.ignoranter, nulla vestra culpa est, nam haec mihi de notis & manifestis disputata sunt) and means it of such, as had been formerly censured, and were under penance, He that partakes not (saith he) is a Penitent, such as the Dea­cons might take notice of by a precedent publike sentence against them, it is to them he speakes, In Matth. Homil. 82. You deserve no little punishment, if conscious of notorious crimes in any of the Communicants, you connive at them to partake of that Holy Ta­ble: They were the Deacons, who as they proclaimed Sancta sanctis, so them­selves were cryed unto to look to the doors, and they shouted out three severall times to them to go out, that were not to receive, in the Leturgies of Basil, Chry­sostome, and the Ethiopick; and yet they will not say that the Deacon had power to examine, De sacro par­ticipat. myster. Tom. 5. p. 328. Homil. 28. in 1. Cor. 11. Tom. 4. p. 112. or authority to cast out any not formerly censured. Besides, Chry­sostome notwithstanding all his thunderings here against admission of persons unworthy, by his lightnings else-where it often appears, that he himself took notice of many that came unworthily, and participated, as Licèt sit aliquid à vobis patratum acceditis; and also, non quemadmodum nunc facimus, temporis gratiâ ac­cedentes magìs quam animi studio, ne (que) ut praeparati ad vitia nostra expurganda compunctionis pleni accedimus, sed ut in solennitatibus simus, quando omnes ad­sint; and again, multos video temerè quomodocun (que) consuetudine magìs, quàm le­gitimè [Page 181]aut consideratione & mente, de corpore Christi participantes.Serm. 3. in c. 3. ad Ephes,Chrysostome well knew such ought not perchance in respect of their proper Consciences to have come; yet he was not ignorant, that in the judgment of the Church they ought not to be repelled, unless notorious and scandalous; they being different questions (as some conceive) Who may come, and, Who may be admitted? and that he may have a right in foro Ecclesiae, which cannot approve it in foro Coeli. Chrysostome resolved Judas did participate, and yet saith, Homil. 51. in 14. Math. Tom. 2. p. 115. Nullus Judas hanc mensam adeat. If they have not been formerly duly censured, at the in­stant of their approach, how can they be regularly rejected, where neither any degrees of admonition, nor judicial process (which regularly ought to precede) can at that suddenness be complied with; and in charity it may be not irratio­nally supposed, that he that offers himself after admonition (usually previous to the administration) that none unworthy adventure to come, Advers. Ana­bap. l. 6. c. 9. p. 230. hath repented of his former sins, and comes with Vows of amendment? Quomodo ergo fideles Ministri (saith Bullinger) adeò facilè, ut Anabaptistae volunt, à coena Domini exclu­derent homines peccatores, sed tamen petentes gratiam Dei, & qui hoc testantur, eo ipso quòd accedunt ad coenam?

The Fathers generally (not onely Chrysostome) doe pathetically perswade men to come prepared, and emphatically threaten such as come without due preparation, not in order to excluding of all such as upon tryal were not found to have such preparatory qualifications; but to excite their solicitude, and quicken their care to fit and dispose themselves, and try their hearts how they were disposed; their Exhortations looked to make them come worthily, not to suspend them, lest possibly they might be unworthy, as St. Paul menaceth dam­nation to him that eateth and drinketh unworthily; yet forbids not to come, but commands Self-probation; and I could instance in these Divines, who assert a free admission of all Church-members, yet doe with as much efficacy press and insist upon a coming with holy and suitable affections, as those that are so closehanded and tenacious of the Sacrament. So that sure Chrysostome is not as full as they can wish, unless as Porus, when Alexander asked him, How he would be dealt with? answered, As a King, and that was enough; so it be sufficient that the authority of the Minister (it seems alone) be greater than the Kings: but whether they have cause to continue their wonder that Chrysostome is brought in by us to give witness on our part, we shall manifest in due place. In the inte­rim we shall give them this corollary, That because the ancient Church repelled notorious sinners, for them to argue, that therefore they admitted none without examination and tryal of their Sanctity, is as if I should conclude, that because the Laws of this Common-wealth punish Theeves that are judicially attainted, therefore they put every man under a restraint, untill he approve himself a true man.

SECT. XIV.

THe Paper to make some Dialectick proof, that there was no such scrupulous examination of men taken previously to communicating in the ancient Church, alleaged, that then the consecrated Elements (which being recei­ved, became the Sacrament) were sometimes sent to persons absent, and to strangers coming to Rome, &c.

The Apologists ‘Quorum vis animus (que) ferox contingit Olympum;’ take this for a corruption, smelling of rank superstition, the Paper fetching it from Rome, bidding us prove it to be an ancient practice, and they will prove it to be an ancient errour.

But I have already verified the practice, Tom. 4. l. 1. c. 9. S. 32. and need not farther confirm it, for Chamier prevents me by affirming negari nequit, adeò frequentia sunt testimonia & exempla; but they have not yet convinced the errour: for it is not sufficient to prove it erroneous, to say it came from Rome (yet it was onely the sending it to strangers which was said to be used, not instituted at Rome, in token of peace and communion) for this was done when Rome was in her Virgin-puri­ty, and before she turned Whore; when all those glorious Eulogies were given her by the consentiens laus bonorum, & incorrupta vox benè judicantium; and to suppose she merited them not then, because now she doth not, is an error as wide upon one side, as that of the Papists is on the other, who thinke she de­serves them now, because then she did. It is no Argument because Jordan falls into the dead Sea, that it never had fresher streams, neither is Rome like the Birds of Phineus, that whatsoever she hath touch'd, must be afterward pollu­ted.

It was enough for my purpose, that I proved the thing de facto; and I am no more obliged to prove it de jure, than our Divines are to justifie the deferring of Baptisme by some in the ancient Church, (and particularly by Constantine) untill toward their death, because from thence they collect an Argument, Tertullian, Haymo, Aquinas, Erasmus, Glossae, alii (que). that Baptisme was not then beleeved to be of such necessity; nor more than those many and great names of Tertullian, Haymo, Aquinas, Erasmus, &c. that conceive St. Paul, 1 Cor. 15.29. did draw an Argument, to prove the Resurrection from a practice either of the Cerinthians, or the Marcionites, could suppose he inten­ded to legitimate that custome.

But of this usage which we discourse of, however these austeri Aristarchi may lash it; yet the modest sweetness of famous Chamier, (as, ‘Ut quis (que) est major, magis est placabilis —)’ will take with more complacency, than their harsh censoriousness, Ubi supra S. 18. S. 28. p. 127. who having said that consultissimum ut Sacramenti actio sit continua, addes of this practice, quia olim factum à piis viris, non sumus adeò praefracti in nostra sententia ut damnemus. And indeed, though Protestant Divines condemn the reposition of the Sacrament, in order to circumgestation, and adoration, &c. yet Sacramental actions being defined by their ends, and this transmission of the Elements be­ing onely a continuance of their first Ordination to a Sacramental use, and so the Sacrament being a Relative, and being not extra usum, had still rationem Sacramenti; and the conservation thereof elsewhere, being signified unto, and ratified by him that was to receive, since the words work not of themselves, but by the understanding of him that communicated, may seem sufficient: There­fore under these Aspects, this Custome which partly arose in times of Persecu­tion, l. 1. obser. 8. p. 60. and partly was grounded on this reason (as Albaspinus tells us out of In­nocent) that they to whom it was sent, se à nostra communione non judicent se­paratos, and perchance upon other reasons, of which, as of other usages, though our great distance may render us ignorant; yet it seems they were so weighty and considerable, that no Christian then living interposed any Objections a­gainst them; I say, this Custome is not therefore condemned, though not alto­gether approved by our gravest Theologues, as Morton, Chemnicius, Gerhard, &c. But for my part, since the Apologists, ‘Contra ibunt animis vel magnum praestet Achillem;’ I shall not hazard the Charge, nor abide the Shock of such bold Assailants, but quit the ground, having already served my turn of it.

They had the confidence in the fromer Section, to proclaim the Fathers were for them; but now ‘Quo teneam vultus mutantem Protea nodo?’ [Page 184]being but a little galled, they wince, and say that Antichrist hath been long work­ing in the Church, (and the Fathers, it seems, were his Chaplains, and his Work was carryed on by them, and not onely by the Gnosticks, and other Hereticks,) and might be too prodigal of Christs blood; I wish they could vindicate themselves from being worse than Prodigals, that are so covetous thereof, & avarus est de­terior prodigo: But neither could the one lavish, nor can the other with-hold from others his blood, but only that which properly is but the sign thereof, and to become his blood to those alone that beleeve; and to be effectual in sealing of Salvation by it, upon condition of Faith; yet that signe, without prodigality to be exhibited to all that profess Faith, and can discern what is thereby signi­fied, and the Salvation to be offered in signo, to whom it was never intended in beneplacito, Salvation, upon condition of Faith in Christ, being but the tenor of the Gospel, which is held forth in the Sacraments, as well as in the Word, onely with a different manner of propounding; and therefore anciently the Catechumeni, as soon as they were baptized, (and till then they were not held faithful) were at once admitted to publick hearing of the Gospel, and partici­pating of the Eucharist. Which Custome, as it is witnessed, de facto, by our Di­vines formerly quoted, and by many of the Fathers, mentioned by Lorinus; so the same Author thinks, In Acta. c. 2. v. 42. p. 109. it had its ground and rise from Act. 2.41, 42. where it being said that four thousand were baptized in one day (of whose conversa­tion sure there could be no tryal had, neither could they make any special con­fession of their Faith, whereof their coming to be baptized onely, was a reall profession; which though it was usual in the baptizing of such as came over from Paganisme, that they might testifie they were Christians; yet there is neither the like Rule, nor Exercise, nor Reason, for a Confession to be made at the Eucharist, by those who have been bred in the Profession of the Faith, and where their approach and desire to participate, is a special profession, as I have shewed:) I say, as soon as it is said they were baptized, it is added in the next immediate verse, They all continued stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship, and breaking of bread; (that is, in breaking of the Eucharist, as the Syriack reades, and the general sense interprets it) and prayers.

From discrediting the Witnesses, they speak to enervate the Testimony, (viz.) That Strangers by place, may upon knowledge of some members, or Cer­tificate from the Church, be admitted; but I briefly demand, Whether with­out farther probation, upon such Knowledge or Certificate onely, they shall finde admission, or not? If yea, they give up the cause

for this might alwayes supersede all farther tryal, and closeth with what we have asserted, That the knowledge of men collected by ordinary converse with them, might frustrate and prevent all farther examination. If not, they given us words that signifie nothing, and which onely ‘Sunt apina tricaeaue, aut si quid vilius istis.’

Indeed it is obvious in Antiquity, that strangers were not regularly admit­ted to the Sacraments, without Certificates from their proper Pastor, which were called Literae communicatoriae & formatae: But their way is as dissonant from this Rule, as the observing thereof would be destructive to their ends; Ne quis sine literis Episcopi sui, in aliena Ecclesia com­municet. 1. Concil. Carthag. Can. 6. Apud Centur. Magdeburg. 7. Apud Caran­zam. for such Literae formatae would altogether frustrate their new Formatae Ecclesiae, gathered and made up of such as have no such Communicatory Letters.

SECT. XV.

HEre (they say) is little that presseth them: The Numidian Bears are so far, that they feel no stripes; and it is said of an Eastern King, he was so fat and so gross that he was not sensible of pain, when Needles were stuck into his body: but it may be our Needles are not sharp enough to enter, we shall therefore see what they are to the point.

In the Authorities also there is, they say, more confusion, than variety. Answ [...] Confusion may like scandal be given or taken, and it is also passive aswell as active, and I might excusably suspect, that those authorities have somewhat confounded them, for to some they have found nothing at all to say in answer, and to the rest, nothing to purpose. I shall not contest with them for accu­rateness of method, neither do I think they need contend with any for va­riety; the method is but accidental to the matter, and as long as Accidens po­test abesse sine subjecti interitu, if the substance be defended, I, that seek not to interweave mine own image with Minerva's in this buckler, shall be less soli­citous of the credit of the method, whereof nevertheless I am as little diffi­dent, onely for their censures, as I am distrustfull of others capacity, for the Sa­crament, for their censoriousness.

The Paper pleaded not for keeping up a quotidian Communion (the reasons perhaps that gave first rise thereunto being ceased) and therefore their arguing against it is but a Sciamachy. Hieron. ad Lu­cinium & con­tra Jovin. Aug. de Serm. Domini in mon­te, 12. Neither was it the assiduity that was principally insisted upon, but the generality of communicating, Totum populum quotidiè Eucharistiam sumpsisse, as Hierom and Augustine. Nevertheless the daily re­ceiving of the Ancients, shews they made no such huge difference between preparation for the Word and for the Sacraments, and it also upbraids their long procrastination of any communion, of which though now at length they have reassumed the administration, yet toward the far greatest part of their Congregations it is still discontinued, and in divers Churches, by their influ­ence and promotion, are those placed as Pastors, who long time were not in a capacity to administer it, (though by an intolerable presumption without any calling thereunto they adventured upon administring Baptism,) which I should think, (since the Casuists say, Filiucius Tract. 13. c. 1. n. 14. it merits the lesser excommunication to receive the Sacrament from the hands of a Lay-man, and the Administer is more guil­ty than the Receiver) is a juster cause to have suspended them from the other Sacrament, than any they can charge upon many of those, whom they put under suspension. Those men have been since ordained, after they had waited to see how the Horoscope would be formed and setled, and what Aspects the Stars were like to have, and which would be ascendent or descendent, and which aucti lumine, aut minuti, aut combusti, that so they might re­solve in what way to ordain them, for a more fortunate and auspicious nati­vity.

Those that content themselves with receiving twice or thrice a year, or make it onely an Easter-formality, I neither am, nor shall be retained to be their Advocate, yet perchance many may so infrequently receive, that are not content with it, but rather patient of what they cannot remedy, and as these may share of the same comforts which the Apologists hold forth to them, §. 13 among whom the administration hath been long intermitted, so is their condi­tion much better than is that of their people, by how much the lesser evil is nearer to good: and seldome is less obnoxious, than never. Cavendum nè si ni­miùm in longum differatur perceptio corporis & sanguinis Christi, ad perniciem animae pertineat, said the Council of Cabillon.

To receive at Easter, onely through formality, Ad popul. An­tioch. Hom. 61. hath frequent increpations from the Fathers, Chrysostom especially, when Circulis rem definis, and when ex consuetudine magìs quàm legitimè, aut consideratione & mente, and temporis gratiâ, [Page 188]magìs quàm animi studio, Serm. 3. in Ephes. c. 1. in 1 Cor. 11. Hom. 28. Tom. 4. p. 112. contra Liter. Petiliani l. 2. c. 94. tom. 7. p. 31. as hath before been declared; yet notwithstanding reproving the abuse, they continued the usage of general communicating at that time, and not in that Emperical way (as a grave Divine wittily speaks) applying the remedy to the weapon, but to the patient, abolished not the act without trying to reform the fault, in the manner of doing, but notwithstand­ing some abuse the ancient Church still thought that an apt and opportune time for the celebration, when as Augustine saith in the like case, Ipsa festivitas ferventiores facit, etiam qui in caetero anno pigriores sunt, and in their sense (who thought not the least helps despicable, seeing small pullies serve to advance great weights) the very season was a kinde of prompter to remember them of that which the Sacrament was instituted (with infinite more efficacy) to shew forth, Aquin. 2.2. q. 2 art. 7. Durand. in 3. dist. 25. q. 1. n. 9. insomuch as thereupon divers Schoolmen and Casuists make it an argu­ment of supine ignorance, that any should not have explicite knowledg of those mysteries of Christ, which were so publickly solemnized by the Church, and therefore though they laid no abstract necessity in the observation, nor ho­liness in the time, yet they thought it had much of seasonableness, and nothing of superstition, (which may be as palpable in not observing, as in observing, set-times for duties) and it was decreed, that at that time every one should communicate, not to imply that it was sufficient to do it then onely, but as Ho­spinian speaks of Zepherinus, Hospinian hist. Sacrament. rei l. 2. p. 124.Cùm vix unquam eveniret ut simul omnes communica­rent, necesse verò erat ut qui permixti erant profanis & idololatris, externo aliquo simbolo fidem suam testarentur, diem certum in anno, ordinis & politiae causâ, statu­it, quo totus Christianorum populus, fidei confessionem sumptione coenae Dominicae, ede­ret: onely these Antipodes to antiquity can endure no Communions at Easter of any time else, of whom compared with the Ancients, we may say, as they do of the French and Spaniards, That what the one is, the other is not; And per­chance as Maldonat tells us, That he approves an exposition (though another of Augustine's be more probable) onely because it most dissenteth from the inter­pretation of the Calvinists; and Bellarmine saith, That an opinion is the better welcome, because the contrary thereof is embraced by the Protestants; so they consultly declaim against the Sacrament at Easter, because the ancient Church then used to celebrate it.

That the ancient Church decreed, that all having passed puberty should com­municate several times in a year, checks their impeding the far greatest part from communicating once in many years. Had the Ancients symbolized with them, they might more aptly and properly have decreed, that none should participate the Sacrament, rather than that all should; for the denomination is to be taken from the major part, and among these men far more are re­pelled than admitted, and one of an hundred is none in comparison; and whereas they tell us, They have also taken in some about fifteen or sixteen years old, (the age of puberty,) I must tell them, that the thing which I directly and principally intended was, that all were to communicate, not at what age they were admitted; but they, contrary to Law, let go the Principal and arreign the Accessary; but from the admission at that age, it may materially be ob­served, that the term, untill which they were excluded, and from which they were admitted, was their puberty, not till upon triall they made demonstration of their sanctity. Let them fix one eye on the ancient Church, and cast the other on their Congregations, and tell me, if their admitting one of an hundred [Page 189]look with any suitableness to that of unicuique praesentium in Justin Martyr, Distribuunt unicuique prae­sentium, Justin. Martyr. Apol. 2. Unicuique po­pulo permit­tunt partem ejus sumere, Clemens. Strom. l. 1. Theodor. in 1 Cor. 11. Panis ille quem universa ecclesia participat. Maxent. cit. à Centur. Magd. cent. 6. c. 4. p. 115. Cunctus populus, Justin. Apol. Hosp. Hist. rei Sacrament. l. 2. p. 5. & 52. Haymo in 1 Cor. 11. ut cit. Cham. Casaubon, Exer. cit. 16. sect. 31. p. 366.uni­cuique populo in Clement, totus populus in Hierom and Augustin, that omnes ex aequo in Theodoret, that promiscua multitudo, (which out of Rhenanus) tota multitudo, (which from Chemnicius we have formerly mentioned) and that mixta frequen­tia & multitudo hominum, and si quibus collibu [...]sset, which Hospinian speaks of to have participated in the greater and more solemn feasts; and whether it be conformable to that precept and reason of Haymo, Omnes communiter ex uno pane communicate, quia illa oblatio unus panis est, & communis debet esse omnibus. Whereupon Casaubon calls the Lord's Supper, Publica fidelium omnium invi­tatio.

That all present at the Word were by decree to communicate, they grant might well be, except such as were under censure, or obnoxious to it: it was never intended to be decreed by them, nor meant to be alleged by us, but upon the known Hypo­thesis of not extending it to persons under a judicial censure; but while they dilate the exception to such as are only obnoxious to censure, (that is, in a sense suitable to their practice, which else it self would be obnoxious) such whom they shall judge unfit, (who repell so many, whereof not one, that I know, was ever duly censured) is a gloss of their own; agreeable with no Text of anci­ent Discipline; but the contrary is evident, by the testimony of St. August. Nos à communione quenquam pro­hibere non pos­sumus, n [...]si aut sponte confes­sum, aut in ali­quo judicio ec­clesiastico vel. seculari nomi­natum atque convictm. De medicina poeni­tentiae super il­lud, 1 Cor. 5. si quis frater, &c. & Homil. 50. Mr. Bal. tri­all of the grounds of se­paration, p. 188, 189. I. 3. de celebrat. missar. p. 121. Augustine produced by the Paper, which (according to the caution given by that ancient Sophister, at the encounter of an hard argument) they take no notice of, nei­ther hath it any smack of justice or reason that any man should be judged ob­noxious, and thereupon be kept off, by any other mans, or ministers private knowledg, but according to allegations and proofs of witnesses, or evidence of fact: The common good necessarily requiring that such publick actions of this nature should be regulated by a kinde of publick not private knowledg, which once admitted into judicature wold soon fill the Church and State with a world of scandals, injuries and inconveniences, and liberty should be granted to wicked ministers to punish with this punishment, whomsoever they please, as a solid Divine disputeth more at large, not onely according to the Doctrine of the Schoolmen, (and particular­ly out of Suarez) but also of the Canonists. The judgment of the former, we shall presently produce; for the later, let him be their fore-man to speak for them, who was second to none, our learned Countreymnn Lynwood, Imò, saith he, quilibet Christianus habet jus in perceptione Eucharistiae, nist illud per pec­catum mortale amittat, undè cùm in facie Ecclesiae non constet, talem am [...]sisse jus suum, non debet ei in facie Ecclesiae denegari, aliàs daretur facul [...]as malis sacerdotibus pro suo libitu punire hac poena, quos vellent. And if the Minister should pro­ceed to act upon his private knowledg or judgment, he shall do what Christ himself, did not, and, themselves say, he ought not to have done, in the case of Judas so as such a course is as much opposite to the practice of Christ; [Page 190]as the judgment of the School and Canonists, whose judgment is steered by his practice.

They next ask, How agrees that Note upon the Margine of the Canons, in old time all did communicate, yea, all that heard the word, by the decree of the Council of Antioch? Chamier tom. 4. l. 7. c. 18. sect. 21. p. 194. Such as were under penance, aswell as Catechumens, (for licuit discedere in missa catechumenorum, sed qui intraverit & Scripturas audiverit, id est, non fuerit egressus cum catechumenis, hunc jubent canones excommunicari, vel ex­pectare missam fidelium, ac proinde communicare) such are still presupposed to be seposited from our discourse, aswell as they were known to be sequestred from the Sacrament; they know we onelyspeak of the rest, and that of those, all that hear the Word should participate of the Sacrament, agrees well enough with the way of the ancient Church, and the way of righteousness too, but in­deed agrees not with their course, where an hundred of those that are neither Catechumens nor Penitents, partake of the Word, and but one of them of the Sacrament.

These then were dark times, unless they were holier than ours, that is, they were dark, unless they had more light, they were holier doubtless, because more humble, and more meek, and more charitable; but some men are like the Hermit, who thought the Sun shined onely into his Cell, and resemble Seneca's Harpaste, who thought the rooms to be dark, when her self was become blinde.

They tell us, a saying of a godly man, That all to the Sacrament is the great Go­lias of those days, with whom the little Davids of this age are encountring; and I shall requite them with an Apothegm of a man, that perchance can be no godly man, because not of their judgment, That none to the Sacrament, but whom they please, is the great Diana of the Ephesians, for which all the Silver-smiths of the times are making Shrines, as if the Image fell down from Jupiter, when it was made by the Crafts-men.

The testimony that allows no cause of separation from the communion, but such sins, as deserve excommunication, they say, bears no weight; yet it is alleged out of St. Augustine, but Augustinus tecum erravit, as Corvicius. The truth is, St. Ep. 118. c. 3. Augustine reciting and allowing therein the sense and judgment of some pious men in his age, speaks this of an active separation of a mans self upon conscience of his sinfulness, and not of a passive, as it is commonly under­stood by Gratian and others; but the argument holds with more nerves and energy against a passive separation, since a greater cause is requisite to exclude those that do come, than to deterr them from coming, and many may not per­chance lawfully approach, which yet cannot but unlawfully be repelled, as I have said before.

And if the ancient Church excluded none but such as were or had been ex­communicate, we may be indulged to think no sins a cause of separation from the Eucharist, but such as merit excommunication. I confess, my Horizon is very narrow, (as men that are of no heighth, have no large prospect) and mine eyes are weak, and do not discern all that I might, and my memory as frail to re­tain all those species and notions, which sometime perchance I have received; but sure I did never meet with (or have forgotten) any clear evidence in anti­quity, that warranted the distinction between Excommunication and Suspensi­on, as now it is apprehended and practised, or that any were excluded from the [Page 191]Communion antonomastically, but such as had been first separate from all Com­munion, or to speak properly, from simple Communion.

The Apologist tells us indeed, that Antiquity hath distinguished between Excommunication and Suspension, but they verifie it by no evidence, or testi­mony, save their own, and we should advise them, rather to imitate Pythagoras his Scholars in their silence, than to emulate their Master in his Ipse dixit. Their Margin seems to quote Ames, as asserting what they affirm, but though that learned man distinguish in the place cited, between the greater and the lesser Excommunication, Cas. consci. l. 4. c. 29. sect. 29. yet he produceth neither Scripture nor authority to back that distinction, (who elsewhere plainly confesseth, that Suspension is not ex singulari Christi instituto.) They say, the Paper it self makes the Ex­communicate but one sort of the excluded: True, but doth it say, or doth it follow from what it said, that the suspended were another sort? The others suffered exclusion for natural disabilities, we are speaking now of those that were separate for sins, which are moral defects, and among those, though the Paper distinguish Penitents from Excommunicate, it was not because all those under penance, had not also been excommunicated, but because all excommunicate were not Penitents, these later being (as I said before) com­munionis ecclesiasticae candidati; it was conceded them as a favour to do pe­nance, in order to their redintegration, which to the others was not as yet vouchsafed.

But however the Apologists (like the Ostrich leave their Eggs in the dust, that any foot may crush them, and so) have deserted all incubation upon su­spension, yet I am not ignorant that some others have engaged in a vindication of the practice and exercise thereof, in the primitive times; but however their sheets like that of Parrhasius, may seem real to other Painters, yet they are but painted.

They shew us, 1. That divers sorts of men were not admitted to the Eucha­rist, which were not under excommunication. And we grant it, but we ask, if it necessarily follow that they must be persons suspended, that is, Ab excommu­nicatis solis poe­nitentia peti poterit. Alba­spinus not. in c. 2. ep. 3. Innocent. ad Exup. p. 143. Multi reperie­bantur excom­municati qui circum fores ecclesiae poeni­tentiam flagi­tabant. Idem. de vet. eccles. ritib. l. 2. obser. 4. p. 240. Per poenitentiam ab excommunicatione sive à peccato excommunicationis, ut loquuntur antiqui canones, liberabantur, Ibid. obs. 3. p. 227. Cum excom­mun [...]cato poenitentia concederetur—ante poenitentiam meminerimus poenitentem excommunica­tum fuisse—& poenitentiae benedictione eum ab excommunicatione liberatum fuisse. Ib. p. 242. obs. 4. Aug. ep. 108. tom. 2. p. 98. 3. concil. Tolet. can. 12. & 6. concil. Tolet. can. 7, & 8. item Albas. not in can. p. 92, & 104, Idem de vet. eccl. rit. l. 2. obs. 4 p. 241. such as were onely debarred the Lords Table, and that immediately, without having been first excommunicated, or cut off from the body of Christ his Church, before they were kept off from his body in the Sacrament, or without being first sepa­rated from a Communion in all Ordinances, aswell as that of the Eucharist? for this is that which they call Suspension, and this is that which they must as­sert out of antiquity, unless they will give us a Cloud in stead of Juno. And this we deny, and gainsay, that there were any such persons, or any such eccle­siastick censure. Those censured persons that were kept off from the Lords Table, and yet lay not under Excommunication, were Penitents; who indeed were not excommunicate, but had been, and were in the way of redintegrati­on with the Church, from whose Communion they had been segregated, and though in the way of their reuniting, they were joyned first by one piece, and [Page 192]then by another, and did communicate first in other Ordinances, before they did in the Eucharist, yet they were first excluded from all, not that one of the Lords Supper; and although at the fourth and last concoction of penance, were admitted to Communion in all save that one, yet at first a total remotion was the terminus à quo, whence they began to move farther in order to their resti­tution and rest, and however some had the Salve ready, assoon as the Wound was inflicted, and it seems were sentenced unto penance without their Petiti­ons, and a determinate time limited how long they should lye under it, yet the very adjudging to penance, implied a former separation from Communion in all Ordinances, and not onely and immediately from the Eucharist. This might be multifariously verified, but as one Caesar contained many Marii, so one testimony of Augustine shall virtually involve many, and he tells us, Agunt etiam homines poenitentiam, si post baptismum ità peccaverint, ut excommu­nicari & postea reconciliari mereantur, sicut agunt in omnibus Ecclesiis illi qui pro­priè poenitentes appellantur. Penitents had peculiar habits, being lapp'd in sack­cloth and ashes, their hair was polled, they came not neer their wives, nor in­termeddled with publick business, nothing of which is enjoyned or inflicted upon suspended persons. And Albaspinus informs us, Iisdem exorcismis paci restituerentur poenitentes, quam catechumeni in Christianam familiam transierant, unde dignoscitur de utris (que) idem judicium apud antiquos fuisse. We need not then be prompted that Excommunication differed from Penance, for we acknow­ledg that they were different conditions, as are also aegritudo & neutralitas con­valescentiae, but the one is but a step from the other; yet neither of these con­ditions was to be under Suspension. Amongst all those sorts of Penitents there was none properly suspended, that is, immediately and onely removed from the Lords Table, there were sundry degrees of them, and those degrees passed under several notions in divers ages and places, but no Church Lexicon will warrant that any of these denominations was synonymous with suspended, as Suspension is now understood and practised; [...], separatus, is a term we grant appropriate to a person excommunicate, because the Ancients knew no separation but by excommunication; but why [...], non ac­ceptus, non admissus, exors, should be translated suspensus, as that word is now commonly accepted, Can. 13. [...] Zonar. annot. in can. 12. se­cundun [...] ipsius comput. (though we shall allow the Translation in that sense wherein the notion was anciently used) and not rather be synonymous with that other of [...], or denote Penitents, while it signifieth onely not to be received into Communion, (as Penitents were not, although they differed from the excommunicates) and as in the same Canon of the Apostles (whence the instance is t [...]ken) [...] and [...] is used for such receiving, and [...] for the receiver, is (I suppose) a writ that bears no teste but meipso. And to argue, some were not received into Communion, therefore they were suspended, is a fallacious affirming of the Species from the G [...]nus. But Zonaras set it out of question by interpreting it of one seeking to be or­dained, and not yet approved or accepted in one place, and was therefore for­bidden to be ordained in another.

2. They vouch Antiquity to warrant, that some waited divers years till they were admitted to the Eucharist; and we acknowledg it, but know no reason why it should be thereupon inferred, that these were persons suspended, that long expectation being never the proper passion of Suspension, for the Cate­chumeni [Page 193]were long in subliming, and the Penitents especially, upon every step of their rise and re-admission, made some stay and commorancy, as be­fore hath been declared, and their probation was of more or less duration, respectively to their offences, and to the customes of several ages, and several Churches.

3. They would perswade us, that to be put from the Communion was onely to be denied the Eucharist, and that therefore Suspension is legible in all those Canons, whereby a deprivation of the Communion is decreed. But surely, they betray their own judgment to be weak, or hope that ours is so, that make this allega­tion. Albaspinus will roundly tell them, L. 2. obs. 8. p. 258. to suppose this word Communion ought to be taken for the Eucharist, — is a notable folly and ignorance, which he cannot incurre that is but meanly versed in turning over the Writings of the Fathers, or in the knowledg of Antiquity. And his very first observation might have better informed them, L. 1. c. 1. p. 2. & 5. that the Communion extends more largely than to the Eucharist, — and comprehends all those things which pertain to holy things, the usage of life and society of men; and he concludes that the custome and use of this word as now it is, is much deflected from the true, le­gitimate, and ancient acception thereof, L. 1. obs. 4. p. 41 which is scarce ever used for the Eu­charist, unless some other word be appended to it, yet upon this false account much stress is laid upon the first Council of Arles, as if it decreed Suspension, 1 Arelat. can. 3.4.7.19. because it prescribed a separating from the Communion, whereas it is clear, that as abstinere eos à communione, à communione separari, à communione excludi, non communicare, are the forms of censure indifferently and univocally used in the Council. So in the second of Arles, alienus à fratrum communione, 2 Arelat. can. 19.21.25.31.23.ab Ec­clesiae liminibus arceri, ab Ecclesia alienus, ab Ecclesia excludi, ab Ecclesiasticis con­ventibus removeri, are but the same things in other notions, which are frequent also in other Councils, and cannot be restrained to, or expounded of Suspen­sion from the Lords Table, but a separation from the Church and Ecclesiasti­cal Assemblies, (whereunto persons suspended are admitted.) And if to be separate from the Communion, had been onely to be kept from the Sacrament, then to receive the Communion must consequently be to partake the Eucharist. Not. in concil. Elib. can. 1. & de vet. Eccles. rit. l. 1. obs. 1. & 11. & not. in can. 12. concil. Arel. 2. & can. 12. concil. Vasens. &c. But Albaspinus clearly shews, that many at their decease were received to the Communion without the Eucharist. And out of the second Council of Arles, he proves that some who happened to dy before they had finished their pe­nance, yet had given signs of repentance, were restored to the Communion after their death, by the receiving of their oblations, when there could be no re­ception of the Eucharist, and accipere communionem, was onely to be absolved, and the Communion was fidelium societas, jus societatis, jus quod quis habere pos­sit in societate fidelium & corpore Christianorum, which was analogous to the jus civitatis among the Romans, whereunto some think the Church had reference, and therefore there is rarely in the Canons any mention of Absolution, it be­ing signified by these words, communion, society, consortship, and reconciled; and notum est (saith Albaspinus) reconciliationem esse ab Eucharistia distinctam, ipsám (que) reconciliationem nihil aliud esse, quàm corpori fidelium restitui eos, à quo peccata illos distraxerant, poenitentésque de ea, non verò de Eucharistia esse solici­tos. Beside this censure, to be separate from the Communion, was generally denounced for the greatest offences, so that if thereby Suspension onely be to be understood, we should be at as great a loss, and asmuch to seek of Excom­munication, [Page 194]as now we are of Suspension; and the latter would have justled out the former, and left no matter for it to work upon, for it self alone would do all, and the lean Cow devour the fat; and seeing the sacrificing to Idols, which the Eliberin Councel calls Crimen principale, and summum scelus, and Tertullian, Cyprian, Eliberin. Can. 1. & 52. and other Fathers account the greatest offence, was onely censured with separation from the Communion, and the Libellaici, such as privately re­nounc'd their Religion under their hands, dispersers of infamous Libels, were sentenced to be anathematized: if to be separate from the communion, had bin onely to be suspended, and to be anathematized were to be excommunicate, at least if it were not more than simple excommunication, viz. dirarum devotio, it would be very admirable, that the greater crime should be adjudged to the lesser, and the lesser offence to the greater punishment. And if not to com­municate were always strictly and onely to be understood of having no Com­munion in the Eucharist, the 28. Canon of the Eliberin Councel, would look with a sad aspect upon our Apologists, which in joyns Episcopum ab eo qui non communicat munera accipere non debere, for this would bring them to as great a penury of common bread, as they have brought upon their people of Sacra­mental, since they should then have nor Tithes nor Offerings, but from five or sixe in a Parish; for about that number are those whom they admit to the Sa­crament, and in some of their Parishes, I think not one hath admission.

Fourthly, the notion of abstaining hath made some to surfeit with excess of confidence to have found some tract of Suspension in the Road-way of the an­cient Discipline; but they are mistaken in their Trace, and it is another Game than they hunt after; for though some learned men; both Protestant and Pa­pists, straining to suit the ancient practice to some resemblance with the mo­dern, and set the Sunne to the clock, have supposed that the abstenti were per­sons suspended; and that abstincre per quinquennium, & ut pauco tempore abstineat, was only to be separate from the Eucharist, yet notwithstanding, 1. as this term of abstention (if I be not deceived) is as often used as a forme of censuring in the Councel of Eliberis, Concil. Elib. can. 16. & 21. Can. 20, 62, 34, 37, 40, 41, 49, 52. as in half of all the other Synods, so there we finde it promiscuously and synonymously made use of with those forms, ab Ecclesia ar­ceri, ab Ecclesiae communione arceri, alienus ab Ecclesia haberi, penitus ab Ecclesia absici, anathematizari; &c. which beyond all possibility of Contest, denote an Excommunication. 2. In those expressions were Censures denounced for as small offences, Can. 49. & 50. as they were in that form of abstaining; for I should think it was no greater crime to permit those fruits which they received with thanksgi­ving to God, to be blessed by Jews, than to eate with them; yet the former was punished expresly, Can. 16. & 61. with casting out of the Church, and the latter with abstai­ning. 3. We may observe, that in this very Council, abstention was inflicted for great crimes, as giving their daughters in marriage to Jews and Hereticks, (which was forbidden by other Canons under pain of Excommunication,) and marrying the Wives Sister; l. 2. obser. 3. p. 10. whereas in those times, Lev [...]ssima peccata multorum annorum excommun catione luebantur, saith Albaspinus, (where take up by the way this observation, That if the smallest faults were punish'd with Excommu­nication, there was no matter left for Suspension to practise upon.) 4. When for Usury the same Councel sentenceth a Clerk, Can. 20. beside degradation, to abstain; and a Lay man to be cast out of the Church, I should conceive it denounceth but the same Censure on both, since it is not like the Church would castigate [Page 195]that sinne in a Clerk, with a lesser punishment, in whom this was a greater sin, especially since as under the Law, Albasp. l. 2. obs. 34. p. 429. Erasmus in Cyprian. l. 1. epist. 11. p. 38. secundum edit. suam. Pamelius an­not. in epist. 62. secundum suam edit. & Goulart. S. 13 p. 172. & epist. 38. S. 10. p. 91. Can. 61. In Cypriani epist. l. 3. ep. 14. p. 93. Albas. not. in can. 47. concil. Elib. p. 68. Idem de vet. eccles. rit. l. 2. obs. 22. p. 320, 322. the sinne-offering of the Priest was as great as of all the Congregation; so Leo tells us, Haec quae in aliis Ecclestae membris non vocantur ad culpam, in illis tamen habeantur illicita; and therefore whosoever had born civil office, been a souldier, or done penance, was uncapable of holy orders. 5. In the ancient Idiom to abstain was onely to separate and remove; and con­sequently abstentus was but [...]; for so Erasmus tells us in his Expli­cation of the words peculiar to Cyprian, prefixed to his Edition of that Father, and upon that place abstinendo diaconum (whose [...]ence was none of the least, having lyen with professed Virgins) he notes absinere pro amovere; and Pame­lius in his Annotations specifies what kinde of Separation or Removal that was, viz. Non separare amovere simpliciter; sed separare à communione; and he more plainly describes it, by saying, Peculiaris penè Cypriana phrasis quâ absten­tum pro excommunicato & abstinere pro excommunicare usurpat — quanquam aliâ periphrasi saepe id circumloquitur, ejicere & de Ecclesia pellere. 6. It is most evident by the first Council of Toledo, that with such as were under abstention, it was forbidden to have any Commerce, (aut colloqui, aut convivari;) which yet was never prohibited towards persons suspended, but onely with such as were excommunicate. 7. That abstinere was first to be removed from all com­munion, may appear by the same Council of Eliberis, where he that marrieth the Wives Sister is censured to abstain from the Communion for five yeares, unless the necessity of his infirmity enforce, velociùs dari pacem, where by peace, is meant fraternity, absolution, and reconciliation, or admission into the com­pany of the Church, as Erasmus expoundeth, and Albaspinus intimates; which shews, that he was before put from the Brother-hood, and cut off from the body of the Church by Excommunication. 8. Albaspinus tells us, Abstenti nec poeni­tentiae compotes essent; and farther, Idololatras & abstentos ad Ecclesiarum aditum ibi fletu & gemitu elicere misericordiam studuisse; Which renders it evident, that the abstenti were the same with excommunicate; and that these two notions were (in his judgment) Synonymous, Arel. can. 3. as appears also by what he otherwhere de­livers, ab hac societate non solùm arcebantur haeretici, schismatici, abstenti, sed etiam poenitentes & Catechumeni, where abstenti must stand for excommunicate, or else they were omitted by him, who were principally excluded from the Church. 9. Whereas the first Councel of Arles decrees, de his qui arma pro­jiciunt in mare, placuit eos abstinere à communione; Albaspinus also himself gives the sense and effect of that Canon, Ut qui in pace arma projiciunt, excom­municentur, and addes this note, Pauco tempore à societate fidelium abstineant, which is more than Suspension (the suspended being not debarred from the society of the faithful) as Abstention from the Communion, is more than Se­paration from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, the former being of greater latitude than the latter. Lastly, we shall often finde, that after abstention from the Communion, penance was imposed in order to restitution; and pe­nance presupposeth a precedent Excommunication. But if Abstention were Suspension, and to be under Penance, was also to be suspended only from the Eucharist, then Suspension had been imposed to obtain a restoring from Suspen­sion; and when we reade in the Canons, poenitentiam agere quaerunt, it should seem they desired to be suspended; but neither was penance like to have been [Page 196]desired by them, unless to get out of a greater evil, under which they lay be­fore, viz. Excommunication.

4. They produce Testimonies to prove, That some were rejected until death, but were not excommunicate so long; for some of those might have the Sacrament at their dying hour, which persons excommunicate could not have. But

If they were rejected until death, they were so long also excommunicate; for in that second Canon of Neo-Caesarea, (which is referred to) Mulier si duobus nupserit fratribus, abjiciatur in diem mortis, sed propter humanitatem in extremis suis Sacramentis reconciliari oportet, ita tamen ut si forte sanitatem recuperaverit, Matrimonio soluto ad poenitentiam admittatur: It is rendred manifest by the first Canon, that this Censure was Excommunication; for there absiciatur is explai­ned by an addition of Extra Ecclesiam; and casting out of the Church is Ex­communication: neither doth it follow, that she was not excommunicate so long, because dying, she might have the Sacrament; for, first, as we cannot be convinced that reconciliari Sacramentis, doth properly and onely signifie the ad­mission to the Sacrament, but thereby by a Synecdoche is understood perfecta communio, & maxima & absolutissima reconciliatio, wherein a right also to the Eu­charist is involv'd; Justellus in­stead of Sacra­mentis recon­ciliari oportet renders it, poe­nitentiam ha­bebit. L. 2. obser. 4. p. 239. Idololatrae, mae­chi, homicidae, apostatae. Concil. Elib. can. 3. Arel. 2. can. 24. Cyprian. l. 1. ep. 38. Cartag. can. 76. Nicen. can. 13. yet though it were in their sens to be understood, nevertheless though no excommunicate person, in sensu composito, could partake of the Eu­charist, (as neither could a person suspended, without a contradiction) yet he that stood excommunicate, might in extremis, in fine, in necessitate infirmitatis, as the Canons speak, be admitted to penance, to be assumed and undergone, if he did recover into health; and in the interim receive not onely the simple Communion, but also the Sacrament, which seems clear and demonstrable from this very Canon; as also doth that other truth, that men were first excommuni­cate, before they were made Penitents. Adducor ut credam (saith Albaspinus) facinorosis & ex omni scelerum & flagitiorum coliuvione concretis hominthus, vel etiamsi in ea praecipites peccata abeant, poenitentiam (modò illa peteretur) nun­quam denegatam; and he cites the words of Caelestine, in an Epistle to the Bi­shops of France, Poenitentiam morientibus denegari — quid hoc rogo aliud est, quam morienti mortem addere, ejus (que) animam nè absolvi possit occidere? And howsoever in some of the first Times, and during the ardour of Persecution, for some sinnes (four sorts of which Albaspinus recounteth) besides those which Tertullian calls non delicta sed monstra; and offences a second time lapsed into (where it was decreed, in fiae Communionem non dandaem, ne lusisse de Do­minica communione videantur) the Communion was denyed to be afforded in their dying condition, (which manifests the falseness of that over-bold asser­tion, That none were excommunicate until death) yet as this was decreed with a condition express'd (nisi digna satisfactione poenituerint, as the Canon speaks) and as it appears by Gyprian, and by the third Canon of the first Coun­cil of Arles, that Communion was especially denyed to men at their death, be­cause they had not petitioned to do their penance, while they lived in health. So not onely the fourth Councel of Carthage, held in the fourth Century, ex­presly [Page 197]decreed, That penance should be permitted to dying persons (which sup­poseth them then under Excommunication) and then that the Eucharist should be immediatly exhibited to them, if they desired it, with condition of perfor­ming their penance injoyned, in case they survived: But the great Council of Nice also determined, Ut si quis vitâ excedat, ultimo & necessariv viatico mi­nimè privetur; si vero desperatus & Communionem assecutus supervixerit, sit inter eos qui Communionem orationis tantummodo consequuntur. Generaliter autem omni cuilibet in exitu posito & Eucharisitiae participa [...]onem petenti, Episcopus cum examinatione oblationem impertiat; where if Viaticum be not the Eucharist, (as Zonaras, Balsamon, and Casaubon suppose it to be) but onely the simple Com­munion, as Albaspinus, and others conceive; yet all, none dissenting, agree, that the Lords Supper is spoken of in the latter part of the Canon; and beside the Story of Serapion is Lippis & Tonsoribus nota, known to all those that have but half an eye in Ecclesiastical History, and have top'd off the least haires thereof.

5. But they were at a greater fault, and ranne away with a falser sent, that hunting after Testimonies for Suspension among the Records of Antiquity, tell us, that Penitents were persons only suspended the Lords Table, & not excommunicate, because some adjudged to penance, were admitted to the Laicke Communion: for if Penance were Suspension, then the privation of the Communion could not be Suspension, because it was provided by sundry Canons, that such as were deprived of the Communion, should be put to doe penance before they could be reconciled and restored; and that had been as much, in effect, as if they should be suspended, in order to discharge them of Suspension. But then secondly, the Lay-Communion, being onely Laicorum jus in corpore Christi mystico, & Ecclesia, as it was contradistinguish'd to Ecclesiastical, or Sacerdotal Com­munion; the being put into the Lay-Communion, was neither the doing of Penance, nor any essential consequent thereof, (though perchance some that were adjudged to be degraded from being Clergy-men, might also, Concil. Eliber. can. 50. as their of­fences were in merit, be sentenced to penance, Ut erat expressum in eorum elo­giis & judiciis, saith Albaspinus; and it appears, that some, when they had fini­shed their penance, were put into the Lay-Communion,) but formally and properly to be set in the Lay-Communion was onely a degrading or deposing of a Clerk, and reducing him to the condition of a Lay-man, being a censure onely inflicted on the Clergy, and but the same which Augustine calls Degra­dation, and the Councels Deposition, and removing from Order, Concil. Elib. can. 51. Arelat. 1. can. 26. Chamier. Tom. 4. l. 9. c. 3. and all Eccle­siastical Office; as appears not onely by that of Gyprian, Ut Laicus communicet, non quasi locum sacerdotis usurpet; but by a multitude of other Testimonies pro­duced by Chamier, Albaspinus, and others: To argue therefore, they were ad­mitted to the Laick Communion, ergo, they were not excommunicate, is in ef­fect to conclude they were made Lay-men, ergo, they were not excommunica­ted. And if Penance were Suspension, and the Lay-Communion were any part or appendage of penance, it will carry a consequent implication, that all Lay-men were suspended, or else that to be suspended, was to be admitted to the Eucharist, as Lay-men were. And let the Lay-communion be, as Baronius, and others would have it, to partake the Sacrament without the Railes, or could it be as Bellarmine supposeth, to receive in one kinde; yet in either way there was a [Page 198]communicating at the Lords Table, Non diffiteor qui communicabat laicè, accepisse eucharistiam more laicorum, Albaspin. de veter. eccles. rit. l. 1. obser. 4. p. 4. saith Albaspinus, so as neither could penance formal­ly have any affinity with the Laick Communion, nor was any Penitent fully and perfectly in such Communion, because during that state, he could not partake of the Sacrament: but when his penance was ended, he intirely communicated as a Lay-man; that is, had the right and privileges of a Laick onely, because he was not restored to Holy Orders; whereof, indeed, he that had done pe­nance, was ever afterward [...]ncapable: And therefore I have laboured under much wonder to what end this Argument was produced. I remember Maldo­nat tells us of a Text, Luke 2.34. Facilior fuisset hic locus si nemo eum exposuisset; and per­chance we might have been more facile to beleeve that there might have been some evidence for Suspension in Antiquity, if those that have so confidently assumed to prove it, had not fallen so short of their undertakings, and our ex­pectation; who as Scaliger said of Baronius, that he did Annales facere, non scri­bere; so they have rather made than found their proofs, and have rather impo­sed upon, than informed us, so that we may not know, unless we shall continue ignorant.

But having cleared these mists, let us look what purer light can be reflected upon us from the Monuments of the ancient Church, that we may see to trace their foot-steps, and discern what way they walked. The notion of Suspension is scarce found in the ancient Fathers: Augustine often speaks of Church-cen­sures, and sometime specifies the several Acts of Discipline, Correption, Excom­munication, Degradation; but I have not met with the name, much less the thing in all his Disputes against the Donatists, where it was most likely to have occurred. And had the Church in his time known any such Censure (especial­ly inflicted for want of a visible worthiness) he could never have said, as is pre-alleaged, Si peccata tanta non sunt ut excommunicandus quisquam homo judice­tur, non debet se à quotidiana medicina Dominici corporis separare; or had it been denizon'd in Chrysostome's age, he would not have said, that those which were unworthy to partake of the Eucharist, were likewise unworthy to joyn in the Prayers and Hymnes.

But as Alexander scorned to steal a Victory in the night, but would get it in clear day, so we shall hide nothing that we can bring to light, which may be of advantage to their cause, though it seem to have been in the dark to all those which I have met with, that have defended it, who have said less for them­selves, than might be said for them, and are therefore obnoxious to David's in­crepation, who when they take themselves to be valiant men, and who is like them in Israel? yet have not kept their Lord so, but that any one of the people may come to destroy him. But nevertheless, though Tellias get these new Pipes, no Antinegidas need to be troubled, for they will not sound to his Tune, nor make any judicious man to dance after him.

To deal ingenuously, as the Canons of the ancient Councels will lend the best Prospect of the Discipline of the Church, those being the Mould wherein that was cast; so we shall acknowledge, that in those Canons we sometimes meet with the notion of Suspension, like as we doe with those of Retentus, Sequt­stratus, Remotus, Segregatus, Exclusus, all of them Synonymous, and all to be limi­ted and defined by the terminus à quo, that from which was the Separation: [Page 199]But I doe with some confidence assert, that suspended is there taken in the pro­per, not the modern appropriate notion, signifying a deferring of, or detain­ing from; and that not onely this one Ordinance of the Lords Supper, but all Ordinances; and is, in effect, but Excommunication, carrying onely besides a connotation of a future restitution to Communion, after penance done, or sa­tisfaction given. The same words have not always the same sense in all Ages, nor signifie the same things, else we might conclude the Assemblies of the Hea­then to be Churches, and their Clerks of the Market to be Bishops; and to ar­gue, that the term Suspension is found in ancient Records; therefore there was such a thing, as use hath since made the word to import, carries as much reason as the Papists have to conclude, that because prayer for the dead was used in the ancient Church, therefore it related to Purgatory; or is with as much sense as Valderama proves the order of Jesuites out of Scripture, because it is there said, that God hath called us to the society of his Son Jesus. But that Suspension in the old Canons implies not a deferring of, or detaining from the Eucharist onely and immediately, but a with-holding from all Ecclesiastical Communion, is very clear and evident, because it is always said to be;

First, either a suspension from Communion, Agathens. can. 64. as in the Agathen Councel (one instance among many) and Communion was comprehensive of more than a Society in partaking the Lords Supper, it is a suspension from the communion of the Church, and from Catholique communion, Aurel. can. 23. & 15. can. 31. as in the fourth Councel of Orleance; neither of which ever was, nor can be restrained and limited to fel­lowship in one Sacrament; and in the latter Canon it was denounced for Idolatry, the greatest sinne, and therefore not like to be censured with the lesser punishment: and in the same Councel it is suspension from the church; but into the church containing, men now under Suspension are admitted, and from the church contained, are not cut off.

Secondly, it was a Suspension from all fellowship in talking and eating with others; and therefore not a suspension from the Eucharist onely; neither are ever those which are put under this younger Suspension, (which is called the lesser excommunication) proscribed from all conference and society in food; but that the ancient Suspension was attended with such an interdict, appears li­quidly enough by the second councel of Arles, Arel. 2. can. 30.Si à communione sacerdotali (which was to be, and act as a clerk or ecclesiastical person) fuerit suspensus episcopus (which seems the truer reading, though some copies have suspectus) yet if this were all, it were but onely deposition or degradation, which excluded not from commerce, but that which follows, shews it attended with a greater punishment, non solùm à clericorum, sed etiam à totius populi colloquio at (que) convivio placuit excludi donec resip [...]scens ad sanitatem redire festinet. Aurel. 1. can. 11. But if this canon leave it obscure, yet more clearly is it apparent by the first councel of Orleance, decreeing, Placuit eos à communione suspendi, & ab omnium Catholico­rum conviviis separari.

Thirdly, It was a suspension of that nature, as whosoever was blasted there­with could not be redintegrated, but by doing penance (but none were made Penitents that had not first been excommunicate) It is legible in the third councel of Toledo, Secundum formam Canonum antiquorum, detur poenitentia, Tolet. 3. can. 11. & 12.hoc est, ut priùs eum quem sui poenitet sacti, á communione suspensum faciat inter reli­quos [Page 200]poenitentes, ad manus impositionem crebrò recurrere, expleto autem satisfactio­nis tempore, sicut sacerdotalis contemplatio probaverit, eum communioni restituat; and it is apparent out of that more ancient councel, Arel. 2. can. 11. the second of Arles, where those that sacrificed to Idols are thus censured, Duobus annis inter Catechumenos, triennio inter poenitentes, habeantur à communione suspensi. Not again to reflect on this, that it carries no verisimilitude, that so great a crime was sentenced to no greater a punishment, than removal onely from the Sacrament: for expla­nation of this canon, we must know, that to be among the Catechumens, and among the Hearers, Neo-Caes. can. 5. was in effect the same; and it seems by the councel of Naeo-Caesarea, that the Catechumens, at least one sort of them, such as were not genu­flectentes, passed under the notion of Auditors, (Catechumeni, id est, audientes) and to be an Hearer was the second degree of penance; and among the Cate­chumens and Hearers, though not confusedly, yet in one common place, stood also those that were for a certain time excommunicate, and likewise Jewes and Heathens; for the sourth councel of Carthage, wherein Augustine was pre­sent, decreed, Ut episcopus nullum prohibeat ingredi ecclesiam & audire verbum Dei sive gentilem sive haereticum, us (que) ad missam Catechumenorum (though nei­ther to the Catechumens themselves were the Gospels read, as appeares by the councel of Aurange, [...]. Arausic. can. 18.ne Catechumenis Evangelia legantur) where also incident­ly observe, that as the ancient church admitted not all to eat the Sacrament, so they permitted not all to hear all the words. But as those that were under Niddui might be present at Divine Service, if they kept their distance of four cubits, so Albaspinus shews that about the sixth age those that were for a set time excommunicate, De vet. eccles. rit. l. 2. obser. 24. p. 336, 338. obs. 29. p. 390, 391. Poenitentes tertii gradus [...] l. 2. obser. 32. p. 405. Poenitentia per appropriatio­nem; primus & secundus gra­dus dispositio­nes erant qui­bus ad tertium exequendum pararetur. obs. 24. p. 357. & obser. 4. p. 243. did also enter into the church, and stood among, or neer the Catechumeni, to hear some portions of the Word, and Expositions there­of, In eodem loco consistere, ibi (que) provolvere se ad genua, & aliquas preces inter­ponere, though they departed before the Mass of the Catechumens, that is, be­fore their Prayers, and before the Sermon too; as also did the Catechumens themselves. But to prosecute the interpretation of the former canon, when those suspended persons advanced farther, and from the Catechumens step'd to be among the Poenitents (whereby Albaspinus understands the Succumbentes) even those in this third degree of Penance, were not onely suspended from the Eucharist, but separated from communion in sacred offices, Orationes, preces, sacra, sacrificia, oblationes, agapae, Stationes, vigiliae, jejunia & similia, — ea omnia poenitentibus aeque ac excommunicatis deerant, sai [...]h Albaspinus, so as it is very evident, that in this canon to be suspended from communion, was to be ex­communicate, because of the several steps of penance which were to be gone over in order to raising and restoring to communion.

Fourthly, Ilerden. can. 5 if In the Ilerden councel, Suspension is expounded by Segregation from the body of the church, Veraciter as flictos non diu suspendere vel desidiosos prolixiore tempore ab ecclesiae corpore segregare.

Fifthly, if I have not failed in my observation and account, the term of Suspen­sion is but twice onely, less often mentioned in the fourth councel of Orleance, than in all the preceding Synods; but it is there arbitrarily, and indifferently [Page 201]used with those formes, which without all colour of contradiction import Ex­communication, viz. ex consortio fidelium vel ecclesiae communione pellatur, Aurel. 4. [...] 16.12, 13, 20, 22.ha­beatur extraneus, pacem ecclesiae non habeat, ab ecclesiae limmibus arceatur, ex­communicationis severitas imponatur. And not to advance farther toward the West or Occident and Declination of Discipline, but to set up our pillars with a nihil ultra at the fifth Council of Orleance, 5 Aurel. can. 2. while it decrees that none be suspen­ded from the Communion for small and light causes: had the Fathers under­stood Suspension in the modern sense, they had rather abolished, than regula­ted it, by taking away the proper object whereupon it worketh, viz. lesser and higher offences; and when they adde, that Suspension be inflicted for such of­fences for which the ancient Fathers drove the Offenders out of the Church, they did not so farre relax the reyns of Discipline, as to censure onely with Suspension from the Lords Table, those whom the Ancients punish'd by ca­sting out of the Church; but their Discipline had made them know no distin­ction between Suspension, and casting out of the Church; and therefore they used them univocally, or the one as an Exegesis of the other.

Lastly, we shall also fairly confess, that in ancient Monuments we meet with those expressions of removing from the Altar, and separating from the communion of Sacraments, and of being reconciled thereunto; but we are convinced to judge, that they onely by a Synecdoche complicated with a [...], signifie a rejection from, and restitution to a plenary and absolute communion, in gene­ral, by one and the most excellent part thereof: And this may be sufficiently proved by several passages in St. Augustine's Disputes against the Donatists, Epist. 11 [...]. c. 3. tom. 2. p. 108. especially against Parmenian: But we need re-search no farther than that place in his Epistles, which we have so lately agitated; for having said, Si tanta est plaga peccati at (que) impetus morbi, ut medicamenta talia differenda sunt, authoritate Antistitis debet quis (que) ab altari removeri, & eadem authoritate reconciliari, hoc est enim indignè accipere, si eo tempore accipiat quo debet agere poenitentiam, non ut arbitrio suo, cum libet, vel auferat se communioni, vel reddat, caeterùm si peccata tanta non sunt, ut excommunicandus quisquam homo judicetur, non debet se à quo­tidiana medicina Dom nici corporis separare, where we see plainly, that ab altari removeri, & excommunicandum judicari, are either consignificant, or exegetical, as well as that he thought that none were to separate from the Lords Table, but for such sins as rendred demeritoriously excommunicate. And though this be a pearl of so great price, that he which finds it, cannot but be willing to sell all the false notions that he hath to the contrary for the buying thereof; yet it is no Union, though one, yet not the onely Orient testimony, there being many others like and equal to it: The first Council of Toledo decreeing, 1. Tolet. [...]a. 2. that publi­cam poenitentiam gerens sub Concilio, divino reconciliatus fuerit altari, implies, that to be reconciled to the Altar, was to be absolved of Excommunication, and re-admitted to communion with the Church; whereof to partake of the Altar, was the most perfect and absolute act; for he that was thus reconciled was under penance, and all penitents were such as had been excommunicate. The Ilerden Council determineth, Ilerden. can. 2. Communione corporis Domini priventur ità ut his duobus annis vigiliis orationibus & elcemosynis pro viribus, quas Dominus dona­verit, expientur; quod si definito tempore negligentiores, &c. prorogandi ipsius poenitentiae tempus, in potestate maneat sacerdotis; whereby it is manifest, that by deprivation of the communion of the body of the Lord, as the chiefest part of [Page 202]Church-fellowship was the loss of all other Ecclesiastical Society, or Excom­munication intended; for as persons suspended are not sentenced to such con­tinual Watchings, Prayers, and Alms; so whosoever was a Penitent had been excommunicate. The second Council of Tours defining, Eos ab Ecclesia sanct­repellant,Turonen. can. 3.nec participare sancto altari permittant, manifestly declares, that they understood a repelling from the Church, and non-permitting to partake of the Altar, to be identical: but such as of latter times are suspended, are never re­pulsed from the Church, which is more than to be debarred the Eucharist. And lastly, Can. 14. the fourth Council of Orleance defining, Tam diu habeatur à commu­nione altaris, vel omnium fratrum ac filiorum charitate suspensus, makes the latter to be exegetical to the former; and evidently proves, that to be suspended was to be cast out from all fellowship with the Brotherhood, and Sonnes of the Church.

Wherefore seeing the ancient Church knew not their Suspension, which is the onely penal, and indeed main act of their Discipline; yet for them to pre­tend to affinity with the ancient Discipline, is a boldness like to finde as little success, as excuse; unless as that old Sycophant advised, Calumniare audacter, aliquid haerebit; so they vaunt boldly of things, in hope they will stick with some for their confidence; or as some Heathens commended the ancient Heroes for fetching their Pedegree from the Gods, though falsly, because it raised their spirits, and advantaged their reputation; so they think it will produce like effects for them to derive the descent of their Discipline from the ancient Church, though it can claim no kindred therewith.

They next come to give an account of their regard to the School-men, but they might have spared the Irony. Few are inimicous to School-learning, but they that are ignorant thereof, such indeed despise what they have not; as Gallienus when Aegypt revolted, and Gaul was lost, said, Quid? sine lino Aegyptio esse ne [...] possumus? Num sine trabeatis sag is tuta Respublica non est? and as Iovius speakes of Detractors, Fortunam suam eâ vindictae voluptate consolantur. The School indeed is a Libanon, or Forest over-grown with Thorns and Briers, yet much good Timber may there be found to build and make Beames for the Temple; and as Otho said to Salvius Cocceamus, nec patruum sibi Othonem fuisse aut obli­visceretur unquam, nut nimiùm meminisset; so shall I say of that Learning, it is not too much to be studied, nor altogether to be neglected.

They desire those that have the School-men, to consult them on the third part of Aquinas, (and if they have them, they might have given a more spe­cial direction and reference, this which they give being like Magna civitas, magna solitudo) who put it into the hands of the Minister, to deny the Sacra­ment to all, whom they judge scandalous sinners, or unworthy persons. Reso. They say, there is a Fish, whereof a part being eaten, it proves poyson, if the whole, an Antidote; so the doctrine of the School in this point being partially and mutilously set forth, may seem to make for them; but fully and plainly represented, will speak much against them. This dissertation will give us some Prosopography of the Apologists, and reflect light to see how forward they are to impose upon others (if these passages were oculis subjecta, and entred by the horny gate) or how facile they are to be imposed upon themselves, (if they were demissa per aures, and had entry thorough the Ivory Port.)

It must therefore be recognized, that the School distinguisheth of sinners, whereof some are secret, not of publick note, or commonly diffamed, though some few, and perhaps among them, the Minister may know them to be scan­dalous in their ways. Some are publick and notorious, either by judicious sentence, confession, or such evidence of fact, as by no Tergiversation can be concealed, or gain-sayd, so as they are generally known to be flagitious. To the latter sort, the most of them (for some dissent, as Soto, and others) judge that the Priest ought to deny the Sacrament; De duplici Martyr. p. 600. S. 31. and we shall not much clash with their judgment, since such are juridice or jure, demeritoriè if not effectivè excommunicate, as we have before delivered. And however (as saith the pretended Cyprian) Tales interdum tolerat ecclesia ne provocati etiam perturbent populum Dei: sed quid prodest non ejici coetu piorum, si merueris ejici, nam ejici re­medium est, & gradus ad recuperandam sanitatem, ejectionem meruisse summa ma­lorum est, ac frustra miscetur coetut sanctorum in Templo manu facto, si summotus est à consortio Dei, & ab universo corpore mystico Christi. Vasquez 3. q. 80. art. 6. disp. 209. c. 4. p. 417. The former either se­cretly come to desire or demand the Sacrament (and a secret demand (and de­niall) is as Vasquez determines, when no other is witness thereunto, but he that denieth, and he that is denied) or publikely doe offer themselves, and so de­mand to receive it: If the demand be sccret, they prescribe, or at least allow the deniall; and onely of this occult deniall doth Suarez make those delive­ries of himself, which they recite, and imposterously apply that simpliciter, which he speakes secundùm quid, and enlarging that to any publick denial up­on publick demand, which he onely restrains and limits to occult, Accipe nunc Danaum insidias, & crimine ab uno, Disce omnes, and it is of this kinde of deniall alone, whereof he saith, quando non interveniunt intrinseca in commoda (which passage they have clip'd off from the rest) potiùs consulendum dignitati & reve­rentiae Sacramenti, quàm juri peccatoris; for this, he saith, Non est propriè puni­tio, quae judiciarium ordinem & probationem delicti requirit, sed est prudens ad­ministratio Sacramenti; and as he addeth, is a certain virtual secret, and fatherly correction, for which the proof of the offence, or confession of the offender is not al­wayes to be exspected, it being no publick judicial action, but private and hidden, and which cannot otherwise be exercised: But for such an one as is not notorious,Suarez in [...]. q. 80. art. 6. disp. 67. S. 3. p. 856, 857. S. 4. Quamdiu oc­cultum est ejus peccatum non amisit suum jus in sacie ecclesiae, & ideo habet jus in foro externo. Sylvius in 3. q. 80. art. 6. p. 336. S. 4. p. 858.though known to the Priest, or some others, to be wicked and scandalous, if he publickly de­mand the Sacrament, and come and tender himself to receive it (which he calls a virtual demand,) Suarez in this case sings another note, that the Priest with­out grievous sinne, cannot deny him the Eucharist; and in this assertion, saith he, almost all Divines agree, which he backs with many reasons: as first, To deny it him, were to diffame him. 2. Upon the denyal, follows a certain and infallible de­triment of Infamy; but upon giving it, there is no certain sacrilege of unworthy re­ceiving; for it may be the offender may be suddenly changed and inwardly con­verted, and so dispose himself, that he may worthily communicate. 3. He ought to exhibite it, to avoid scandal. 4. Because a secret sinner (that is not notorious) hath a right publickly to demand the Eucharist, and cannot be deprived of this right, un­till he be sufficiently convinced of his crime.

And he farther addes what I formerly recited out of Mr. Ball, That it apper­tains to the common good and convenient Government of the Church or Common­wealth, that common good things or benefits, which are publickly to be dispensed, and distributed according to the merit and dignity of particular persons (as the Sacra­ment [Page 204]is) should not be dispensed according to the private but publick and notorious knowledg of the Administer, which he saith, is a moral Principle, which if it should not be observed, it would occasion many scandals, troubles and injuries, and Mini­sters might defame whom they list, and fein a sin and unworthiness, where there is none, and the faithfull must often▪ sear and be afraid, lest they should be defamed by the Minister.

And to those Reasons of Suarez, another (which he thinks of more efficacy) is superadded by Vasquez, Here (saith he) two Precepts concurre, one of not un­worthy administring the Eucharist,Ubi supra, c. 3. p. 409.which consists in this, That it be not administred to one unworthy; the other, of not defaming our Neighbour, nor publishing his sin; the first is a virtue of Religion against Sacrilege, the other a virtue of justice against Detraction; and though the virtue of Religion be more worthy and perfect than justice, and consequently the sin opposed to Religion be greater than the sin opposite to justice; yet the commandment of not defaming more obligeth, than the administring the Eucharist to one unworthy, and a sinner, because as Thomas saith, 2.2. q. 32. art. 4. The obligation of Mercy is preferred before Religion, for we worship God with external Sacrifices, not for himself, but for our selves and our brethren; for our benefit, not his, who receives no profit by them, and in this sense he expoundeth that of Osea 6. and Matth. 12. I will have mercy and not sacrifice. So as where they say, See the Schools say more than they would have them,

For 1. The Schools allow no power to deny the Sacrament publickly to those that in the proper judgment of the Minister are unworthy, but this power they assume, withholding it from such as were never duly censured by any other Judicatory.

2. The School warrants a publick denial unto none but notorious sinners, but they keep back the Sacrament from all that do not upon triall approve themselves Saints, and though they pretend to hold, that none are rightfully to be excluded, but such as are some way scandalous, yet actually they withhold the Communion from those that they dare not say, much less have they been sentenced to be scandalous, and are therefore more inexcusably culpable, to be like Medea, To see and approve better things and do worse.

3. The School prescribes the Sacrament to be exhibited to secret sinners, if they publickly crave it, that is, such whose sins though known to some few, and among those to the Minister, yet are not notorious; but they to prevent the vir­tual craving by their approach, and offering themselves, (like Julian who struck at Christianity rather than Christians, so) they have excommunicated the Sacrament it self out of their proper Congregations, that none might come to demand it, and those that have come to them to require it, have been denied the participation, though such as have not been patible of the definition of no­torious sinners; and though they suppose that it proves nothing, that the Schoolmen and Casuists assert, that secret sinners are not to be kept off, yet it proves their course not paralel with the line drawn out by the School, who de­ny it to those, the far greatest part whereof can be but occult sinners, and not within the definition of notorious; and it is something sure, that hereby the [Page 205]School and Casuists must consequently conclude, that when a Minister doth (as he ought) distribute the Sacrament to him whom onely by his private no­tice he knows unworthy, he doth no act simply unlawfull, by partaking of the receivers sin, or prostituting the privileges of the godly, or giving false testi­mony, nor that he is to suspend him, untill he hath rendred, upon triall, de­monstrative signs of his conversion.

They say, Suarez tells us, That a violent suspicion is enough to deny the Sacra­ment; but (as Pliny writes of the deceitfulness of the Panther) they shew forth those parts which seem fair for them, and hide the head, which would seem stern and terrible; so Suarez indeed saith this of a publick suspition, not of any private, and of such a violent suspition too, quae probabili rationi deponi non potest, for if it be onely probable suspicion, Sect. 6. p. 863. that onely sufficeth ad gene­randum dubium, non ad judicandum simpliciter de peccato alierius, and in such a case saith he, Melior est conditio possidentis, Suspect's de a­liquo crimine neganda est, si suspicio publica vehemens seu violenta, sive si laborat publica infamia; non item si est suspi­cio solùm pro­babilis vel prae­sumptuosa. Syl­vius in 3. q. 80. art. 4. p. 311. Dr. Twisse.& quando aliquis non sufficienter probatur malus, praesumendus est bonus, and a violent suspition is described to be such quae moraliter facit rem certam; such a suspition Suarez thinks sufficient, because in rebus moralibus non est quaerenda metaphysica evidentia, sed sufficit moralis cer­titudo, and therefore this violent suspition is (in Suarez his sense) equipollent to evidence of fact, or little short thereof, for otherwise that any less suspition is enough to deny the Sacrament, is so far from being the common opinion of Divines, that they commonly opine and directly resolve the contrary, as I have elsewhere manifested, and it would otherwise be contradictory to Suarez his own judgment, otherwhere delivered, viz. That the Sacrament is not to be denied, but to him that is notorious by Law or fact; and his fellow Vasquez (whom a famous Schoolman hath weighed in his ballance, and found to pon­derate more than Suarez) doth tell us, that infamy (which is I think somewhat more than suspition) Licèt sit sufficiens principium, inquirendi contra ipsum de de­licto ad poenam, non statim vldetur sufficiens ut statim puniatur tanquam manife­stus peccator, in conspectu ecclesiae, denegando ei Eucharistiam, cùm infamia illa non e [...] rei evidentia, sed ex aliquibus judiciis ortum habet, quae sufficere non debeat, ut ità graviter quis puniatur.

And seeing the publick repulsion from the Sacrament is called the lesser Ex­communication, and that being defined to be an ecclesiastical consure, Cas. consc. tract. 13. c. 1. Sect. 9. p. 254. and Ei­liucius telling us that ad ferendam censuram requiritur jurisdict [...]o fori contentiosi, so that whereas Biel taught, That whosoever sinned mortally incurred the lesser Excommunication, because he that remains in any mortal sin deprives himself of the Sacrament. Vasquez refutes this opinion as false, upon this ground, De excom. dub. 1. Sect. 7, 8. because the lesser Excommunication is an ecclesiastical censure: hence there­fore it follows, that regularly according to the Doctrine of the School, neither should the Minister alone inflict it, neither ought it to be inflicted upon suspiti­on, but according to the judicial process upon proof or confession of some crime, or evidence of the fact.

Their testimony out of Gregory may serve to assert what we confess, That for such manifest faults as seem to be inconsistent with grace, and to exclude it, a man may by authoritative sentence be put from the Communion, but tends not to prove what we deny, that he may arbitrarily be suspended, till he demon­strate himself to be in the state of grace.

They have the conscience to appeal to the Readers judgment whether there be [Page 206]not more conformity between them and antiquity, than their adversaries can pretend unto, that make no separation: But we approve, and shall cooperate in a separa­tion of others from us, by juridical censure, that are notoriously wicked, for this suits with the ancient Discipline, but not a separation (as theirs is) of our selves from them, that are not manifestly godly, no nor yet from that Church, where that laudable Discipline, though de jure approved, is not defa­cto, through some obstruction, exercised, for this sorts with the old Donatisme.

The Chymists boast much of their extractions and separations of the pure parts from the impure, but Sennertus commends an answer of Queen Elizabeth to one glorying of such spirits, If, said she, we were purely spirit, we might be cured and nourished by such spirits; so I shall say, If we were onely and alto­gether spiritual, we might have a Church universally holy, and a pure use of the Ordinances, but till we come to be so, which will be onely when we shall be as those immortal spirits, the Angels, those violent separations are like to leave us scarce any body of a Church; but because the ancient Church made some kinde of separation, and they also separate, therefore to infer, that theirs must needs be the like kinde of separating, and their way conformable to the ancient, is such another argument, as the Chymicks use, that because Ezra weighed out two vessels of fine Copper, precious as Gold, therefore they must needs forsooth be of metall transmuted or improved by Chymical artifice. Ezra 8.27.

They know not who they be that are so carefull to repell and exclude men from the Sacrament; indeed every man being his own grand flatterer, he is the first that sees his perfections, and the last that discerns his faults, and there are some that misprise their faults to be their perfections, as the Mexicans think, that to be beauty and gallantry which is the vilest deformity, to have their lips by the weight of jewels pendent in them drawn down over their chins to the im­bearing of their teeth; but if to suspend whole Congregations, not because they are proved to be wicked, but meerly because they are not approved to be Saints, (which is as if we should withhold a mans sood from him till he make proof of his good digestion) to suspend the Sacrament it self in their proper Churches, that they may better suspend their people, (which hath some affinity with Caligula's wish, That the whole City of Rome had but one neck, that he might cut it off at once) to take so much pains to justifie and defend their suspending of so many as unfit, when (as he said to his Son encountring with his Enemy, Percute qua aratrum) the same labour might have made the most of them fit, and however they shall be fitted, yet to give them no ad­mission or entrance, but onely by stepping over their threshold, which they have set up by Gods threshold: he that shall deny that this is to be care­full to exclude and keep men from the Sacrament, and as Alcibiades perswaded Pericles, to be studious rather not to give, than to give an account, so that this is to be more solicitous not to give, than to give the Sacrament: he hath been bred up in Anaxagoras his School, where in defiance of sense, it was denied that the Snow was white; and if I should do it, I should doubt that even for this I should come too near the danger of incurring some of Chrysostome's stig­matical Epithites.

Chrysostome was ere while as full as they could wish, now he is fulsom, and their stomaces cannot digest an argument collected from his words: They very calmly and with silence let pass the greatest and most forcible part of the [Page 207]testimony, and onely pick a quarrel to the application of one piece thereof. Chrysostome had said, that he that stands by and not communicates, is wicked, shameless and impudent. And the Paper thence (modestly as it could) offer­ed it to be considered, by arguing à pari, if not à fortiori, where or upon whom that censure would fall, or how it would be-reversed, if those that stand by and would, yet shall not be suffered to participate; hereupon ‘Ignescunt irae, & duris dolor ossibus haeret,’ They take this shaft into their sides, as if aimed at them, and complain of the wound, and indeed cùm vitia incessimus, reum ira manifestat, but I shall say with St. Hierom, Neminem specialiter meus sermo pulsavit, Tom. 1. ep. 2. ad Nepol. c. 26.— qui mihi irasci volu­erit, priùs ipse de se, quòd talis sit confitebitur. As our Saviour told the Jews, That not he, but Moses accused them; so it was not I, but Chrysostome that laid the censure, and leaves it not on them, but ex Hypothesi, upon supposition, they do that which he censureth; it was he that delivered the Law as the major, if their conscience become the witness against them in the case, and make up the minor, for the conclusion, let any man be judg. I could not borrow a nail from that Master of the Assemblies, (as the words of the wise are called) and not drive it to the head, nor bring forth and onely shew the weapon, and not strike with it, nor make it like Thebes, when Epaminondas was slain, a spear that had no head or point. If they shall prompt me how I might apply the words to make them argumentative, in any more modest or candid manner, I shall be very docible, to write after their copy; and excuse and expunge my former cha­racters, or, ‘Ut Lugdunensem dicturus Rhetor ad aram,’ My tongue shall lick out and make amends for the blots of my Pen.

But noise and outcries (whatsoever some Nations imagine) will not help an Eclipse. As in Tophet they set up a loud sound, and raised clamours to drown the cry of the dying childe; so perchance they keep this ratling about thatwhich seems to pinch the credit of their persons, onely to drown the sound of that blow which-mortally wounds their cause; for what was transcribed out of Chry­sostome, That he which was unworthy of the Eucharist, was also unworthy of the prayers; this they take no notice of, like weak souls that wink when they are put in fear, and think the danger lessened which they see not; And this, though his words seem yet to be the sense of the whole Church, which did conclude all her publick and solemn prayers with the receiving of the Sacrament, so as Albaspinus tells us, De vet. eccles. rit. l. 1. obs. 16. p. 124. Mede Christian Sacrif. Sect. 1. p. 475. Vix repories quenquam eo (i. solenniter) usum esse nisi ad Eu­charistiam significandam. As we vocally conclude all our prayers, through Je­sus Christ our Lord, so (saith Mr. Mede) the ancient Church in the solemn and publick service, when she presented her self before God as one body, did vi­sibly, by representing him in the Symboles of his Body and Bloud, he being thereby commemorated and received by them (and us) to the same end for which he suffered, that through him we receiving forgiveness of sins, God might accept our persons and prayers. The Stations which were but dimidiata jesunia, Fasts extended to the ninth hour, and not prolonged us (que) ad authorita­tem [Page 208]demorantis stellae, in Tertullian's Idiom, and which he tells us had their name from the example of Souldiers, whose standing to watch before the Palace, being called Stations, I. 1. obs. 14. p. 101. gave the like appellation to the Christians coming to­gether twice a week, and continuing together in prayer for defence of the Church, and to impetrate Gods favour, those Stations being (as Albaspinus de­scribes them) Nihil aliud quam coitio ac veluti conjuratio totius ecclesiae contra De­um, and whereby as Tertullian speaks, quasi manu facta eo Deum perpellebant, adi. gebánt (que) ad id quod obnixè peterent, concedendum; But those Stations were al­ways concluded with the Eucharist, as the close and upshot thereof. In the fifty days betwixt Easter and Whitsunday, L. 1. obse. 15. p. 106, & 108 a time of more solemn prayers, and which Albaspinus affirms to equal the Lords day in Worship and Religion, eve­ry particular Christian (saith he) most sweetly was compelled and enforced to receive the Eucharist. Besides, they had no other place where they offered the publick prayers, but that whereon the memory of Christ's Body and Bloud was celebrated, and even as in the Old Testament, where they called on the Name of the Lord, there they still built an Altar, and their Sacrifices were Rites whereby to invocate God, as may be collected from 1 Sam. 13.12. So in the swadling of the Christian Church, Breaking of Bread, or as the Syriack reades, the breaking of the Eucharist, and prayers, are conjoyned, and both referred to their Christian fellowship, as the Exegesis thereof, shewing wherein the Communion of the Church consisted; so as therefore whosoever was of the body of the Church did both partake of the Prayers and of the Altar, and who was divided from the one, had no benefit of the other, as Mr. Mede produceth Ignatius to witness; Pag. 494. and it was morally impossible, that those which were re­ceived as competent for a conjunction in the former, could be rejected as in­capable of Communion in the later, seeing this was a concluding part, and as it were the peroration of that other.

We would have as much care impended, and forwardness manifested, in ma­king men worthy partakers, as in having them to partake, but we do not con­ceive there lies upon us any obligation to give, or on others to take, by triall, an account of our worthiness: nor that their title to the signs and elements, the Sacramentum rei & Panis Domini is rooted in or resulting from their worthiness, but their Church-membership. We wish every Heir were a prudent and tem­perate manager of his Inheritance, but he must not be suspended from the en­joyment thereof, till he demonstrate his temper and thriftiness, his right accrews as Heir, not as a good Husband or a sober man, and yet while he is in infancy or an Ideot, he is not admitted to manage it, and by Outlawry he forfeits his per­sonal, and cannot sue for his real Estate, and by Attainder forfeits the whole.

They tell us of the comforts they have found in their endeavours to preserve the dignity of Gods Ordinance. They are very subtil or cautious to dispute a­gainst us so often with those arguments whereof we can take no perfect cognizance, and for truth whereof we must take their word, their inward experiences. But to answer, the dignity of good things is their commu­nicableness, and it is no indignity to the Sun, that the Negro's partake his light, though it scorch them; but it seems that the Apologists are like the Eastern people, that think it conduceth to the Majesty of their Kings to be re­cluded and shut up from publick intercourse, whereas it were more for their honour to be imployed in the administration of the Office, whereunto they [Page 209]were designed. But if their endeavours have been, formally as an Ordi­nance, to preserve the dignity thereof, they should have done the same towards all Ordinances, by the Canon of per se & de omni, but their care hath not been like in such way to preserve the dignity of the Word and Prayer, which we think, and shall endeavour presently to shew, to be Ordinances of like dignity, and to be in danger of as much indignity, as the Sacrament by a free and pro­miscuous admission; so that we doubt, that it will start much suspicion that there is an influence of Self and interest into their endeavours, and their love to the dignity of this Ordinance is Amor concupiscentiae, non amicitiae, as that which will better serve their turn, and fit their ends.

To condemn their people for not taking what they will not give them, is pa­ralel to the hard measure of some of our Kings, that compelled some to fine for not taking the Order of Knighthood at the Coronation, when as they came to tender themselves at the day, and could not obtain it.

It seems to them below reason, to see no difference between other Ordinances, and the Lords Supper, as to matter of examination. It may perchance be below their reason, which is at such an elevation, but seeing Nos, populus terrae, quibus non licet esse tam disertis, are not at such an ascendent, it had not been below their charity better to inform us of this difference.

To hear without faith makes the Word become the savour of death, In 1 Cor. 14.22. Ad Pop. Antioch. Hom. 73. tom. 5. p. 141. Confut. of Rhem. Test. p. 528. and al­so to seal mens condemnation, as Diodate in terms delivers it, as to eat and drink unworthily makes the Sacrament turn to damnation. Si nihil ex eo quod huc convenimus & admonemur, — lucrari deberemus, haec non modo nihil no­bis prodessent, verum & majoris occasio damnationis fierent nobis, saith Chrysostome; (do you think this a matter of less hainous offence to neglect his Word, than his Body, saith Fulk?) so there is no disparity in the danger of the one or other. As previously to eating, there is a command for a man to examine himself, so dispositively to hearing there is a precept, to take heed how we hear, and seve­ral other qualifications are thereunto required, 1 Peter 2.1, & 2. James 1.21. so as there is no inequality in the obligation to bring suitable dispositions. The formal part in faithless hearing, can no more be separated from the mate­rial, than in unworthy receiving, so as there is no disproportion in the hazard of sinning, and with as little difference are the Principles and Reasons, supposed to forbid the admitting of unworthy persons to the Sacrament, extensive and applicable to the non-admission to the Word, In 3. q. 80. art. 6. p. 365. Universaliter in omni materia est contra jus naturae admittere indignos ad quaecun (que) beneficia, as Nugnus argueth, and either the Word is no Pearl, nor holy thing, or else though Pearls and ho­ly, the Sacraments may as well as the Word, (ex Hypothesi) be cast before Swine, and given to Dogs. That prohibition primarily and directly respects, and is intended (as is elsewhere shewed) to the not preaching of the Word to those that may fall under that metaphorical notion, and is applicable to the Sa­crament (which was not then instituted) onely extensione quadam Scripturae, non proprio & literali sensu. To say, that more apply this Text to the Sacrament, than to the Word, as it is impertinent to tell us how it is usually applied, when we require how it is to be rightly understood, so it is improper for them, Ad similitud­nem non ratio­nem vivunt. Seneca. to make any such aid-prayer, who would by a kinde of Petalism exile, that Topick of Authority, and make it an Utopick, save perchance when it may do them ser­vice, and then as Ockham to the Emperour, they will defend with the Pen, [Page 210]what shall protect them, as with a Sword, and if the Argument may be impress'd against an adversary, then onely Hostem qui feriet, fuerit mihi Carthaginensis. But however, if (as they confess) the Text may be extended to Hearers of the Word, that comes full enough to our purpose, for if (as they dispute) because the Pearl and holy things of the Sacrament are not to be cast or given to Swine or Dogs, that is, persons unworthy, therefore it is of necessity to make triall who are worthy, may not we with as good consequence, and as much force of reason argue, that because the Pearl and holy things of the Word are not to be dispensed unto such also, that therefore they ought to examine who are such or not, antecedently to such dispensation? But farther also, if (as we argue and the Context will evince) the prohibition be first and chiefly intended of preaching the Word, then as the direct light is brighter than the reflected, the first draught of any fancy in picture is more perfect than the second; so the not casting or giving those Pearls and holy things being principally meant of the Word, and applicable to the Sacraments onely in an accommodate sense, it seems to follow that those which are not such Dogs and Swine, but that to them the Word may be preached, they are neither such, but that to them also the Sacraments are administrable.

If they knew any did come to hear with a design to mock, or purpose to blaspheme the truth, they would sense an obligation to exclude him from the Auditory, and to frustrate this wickedness. Why is there not as great an incumbency for exa­mining of Hearers that they might be known, as to prevent unworthy re­ceiving, there is for probation of Receivers? Nay, I presume they would ad­vance farther and come up to Bellarmine, De eccl. mil. l. 3. c. 10. that saith, Si ecclesia possit dignoscere impios, incredulos & hypocritas, nunquam admitteret, aut casu admissos excluderet. And doth it not hang upon the same hinge of reason, that because no wicked faithless person ought of right to be admitted into Church-fellowship, there­fore they ought to make triall of all before their admission to be members (which is the state of that disease of Independency, and Meridian of that New Light) aswell as because no unworthy person ought de jure to participate the Sacrament, Cit. à Gratiano 1. q. 1. c. Inter­rogo. & ab Hospini­ano Hist. Sa­cram. l. 2. p. 97. & centur. Magdeburg. centur. 5. c. 4. p. 215. Casaubon exercit. 16. sect. 36. p. 378. & 363. therefore they ought antecedently to make probation of every ones worthiness before he be a partaker? St. Augustine affirmeth, the Word of God not to be less than the Body of Christ; and Casaubon saith, that preaching of the Scriptures, which is called a spiritual Table, is another kinde of spiritu­al eating of Christ, as the Fathers teach us.

As indeed Origen saith expresly, Of the Sacra­ment, p. 10. Hoc unum ea­tenus inter ea discrimen est quod quae ver­bum in mentem per aures insi­nuat, ea sucramenta per oculos in eandem ingerunt, Theses Salmuri, part. 3. sect. 13. p. 34. Bibere autem sanguinem Christi non solùm sacra­mentorum ritu, sed & cùm sermones ejus recipimus in quibus vita consistit. And the Word and Sacraments tend to the same end, but by somewhat different ways, the same promises are conveyed by both, but in one demissa per aures, in the other oculis subjecta fidelibus.

Cranmer tells us, as the Word preached puts Christ into our ears, so likewise those Elements of Water, Bread and Wine, joyned to Gods Word, do after a [Page 211]sacramental manner, put Christ into our eyes, mouths, hands, and all our senses, so as neither for dignity are they unequal, nor different in the effects and ends. And this seems to me to be acknowledged by the Apologists them­selves, when they tell us, Sect. 23. That the want of the Sacrament is supplied by the Word, whereby God gives Souls to eat and drink the Flesh and Bloud of Christ Jesus by faith. As the Eucharist is onely dispensable to such as are capable to shew forth the death of the Lord, and to examine themselves; so Ezra brought the Law before the congregation both of men and women, and all that could hear with understanding, Nehem. 8.2. As infants are debarred of communicating till maturity, so not onely among the Hebrews (as St. Hieron. Pro­em. in Ezek. tom. 4. p. 727. Casaubon ubi supra, p. 399. ad 404. Hie­rom tells us) none under thirty years of age was permitted to reade the begin­ing of Genesis, the Canticles, nor the Exordium or end of Ezekiel; and Casaubon shews us, That as in the ancient Church, onely the faithfull were admitted to some certain Prayers, so the Fathers distinguish'd the Doctrine into [...], which might be publish'd unto all, and [...] those secrets which were not rashly to be evulged, which neither in familiar Colloquies, or Catechisms, or Sermons, they temerariously mentioned before Pagans, Catechumens, or any other not initiate; and in this thing (saith he) agree all the Greek and Latine Fathers ad unum omnes; and some of them do bottom this use upon that very place of Matth. 7.6. And from hence resulted that usual form (especially used in mentioning the one or other Sacrament, Norunt initiati quod dicitur, which is to be found at least fifty times in Chrysostome, and not much fewer in Augustine. And as Casaubon tells us out of Dionysius, that none not initiated were admitted to see the Administration of Baptism, so it is evident out of the Monuments of Antiquity, Albasp. l. 2. obs. 22. p. 315. & obs. 23. p. 327. L. 2. obs. 1. p. 190. that to whom they divulged the mystery of the Eu­charist, to them they exhibited the use thereof, and to whom they thought not fit to administer it, to them they deemed it not expedient to publish it. The Church (saith Albaspinus) took order during their instructing the Catechumens, Ut iis interea nihil de sacramentorum arcanis aperiret. And in another place he tells us, Catechumenos saluberrimis Christianae religionis praeceptis, omissâ omni mysteriorum & sacramentorum mentione, imbuerent; and therefore they went out not onely before the Administration, but also before the explicati­on of the Mysteries. When it was objected to Athanasius by his Enemies, that he had irreverently broken the Mystical Cup, he in his Apology heavily accuseth them, that they had not blushed to discourse of the Mystery of the Lords Supper before Catechumens and Ethnicks; and when Celsus scornfully hereupon called Christian Religion, A clandestine Doctrine; Origen answers, That the most of their Heads of Doctrine were publickly delivered, and if some were not generally communicated to all, the Christians were therefore no more to be reprehended, than the Heathen Philosophers, who divided their Learning into [...], which were brought forth to all, and [...], which were confined within their own School. The learned Grotius also shews out of Clemens Alexandrinus, that Chaldaei, Hebraei, Aegyptii, Annot. in Matth. 7.6,vetustissimi sapientiae professores, praecepta sua tradebant [...], and indeed as the Apologists have told us of the ‘—Proeul 6, procul ite profani.’ [Page 212]whereby the Heathen excluded flagitious persons from their Sacrifices, Rosinus antiq. Rom. l. 2. p. 195. so we could return, that they onely commmunicated their mysterious Doctrines also to such as were initiate, whence Mysterium dicitur [...], quod est es clau­dere.

So as then all being not held capable of hearing the Word preached, (aswell as some were not of the Sacrament) it were consonant to their Prin­ciples, to have examined who were or not, and consequently there might seem to be a parity of reason for a probation previous to admission unto the one Or­dinance, aswell as the other.

The Sacrament is a Seal of Faith, therefore say they, There must triall be made of their faith, 1 Cor. 14.22. that are to receive it, and hath it not equal force in the consequence, to argue, prophecying (which by the concordance of Interpre­ters is interpreting of Scripture) is a sign unto, or serveth for believers, there­fore probation ought to be made, whether they believe, that are to partake of Prophecying or the Word preached. As the Lopers said, If we enter into the City we shall dy there, 2 Kings 7.4.and if we sit still here, we dy also; so he that hears and believeth not, shall be damned, and he that eats and drinks without faith, can but eat and drink his damnation, there is no safer sinning in the one or other. And Aristippus would have found no odds in dying by the bite of a Lion or a Weazel, nor Heliogabalus been sensible of any difference in the kinde of his Halters and Poniards, that should have killed him.

If the hope of learning and possibility of attaining faith, may support and warrant a promiscuous admission to hearing the Word, though notwithstand­ing many that hear, have no right to the promises held forth in the Word, nor any interest in the salvation offered in Jesus Christ, but all those in effect signi­fie nothing to them, yet nevertheless all must hear, and those are generally and indifferently to be propounded to all; if because the matter of the duty, viz. Hearing, is commanded by God, it ought to be performed by all, though many are not qualified to do it in due form, or to a right end, since our powers or our prosiciencies are not the measure of our duty, but Gods precept, and our obligation is not rooted in, nor results from what we can do, but what God will have done, and the good commanded must be done, though evil (not causally but consequently, not of it self, but accidentally) ensue in the doing: Why either all these considerations should not (in some measure and degree at least) be extensive and applicable to an admission of all Church-members to the Sacrament, or why (considering this) their solicitude and sedulity should not be extended and applied to the trying and preparing men in order to wor­thy hearing, aswell as to communicating, may seem not so much below reason (as they say) to ask, as perhaps above it, to answer

But now when we can see no difference in the Grounds and Reasons, and yet do behold such disparity in their affections and factions concerning the one or other Ordinance, which did they simply and purely rise and flow from zeal to purity of Ordinances, or salvation of souls, would equally respect all Ordi­nances, and salvation of souls, in all like concernments.

We cannot be so blinde or so connivent, as not to discern that which may fa­cilitate us to suspect, that the Sacrament is but the accessory, some other thing is the principal which is reposited among arcana Imperii & ragion di stato, and the wheels of their Discipline run Byas, and themselves like false Proxinetes un­der [Page 213]colour of wooing for their friend, court for themselves, and onely pretend to fit men for the Sacrament, but intend better to fit them for their proper ends, Canponantes sacramentum: so that though Caesar apertly did invade the Soveraignty, and Pompey pretends the name and interest of the Common­wealth, yet the difference is no more than between a Storm and a Mine.

That there is not the same reason for a precedaneous examination in these two Ordinances, they assay to prove, Because Heathens are capable of the Word, Go preach the Word to every creature; The other is proper to Saints, to strengthen and comfort the begotten, ‘—Has fundit dives facundia gemmas.’ But they forget that we are not disputing ad rem, what is or ought to be done, but arguing ad hominem, what should be done consequently to their Principles, viz. that Ordinances are not to be dispensed to persons unworthy, who cannot but sin in participating unworthily, and that they are partakers of that sin, which admit them, from which and the like Aphorisms there seems to result a necessity of examining Heathens precedaneously to their admission to the Word preached, whether they are humble, docil, and facil, to captivate their understanding to the obedience of faith, or not.

2. There is not the same reason for examining of Heathens, as of those that be members of the Church; What hath any to do to examine (more than to judg) those that are without? The Ethicks tell us, that some are not idoneous Auditors of moral Philosophy, viz. young men, not defined by pau­city of years, but weakness of understanding, and inconstancy and levity of manners: now though perchance a Reader or Master may sense it as the dictate of prudence, to make triall of the ingeny and temper of such as by agree­ment are his profest Scholars, yet it follows not, that if a stranger shall acci­dentally go into, or transiently pass through his School, or being perswaded by some Declamations made abroad by the Master or Scholars of the excel­lency and praise of the Art, shall purposely come with some propensness to be­come a Scholar, if he shall like the Doctrine which is taught; that he must suspend his Lectures, and impose silence on himself, untill he have tried the capacity and docibleness of his adventitious Auditor.

3. Though Pagans may be permitted to be Hearers, (and yet in the ancient Church they were not admitted to hear all the parts of Scripture indefinitely, but onely some special portions thereof) yet they hear it not as their Word, or that wherein they can yet claim any actual right or interest. In 1 Cor. 14.22. Prophesying is a sign for them that believe, a sign of favour and benediction, whereby God teacheth and blesseth his people, (as Paraeus, Aquinas, A Lapide, &c.) primarily and principally intended to the faithfull.

Plato, who is therefore called Moyses Atticus, [...] seems to have been very conver­sant in the writings of Moses, whereunto some think he refers in that frequent phrase, As the old saying goes: the fifth Commandment is explicitely found in Homer, and divers of Solomon's Proverbs in the moral Philosophers, yet never­theless it was the proper privilege of the Jews, that to them were committed the Oracles of God.

A Writing or Deed belongsonly to him to whom, or to whose use, it is sealed and [Page 214]delivered, though an unteressed stranger may perchance hear it read. In the Charter of a City none hath actual interest, until he be incorporate and made free; yet a forreiner may hear the purport thereof, and perchance may consultly be made acquainted therewith, to facilitate and inflect him to denizen him­self, through the alluring hope of participating the benefits and privileges thereby granted; yet all that while the Magistrates hear no obligation to make inspection into, or take account of his condition, that is not yet under their government.

4. We are now disputing onely of Christians, and such as are of yeers of discretion; Defence of the Admon. S. 1. p. 118. and of such Mr. Cartwright expresly sayes, If they be not meet to re­ceive the Holy Sacrament of the Supper, they are not meet to hear the Word of God, they are not meet to be partakers of the prayers of the Church; and with what law­fulness they may offer themselves to the Prayers, and to the hearing of the Word, they may offer themselves to the Lords Supper; so he correspondently to what hath been else-where shewed to be the judgment of Chrysostome; and upon such ac­count, there is as much need of examination, in order to fit them for partaking the other Ordinances, aswell as this. That of Mark 16.15. Preach the Gospel to every Creature, is paralel to that of Matth. 28.19. Go teach all Nations; and to teach, is (according to the Original) to disciple; and then it might seem consonant, that they should preach to such as were disciplinable, and in a capa­city to be made Disciples; and then next they may take notice, that it follows (baptizing them) whence it will be consequent, that as they ought onely to admit to baptisme, such as receive the Word with Faith; so to receive, as their Hearers, such alone as entertain the Word first offered and propounded to them, without any malicious blaspheming, or despiteful persecuting thereof (for those onely fall under the denomination of Swine and Dogs, to whom Pearles are prohibited to be cast, and holy things to be given) and then concor­dantly to their principles, even the Heathen should be examined, whether they were such or not, previously to, admitting them to be constant and profess'd Hearers.

But to seposite the Argument ad hominem, and to reflect upon that which may perchance be hence collected and alleaged ad rem, as, that if confession of faith be requisite antecedently to baptisme, then à pari, examination or the like confession, is as necessary to the perception of the other Sacrament: I shall hereunto reply, That the consequence doth not hold, because the latter hath neither like example, nor equal reason with the former; we find prece­dents for the one, and until they, like the old Mercuries, will with their finger point us the way, where we may find the like for the other, we shall be like the Mercuries too, stand still, and let them be like the Passenger to go on their course. It carries much of reason, that he that renounceth his former princi­ples, should declare and let us know, what beleef he is now become of; and be­ing by baptisme to be initiated into the Church, should tell us what Faith he desires to be baptized in; there is not the like reason for those who being mem­bers of the visible Church, doe formally, as such, make continual profession of faith; the former by a great summe (as it were) obtain their freedome, the latter are free-born, but as the Children of Christian Parents, being born, as it were Denizens of the City of God, the Church, doe forthwith receive baptisme without adjournment thereof, till they are susceptible of making [Page 215]profession of faith, so by similitude of reason, should those that are baptized, and intelligent Church-members, be admitted to the other Sacrament, without any farther explicite professing.

That examination should seem requisite precedaneously to be aring the word (they say) hath no conformity with Antiquity; for Catechumens and Penitents were ad­mitted to the Word, not to the Eucharist. But doth it therefore follow, that either they were not, or ought not to be examined, whether they were apt and capable before they had such admission? This onely shews, that some admitted to the Word, were not permitted the Sacrament; not that those Hearers were put un­der no tryal, nor needed to be so. The Catechumens were onely Embrio's, and Christians in fieri, & but an higher story, or the first winnowing of Heathens, & to them is applicable what we have already discours'd of: the Penitents in their steps to restitution, who were admitted to hear in the Porch some portions of the Word, not the whole, but before any excommunicate person could be indulged the favour of penance, he rendred some hopeful signes of repentance, which could not be collected but upon some tryal; which argueth for us, that there was some probation of them, before they were admitted to be complete Hearers; but when they first were cast out, they were as well excluded from the Word, as from the Sacrament, correspondently to the method of discipline among the Jews, where he that was under Cherem, did neither teach, nor was taught, which both checks with the practice of the Apologists, and confutes their principles.

To tell us out of Ames, that the Word goeth before, the Sacraments follow, doth no more enforce this consequent, that therefore there needs no examination precedent to the Word, than it follows, that because Baptisme goes before the Eucharist, therefore there is no necessity of any examination, or profession of faith to be made antecedently to baptizing adult persons; or because seed­time goes before harvest, therefore no care need to be taken, whether the ground be cultivated and carefully manured, where we cast our seed. But though, as applied by them, it savour more of Bellarmine, arguing that the Sa­craments excite not Faith, as the Word doth, because Verbum Dei praecedit fi­dem, sacramenta autem sequuntur;Tom. 2. l. 2. c. 8. p. 204.— unde verbum praedicatur infidelibus & haereticis quibuscun (que), ut incipiant credere, at sacramenta requirunt fidem saltem in adultis, nec possunt rectè conferri, nisi iis qui priùs credunt: Yet we shall per­fectly close with what they alleage out of Peter Martyr in this, and grant that the Word may be preached to those that have not yet heard or understood it; and that from such (viz.) Heathens, the communion of the Supper ought to be pure, if so they would not fouly clash with him in the rest, but admit thereunto such, who openly profess themselves Christians (as I am sure all those doe whom they exclude) to whom he saith it is given for a publick thanks­giving. And it seemes to me, to carry no great disproportion of reason, if the Word may be preached to such as have not heard or understood, in hope they may understand and beleeve, and in order thereunto: that then also the Sa­crament may be exhibited to them that profess the Faith of Christ, without disquisition, whether they doe sincerely make that profession or not, because it is not onely probable to Charity they may have sound Faith, but possible their Historical or Dogmatical Faith (if they have no other) may by that Ordi­nance be improved, and quickned into a special lively working Faith.

But here they cast their Shete anchor, [Page 216]

and bring forth their Palladium, that must preserve the City, and which they also think to be like the shield of Pallas, with the Gorgon's head, that will blind and astonish all beholders into silence.

Who knows not that distinction between a converting and confirming Ordinance? We know the effects and influences of one and the same Ordinance may be so distinguish'd; but acknowledge not there is any such essential difference or distinction between the several Ordinances of the Word and Sacraments, we shall onely grant,

1. That the Sacraments are no converting Ordinances, in relation to men out of the Church, and to turn men from Ethnicisme to Christianity, although they be such to men within the Church, Prae festi. Mo­rat. p. 392. and to convert them from an Histori­cal or Dogmatical, to a lively-active-saving faith, when Mr. Tombes inferres, then breaking of bread is a converting Ordinance, Mr. Baxter answers, If you mean that it may convert, who ever denyed it? Yea, or it may be useful to convert unsound Christians to sincerity?

2. That perhaps appropriately, rather than properly, by a denomination ta­ken from the more frequent and more ordinary effect thereof, the Sacraments may be called confirming Ordinances, and so contradistinguish'd to the Word.

3. Though as seales obsignating, and assuring conditionally, they are not without some efficacy toward conversion (as shall be shewed) yet seeing in that way they convert onely by confirming, converting to a true special faith, by confirming and quickning a common general faith; therefore as seals they may be said to be primarily confirming Ordinances; and though also as seals actually and absolutely confirming relative grace, and exhibiting the benefits and privileges of the Covenant, they suppose faith either in fieri, or facto esse, Faith being the Condition of the Covenant, whereupon those benefits and pri­vileges are bestowed; Art. 45. or though as conjoyned to the Word for more ample confirmation thereof (as the Confession of the French Churches hath it) they in that respect are also called confirming Ordinances, (Quomodo enim duo vincula dicuntur uno fortiora, & duo testes fortiores solitario, sic proculdubio longè plùs valeat ad confirmationem fidei, Tom. 4. l. 2. c. 9. S. 32.promissionis obligatio, & Sacramentorum pignoratio, quàm alterutra seorsim, nimirum quia & intellectus per se movetur in verbis, & per sensus, in sacramentis, as Chamier discourseth;) yet as they are signes shewing forth, and representing the death of Christ, and salvation there­by, unto beleevers; so they are means, and moral instruments, to beget that real grace which converts the heart, (in like manner as the Word doth) those two, the Word and Sacrament, not having different effects and operations, in relation to Faith; but onely a different manner of efficiency, and the one as­sisting and confirming the other toward the same effect. But in their sense, though this distinction, this their Palladium, (as the old Heathens fabled of theirs) may be pretended to have fallen from Heaven; yet, as other Images, it was the work of mens hands, and of a late framing; and whosoever shall [Page 217]hotly strive to preserve it, shall like Metellus, rescuing the Palladium at Rome, hazard, in such flames, the loss of his eyes.

But if we should, by hypothesis, allow the distinction in their sense, yet it brings nothing pertinent in answer to our Argument; for who hath so little of natural Logick (if he have no artificial) to judge, that because the Sacra­ment is onely a confirming, and the Word a converting Ordinance, therefore it can possibly be consequent, that pre-examination is requisite in order to right partaking of the former, not the latter? Who would not rather, without any Prompter, suppose, that such examination were rather to be required for disposing men to be partakers of the Word, whose effects are more general, gracious, and profitable, (as I have elsewhere manifested) and where the ha­zard and danger both of damnum emergens, & lucrum cessans, is more to such un­preparedness and indisposition? and either due preparation is necessary to no Ordinances, save such as confirm Faith (and then men may come to the Word unprepared;) or else men may come to some Ordinances duly prepared without pre-examination. Like Iphilus treading on the tops of Corn, without any pressing them, they tenderly insist upon this point, and doe rather knock at this door, than enter; but let us survey their discourse,