Of the Power of the Keys, Chapter 4 (1 of 3)

Of the Power of the Keys · Chapter 4 (1 of 3)

p. 41CAP. IV.

I Come now to the ſecond general enquiry, in what this power Sect. 1 conſiſts, and ſhews it ſelf: which I ſhall make no ſtay, or ſcruple to define in this propoſition, That the power of binding and looſing in theſe places of the Goſpels, is eeforeign, &c. Chryſ. in Jo. 20. foreign. Theoph. in Joh. 20. foreign &c. IbJohn 20foreign, a ſpiritual gift, or grace, and belongs to the foreign, in Theoph. in Mat. 16. the pardoning or puniſhing of faults, the former to the Cenſures of the Church, the Eccleſiaſtical puniſhments of Excommunication, and the later, the power of looſing, to that of abſolving from them.

This poſition I muſt vindicate from the contrary interpretations, or objections which are thought to keep theſe Texts from concluding or countenaning any ſuch Cenſures. And of theſe, though they are not all to one ſenſe, yet one interpretation I have choſen rather to inſiſt on, becauſe it hath not yet been conſidered by others, and becauſe it ſeems to pretend to more antient grounds, then the reſt formerly have done, I mean that, which proceeds by interpreting the Phraſes out of the writings of the Talmudiſts, and from them concludes (I ſhall Sect. 2 give it you in the learned writers own words) that the power of binding and looſing is foreign facultas decernendi, explicandi, interpretandi, declarandi de ligato & ſoluto, quod planè millies in Talmudicis ex vetuſtiſſimae Eccleſiae illius uſu denotat, quid vetitum ex lege ſacrâ, quid permiſſum (quemadmodum & Graecis **Vide Eustath. & Did. in illud Iliad foreign. & Inſcrip. Iſid. apud Diodor. Sic. l. 1ſcimus foreign, quod ligare eſt, etiam interdicere ſonare, & foreign, quod eſt ſolvere, etiam permittere, ſeu obligationem ſive auferre, ſive nondum inductam monſtrare, aut aſſerere) adeóque ad docendi, ſeu interpretandi, ſeu Theologiae Praeceptivae munus ſolum ibi attinuit, &c. making it no more then the faculty of explicating, or interpreting what is lawful, what not, &c. in a word, no more then the power of deciding caſes of conſcience, ſeu ſic de jure publicè reſpondendi p. 42illúdque dicendi, &c. The truth of which, I ſhall, with all due reſpect, for a while take boldneſſe to examine. Firſt, by yeelding, or for the preſent not denying, that there was or might be an office or power among the Jews intruſted to ſome ſelect Elders of the people, of teaching and giving publique reſponſes (by way of deciding caſes of Conſcience, though not by way of Judicature) what was to be accounted lawful, what not, both by the Law of God, and the Tradition of the Antients; which yet being ſuppoſed and granted, I muſt ſecondly interpoſe, that it is not thereby proved that this is called in the Talmud, or by any of thoſe writers, the power of binding and looſing, (or that the power of binding and looſing, is by them ſo deſcribed) but (which is quite another thing) foreign a power of teaching or inſtructing, &c. what is lawful, what forbidden. Nor will it be a proof of any force to conclude (that which we have no reaſon to believe without a proof, or ſome kinde of affinity in the phraſes, viz.) that this power of binding is that power of teaching, and no more, only becauſe there was ſuch a power of teaching among the Jews. For if we will judge à pari, experience proves the contrary, in this Church of ours; where though there be a power of binding, and a munus docendi, an office of teaching, &c. yet no man is bound from thence to acknowledge theſe two to be all one, but we have long believed them to be two faculties, or offices, the one given the Apoſtles in the donation of the Keys, the other in the miſſion to preach; (and though it were granted that we were miſtaken in affirming them to be two ſuch diſtinct faculties, yet would not that hinder the truth of this aſſertion, that in our books they are ſo diſtinguiſhed, the queſtion being now of the fact, & not of the right, and it being clear that in our practice our Preaching is one thing, and our Excommunicating is another) and ſecondly, becauſe 'tis clear, there were two diſtinct powers among the Jews, one of declaring in foro, as well as the other extra forum, one judicial, as well as the other doctrinal; and ſure it would be but a poore ſuperſedeas, or prohibition to keep the Sanhedrin among them from judging and puniſhing any offender brought before them, by telling them that there was among the Jews a foreign a licence or faculty of declaring what was lawful, without any power of puniſhing; For p. 43they would be ſoon able to ſay, that 'twas by ſome other power (and not by that of declaring) that they undertook thus to judge and puniſh: and let me add that although the power among the Jews were acknowledged only to be a civil power, yet might Chriſt in his Church ſet up an Eccleſiaſtical power proportionable to that, and imitate that in the ſacred, which they uſed onelyonly in civil judicatures, as anon we ſhall have occaſion to demonſtrate. And thirdly, the phraſe of the Goſpel, from whence we pretend, is not the facultas, faculty, or power of binding, but the donation of Keyes, and with that, Chriſts Promiſe, that whatſoever they ſhall bind on earth, ſhall be bound in heaven: and therefore I conceive this will not be a convincing way of inferring this concluſion.

We muſt therefore in the next place proceed to examine the Sect. 3 reaſons, or arguments produced to perſwade us, that the power of binding and looſing is no more then the power of declaring, &c. what is prohibited, what is permitted, the office of the Caſuiſt only. And theſe reaſons I can finde to be but two.

1. That ligatum & ſolutum planè millies in Talmudicis ex vetuſtiſſimo Sect. 4 Eccleſiae illius uſu denotat quid vetitum, quid permiſſum. 2. That in ſome places of Greek Authors, foreign and foreign, to bind and looſe are uſed alſo.

For the firſt of theſe, I ſhall firſt ſay, that if it were true, that Sect. 5 the Idiom of the Talmudiſts were ex vetuſtiſſimo Eccleſiae illius uſu, out of the moſt antient uſe of that Church the Law of Moſes, and the Scriptures of the Old Teſtament, being the Records of the moſt antient Church, ſome footſteps of it might be expected there; but I ſhall ſuppoſe there are no ſuch to be found, not onelyonly becauſe I have there ſought them in vain, but becauſe I preſume the Author would have conceived any Teſtimony from thence to be more Authentick then the Talmud, and ſo would certainly have produced them, if there had been any. Secondly, for the Talmudiſts acception of the phraſes; firſt I might ſay, that we are no way obliged to interpret Greek words in the New Teſtament by the uſe of the Talmudiſts, becauſe though the traditions concerning Hebrew cuſtomes mentioned in the Talmud may reaſonably be thought antienter then Chriſts time (and ſo the Teſtimonies brought thence be worth the heeding for p. 44ſuch, and fit ſometimes to be uſed for the explaining the like cuſtoms mentioned in the New Teſtament) yet the booke it ſelf, and conſequently the word in it (which only we have now to conſider) was written, and ſet out long after the New Teſtament, the Miſnaioth, or firſt foreign, which contain the Text of the Talmud, being ſet forth by the foreign Tannaim, or Doctores Miſchinici, about the year 150 after Chriſt, who as they profeſſe to have had their beginning per continuam ſucceſſionem acceptionis legis oralis à Moſe, ſaith Buxtorf, by a continual ſucceſſion of tradition of the oral law from the times of Moſes, ſo they acknowledge to end in R. Jehudah hakkàdoſch, (ſtiled Hannaſi, the Chief or Prince, and by way of eminence Rabbi, when he is cited in the Gemara) who lived under Antoninus in the midſt of the ſecond Century. After theſe Tannaim, are the foreign Amoriam whom Scaliger cals foreign, the Authours of the Gemara, and of that Gemara, i. e. thoſe diſputations, and deciſions of thoſe learned men at Jeruſalem together with the Miſchna forementioned, doth the Jeruſalem-Talmud conſiſt, and was ſet forth ffVid. Buxtorf. Lex. Rabb. p. 283.an. 230. as the collection of the like diſputations and deciſions on the Miſchna, which were had in Academiis Pombedithana, Soriah, and Nahardeah, make up the Talmud Babylonicum, which was compleated an. 500. This will be ſufficient to ſhew that the words of Chriſt, either as they were ſpoken by him, or repeated by the Evangeliſts, ought not to be conceived to have imitated the phraſes of the Talmudiſts ſo long after them; and there will be as little reaſon to believe (what is left the only poſſible) that the Writers of the Talmuds have imitated the phraſes in the Goſpel, being themſelves both Jews and enemies to the Chriſtian Religion; and beſides, if the Idiom of the Talmudiſts were of any weight in this matter, yet ſure it is not ſufficient to weigh down the contrary Interpretation of the Chriſtian Fathers, (who are to us in all reaſon to be heeded, as the veryer Talmudiſts of the two, the Traditors and deliverers of our Goſpel, and Creed unto us) or the uſe of it among the Jews that have written in Greek, particularly of the Author of Eccleſiaſticus, who is conceived to be the famous Ben-Sira, and with him foreign, is punctually to forgive ſins, c. 28.2. however no way able to extend it ſelf to that p. 45other place in S^t John, where the phraſe is varyed, and the [power of remitting and retaining of ſins] is given to the Diſciples, which will have no analogy with that which is here pretended; for whatever ſhould be granted of the words ligatum & ſolutum, b…ing all one with prohibited, &c. the retaining or remitting of ſins, will be diſtant from it, for ſure that will not be, to declare one mans ſins unlawfull, anothers lawful, which it muſt do, if this interpretation be applyed to that place alſo.

This being premiſed as an Anſwer ſufficient to take away Sect. 6 the force, or convincingneſſe of this interpretation, I ſhall ex abundanti ſuperadd, that I have uſed ſom care to examine thoſe words, and to obſerve their importance in thoſe, and other Jewiſh writings: I ſhall give you an account of it.

The Hebrew word for binding is foreign, which I ſhall make no ſcruple to acknowledge, doth in the Talmud many times ſignifie to forbid and prohibit; and from thence foreign and foreign ſignifies a thing forbidden, prohibited, unlawful; onelyonly by the way I ſhal crave leave to ſhew you by what degrees it comes to ſignifie thus. The word in the Old Teſtament ſignifies to bind, (and ſure that is the beſt interpreter of Idioms in the New) and accordingly is rendred by foreign, &c. and is uſed commonly for binding with cords, and ſometimes for that band, or obligation, that proceeds from having made a vow as Numb. 30.4. and is then rendred foreign definition or decree, becauſe by that vow I bind, or define, or determine my ſelf to ſuch a performance; Farther then this, 'tis true this word is rendred by our Tranſlators, Num. 11.28. to [forbid] Lord Moſes forbid them, where yet 'tis obſervable that the forbiding there, which Joſhua deſires, is applied to the perſons, and and not to the thing, and ſignifies a checking, repreſſing, [Lord Moſes ſuffered them not, cohibeto eos] as when by chiding, or diſciplining, a ſuperior reſtrains another; according to which uſe of the word it is, that Philip de Aquin. makes it agree in ſenſe with foreign, and foreign prohibuit and cohibuit, forbidding, and repreſſing: and thus it will be very agreeable with our ſenſe of binding, as that ſignifies Church-cenſure, foreign, diſciplining, repreſſing offenders by that means. In the whole Scripture I believe there will not one place be found where that word is rendred by the 72. by any word ſignifying p. 46barely to prohibit, or the like, unleſſe you will ſay it doth Dan. 6.7, 8, 9. where the word foreign is rendred foreign, and foreign, a decree, and yet if you examine that place, and the nature of the decree, you ſhall finde, that it was not a bare prohibition, but a binding to puniſhment upon non-performance (for the decree was there, v. 7. that whoſoever ſhall ask any petition from either God or man, but of thee, O King, ſhall be caſt into the den of lions) and ſo the decree is that deſignation to the puniſhment of caſting into the den, which is there call'd foreign binding, as when the Jugde decrees the Offender to be Excommunicated, that act of judicature is a decree, yet nevertheleſſe a binding, (this binding being a judicial act, and from thence receiving its force of obligation) and è converſo in that a binding, or obligation to puniſhment; that it is ſuch a decree, to wit, a decree ſub poenâ, that ſuch a thing ſhall be done, ſo ſaith Schindler, that the Chaldee foreign is obligavit ad obedientiam, aut poenam, binding to obedience, or penalty, and Elias Levita, that foreign &c. Every thing from which either ſinne or puniſhment commeth unto him that doth it foreign is ſaid to be bound, or is call'd Aſſur; and therefore Munſter giving an account of the uſe of the word in the Commentaries of the Rabbins, ſaith foreign or foreign ſignifies edictum aut ſententiam, quâ quis tenetur, &c. by which any man is bound to puniſhment, if he obey it not. In like manner as he that vows, binds, (and the word foreign Num. 30.4. &c. belongs peculiarly to that) becauſe in vowing he doth either by words of execration explicitly, or elſe by intimation implicitly, call puniſhment upon himſelf, if he perform not his vow, and ſo binds himſelf to that puniſhment. And ſo ſtill the word [binding] by denoting a decree in this kinde, doth not at all vary from our preſent ſenſe of binding by way of cenſure, which now we contend for, but rather confirm and concurre with it; and ſo I conceive (in thoſe excerpta about excommunication, Exc. Gem. Sanhedr. p. 147.which J. Coch hath ſet down in Latine out of Maimonides) thoſe words of Maimonides do import, Quod totus Iſrael decrevit, non obſervat Princeps, &c. What all Iſrael decreed, the Prince obſerves not: he ſpeaks of inflicting anathema's, and I ſhall grant that the word rendred decrevit, is in the original foreign the word for binding (in reference to which it follows in the next words, by him ſet down, remittitur à laeſo, ſi ei ſatisfecerit, &c. p. 47The injur'd perſon remits, if ſatisfaction be made him) and from thence ſhall conclude, that even when it is to be rendred decrevit, it may yet note puniſhment, particularly that of excommunication, or decree ad excommunicandum, ſentence to puniſhment being a kinde of Legiſlation, and all binding to that, an act of Command or power.

Having thus conſidered the verb foreign I ſhall as freely grant Sect. 7 that the participles, or nounes deduced from thence, foreign and foreign among the Rabbins or Talmudiſts, ſignifie very often a thing forbidden, prohibited, unlawfull (though in the Old Teſtament again the nouns there uſed foreign, and foreign ſignifie not ſo, but are taken in a regular ſenſe, and ſo rendred by the 72 foreign a band, and foreign an ordinance or decree, and foreign and foreign, bound or impriſon'd, and the like, and not the thing unlawfull or prohibited) which yet being granted and added to what was before granted of the Talmudical uſe of the Verb, comes not home to prove the objecters concluſion, w^ch is this, that the verb foreign ſignifies among the Talmudiſts, decernere, explicare, interpretari, declarare, de ligato, vel quid ligatum ſit, i. e. quid vetitum: to decern, explicat, interpret, declare concerning a thing bound, or what is bound, i. e. what is forbidden: for to prove this ſenſe of the verb, that other ſuppoſed uſe of the participle is not ſufficient, any more then my confeſſing amatum to ſignifie a thing loved, will conclude me to affirm, that amo ſignifies to declare a thing to be loved, which we know ſignifies formally to love, and nothing elſe.

That the verb ſignifies to forbid, or decree, per modum legiſlationis Sect. 8 (which is all that could be deduced from theſe premiſes, (though ſuppoſed true) of ligatum in the Talmud ſignifying nothing but illicitum) 'tis acknowledged, but that will not ſerve the turn, thereby wholly to evacuate & nullifie the power of the Keyes, which is pretended to belong to the Church from theſe texts; If the Apoſtles had this power to forbid or decree, this were 1. more then to interpret or declare a thing to be unlawful, the office of making laws is more then that of the Caſuiſt, or Counſellour, or Preacher: and beſide, ſecondly, it would be but reaſon to ſuppoſe thoſe decrees backt with ſome power of cenſures againſt reſiſters, and ſo indeed the word imports, to decree p. 48ſub poenâ under penalty, and not ſimply to decree. But the thing for which this Talmudical interpretation contends, and which we oppoſe, is that this power of binding is onelyonly a power of declaring, and explaining a thing to be unlawful; and for this from all that is pretended, or offer'd to our view, I have after all my ſearch no temptation to ſuſpect, that even the Talmudiſts themſelves do uſe the word. The verb with them may ſignifie [to prohibit] and the nouns, and participle, a thing prohibited, or unlawful, and that is the utmoſt that Buxtorf could obſerve of the words among the Talmudiſts, or that the author of the interpretation offers any proof for [ligatum & ſolutum, i. e. millies in Talmudicis vetitum lege ſa…râ aut permiſſum;] and if theſe notions will be taken, then the meaning of [whatſoever yee ſhall bind on earth ſhall be bound in heaven] will be, that whatſoever they ſhall by decree prohibit on earth, ſhall be prohibited, or unlawfull in heaven; which were onelyonly to exchange the power of Cenſures, for the power of giving Laws, which, as it is more then that of the Caſuiſt, ſo, I conceive, is never to be found any where without power of puniſhing alſo.

Sect. 9 This I conceive to be anſwer ſufficient to all that is produced, or pretended, even upon ſuppoſition that the Talmud were the umpire, or the uſe of words there the beſt Nomenclature for the New Teſtament. But then over and above, we muſt again remember, that this Talmudical obſervation will be but little conviction to us, who finde that the writers of the New Teſtament have no ſympathy with the Talmud in this matter, but uſe variety of other words to expreſſe [commanding, or decreeing, or forbidding;] ſuch are foreign, and the like, but never foreign or any of that making; and in like manner have other phraſes to expreſſe a thing unlawful, or forbidden ▪ foreign, and the like, but never foreign, or any thing like it: neither is it, I conceive, pretended, that theſe words foreign and foreign have any ſuch ſenſe in any other place of the New Teſtament; but onelyonly in theſe two, which are (parallel one to another, and ſo) in effect but one, and that the matter of the preſent controverſie, and ſo a petitio principii, when 'tis made uſe of to confute him that concludes the Cenſures from thence.

p. 49Adde unto theſe yet farther, that even in the Talmud it ſelf Sect. 10 the word foreign (of which this obſervation is made) ſignifies binding too, and that not only in the obvious vulgar ſenſes, but in that alſo which we here contend for, of binding by cenſures, or binding over to puniſhment, (obſtrinxit ad poenam, as Schindler renders the Chaldee, and as Elias Levita the Rabbinical word, be bound over to puniſhment) and ſo with great reaſon may be reſolved (even when it ſignifies to prohibite) to belong only to ſuch penal prohibitions, or at leaſt, (belonging at firſt to ſuch only) to have fallen after in common uſe (which ſure hath been obſerv'd to bend words from their primitive ſenſe) to ſignifie foreign all kind of decrees or prohibitions: which ſurely will not exclude, but contain under it that which we now contend for.

I ſhall ſhew the ſtrength of this argument by a parallel, as I conceive, exactly proportion'd to it. foreign in Arabick ſignifies millies, very ordinarily [to ggVetare, prohibere, illici…um ſtatuere.forbid, or reſolve any thing to be unlawful, from thence the noun foreign and foreign is vetitum, any thing prohibited or forbidden, and foreign and foreign prohibition; Suppoſe now in ſome diſcourſes concerning the kinds or degrees of excommunication among the Iews, or of the power of the Sanhedrin, or indifferently in any Jewiſh writing, I ſhould meet with the word foreign and render it in Latine prohibuit, interdixit, and a friend ingenuouſly admoniſh me that it ought to be rendred anathematizavit, devovit; would it be thought reaſon or ingenuity in me to reply to my admoniſher, No, but I have rendred it aright, for in Arabick foreign ſignifies prohibuit, and therefore 'tis but an ignorance in the Arabick dialect, to render the Hebrew anathematizavit, and but a popular error (to be reform'd from hence) in them, that conceive there was any kind of excommunication among the Iewes, meant by that word foreign whereas 'tis clear, that word ſignifies onelyonly prohibition, and therefore belongs among the Jews only ad Theologiae praeceptivae munus, or to the office of teaching and interpreting, what is [vetitum, vel interdictum lege ſacrâ.] If, I ſay, I ſhould deal thus with any peece of plain Hebrew, my firſt queſtion would be, whether this account of my rendring that word would be accepted; and if not, my ſecond now is, whether the p. 50proceſſe of the preſent arguing hath not done the like, or ſomewhat more.

Sect. 11 This wilbe yet clearer, by proceeding to conſider the words which are oppoſite to it, (and to which this Author refers when he ſaith, Solutum millies in Talmudicis licitum aut permiſſum; A thing looſed is taken a thouſand times in the Talmud for lawful or permitted) ſuch are foreign and foreign which I alſo acknowledge to be taken amongſt the Talmudiſts for licitum & permiſſum, lawful and unforbidden.

Sect. 12 Of which yet ſomewhat muſt be further obſerved, 1. That foreign from whence they come, in hiphil ſignifies ſolvere, to looſe; (as indeed that which hath no obligation laid on it, which is looſe from all band to obedience, or obligation to puniſhment, is properly reſolv'd to be lawful) but then this hinders not, but that the verb in hiphil may ſtill ſignifie, (and indeed even among the Rabbins ordinarily doth) to looſe, both properly & metaphorically; properly, as to looſe or unty thoſe that are bound with cords, or ſuch like bands, properly ſo called, as Pſ. 146.7. foreign ſolvite vinctos, looſe thoſe that are bound, & Pſ. 105.20. the king ſent foreign and looſed them, where the Chaldee paraphraſe reads foreign & ſolvit eum, and the 72 foreign, and Pſal. 146.7. Dominus foreign qui ſolvit vinctos, looſing men out of priſon: or metaphorically, and that in a double ſenſe, either as it is applied to doubts, or difficulties, and then 'tis to diſſolve them; or to perſons, and then 'tis to let looſe or unoblige, and in this latter ſenſe J. Coch cites it ex cap. 1. Nedarim, that on whom the anathema or cherem is inflicted coram, or in his preſence foreign it ſhall not be remitted to him, but before his face alſo: where this word ſignifies clearly remiſſion or abſolution, and that from a ſentence of excommunication; ſo again in that conſtitution of the law cited by Buxtorf, Ep. H…b. inſti…. p. 57.the word is twice uſed moſt clearly in our ſenſe, He that continues in Niddui 30 dayes foreign and deſires not to have it looſed, they ſeparate him, or put him under Niddui again, & if he continue ſo 30 dayes more, foreign and deſires not to have it looſed, (or as he renders it, relaxate) they excommunicate, or put him under cherem; & therefore Schindler mentioning foreign, and the Rabbins uſe of it, renders it ſimply ſolutio, looſing; and there is a ſaying in foreign in which p. 51it bears this ſenſe. If any man ſwear in this form, [If this be true, let me be excommunicate in this world, and in the other] and be perjured, he cannot be abſolved by any.

Another word ſynonymous to this, and ordinarily uſed by Sect. 13 the Talmudiſts is foreign, and that primarily ſignifying (as the other did) to looſe or diſſolve, as to looſe cords which tye, or Camels which are tyed with them, is by the Talmudiſts taken for hhVid. Buxtorf. Rabb. ….abſolving, remitting, forgiving, pardoning; ſo ſaith Elias Levita in Thiſby, it is uſed by the Rabbins for pardoning and remitting, as, foreign The merciful God pardon Hillel! and in the prayer that begins, foreign All ſhall be remitted, or pardon'd. So in a place cited by Coch out of Gem. Moed. Caton. c. 3. Quid remedii? age cum ipſo foreign ut remittat tibi, that he may looſe you from the excommunication: and again, adi principem, foreign that he may remit it to you. So c. 1. Nedarim, Steti coram R. Huna, cum audiens quandam nomen Dei in vanum proferre, eam excommunicaret, & ſtatim eâ praeſente anathema relaxaret; there the word foreign is uſed again, for looſing in our ſenſe, relaxating of, or freeing from a cenſure of excommunication, directly all one with foreign remittatur ipſi, following in the ſame place, which even now we produced.

A third word there is ordinarily uſed to this purpoſe, of Sect. 14 the ſame importance, and that is foreign. So in iiVid. Buxtorf. Lex. Rabb. p. 2465.Moed Katon, Sapiens poteſt ſeipſum excommunicare, a wiſeman may excommunicate himſelf foreign and free or looſe himſelf again: and ſo in that out of 1. Nedarim, in J. Coch, excommunicationem poſſe è veſtigio reſcindi, there the word is foreign in both, contrary to excommunication.

By the little that hath been ſaid, it may ſufficiently appear, Sect. 15 that to bind and to looſe may be found even among the Talmudiſts to ſignifie ſomewhat beſide interpreting or declaring, quid vetitum, quid permiſſum ſacrâ lege, what is forbidden, what permitted by the law of God, as that referres ſimply ad ſolum docendi, & interpretandi, vel Theologiae praeceptivae munus, onelyonly to the office of teaching, and interpreting, and of preceptive Divinity, &c. and that 'tis no way contrary to the ſtile or idiom of thoſe writers to affirm, that binding and looſing belongs to Cenſures, (and not only to ſtating of Caſes of Conſcience) even if the Talmud were p. 52our judge: for ſure there is nothing more ordinary in that, then to heare of looſing them who are excommunicate; which muſt needs imply, that they which were ſo excommunicate, till they were looſed, were ſuppoſed bound alſo.

Sect. 16 And therefore it may be obſerved (in paſſing) that the learned H. Grotius having in his Notes on Matth. 16.19. made this Talmudical obſervation, that foreign to bind, & foreign or foreign to looſe, are by the Hebrewes attributed to the interpreters of the law, (which ſeems ſomething agreeable to this obſervation) conceiving the Keyes there ſpoken of, to be the keyes of knowledge, Luk. 11.52. doth yet on Matth. 16.19. interpret foreign and foreign binding and looſing there, by foreign and foreign retaining and remitting, Joh. 20.23. and in his notes on that third place acknowledges, that thus the Apoſtles did remit, either when by Baptiſme they received into the Church thoſe that profeſſed the faith, or when after the teſtimony of ſerious repentance they received into their communion thoſe that had been lapſt or fallen, and applies to it that of the 2 Cor. 2.10. To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive alſo, (which belongs clearly to the excommunicate, inceſtuous perſon, in the former Epiſtle, who was it ſeems by this Eccleſiaſtical courſe brought to a capacity of remiſſion, and abſolution by that time, and now abſolved by St. P…ul) and for the conjunction of both theſe ſenſes in the interpretation of that place, he produces S. Cyprians authority, Ep. 73. To which I ſhall only adde, that in another part of his Notes upon the Goſpels, Luk. 6.22. this very Judicious man (whoſe education might have given him as great prejudices againſt the Prelacie, as any other) hath given us a very excellent tract concerning this ſubject of Excommunication, or Cenſures; And at laſt reſolves out of St. Cyprians Epiſtles, Totum ferme Chriſtianae diſciplinae vigorem in iſtis judiciis conſtitiſſe, &c. that well nigh all the vigor of Chriſtian diſcipline conſiſted in thoſe judgments of the Church. Quem morem qui ex Eccleſiâ ſublatum volunt, graviſſimum infligunt vulnus diſciplinae, quam corruptis adeò Chriſtianorum moribus ad veterem ſeveritatem reduci maximum ſit operae pretium, p. 680.tantùm abeſt, ut ulla ejus pars reliqua laxari debeat, &c. Which cuſtome they which would remove out of the church, inflict a moſt grievous wound on diſcipline, which (now in p. 53this notable corruption of the manners of Chriſtians) it were moſt excellently worth any mans pains to have reduced to its antient ſeverity, ſo far is it from being fit, that any remaining member or part of it ſhould be looſed, or put out of joynt; and in another place, Diſciplinam morum ego non refugio, ut modò pax coeat, nulla futura ſit tam ſevera, cui non libenter me meoſque ſim ſubjecturus. For the diſcipline in order to manners, I would willingly ſubject my ſelf, and all that belong to me, to the ſevereſt that could be brought into the Church. But this by the way.

For the perfecting of this anſwer, and ſatisfying all the contrary Sect. 17 appearances fully, it muſt yet farther be obſerved, that there is one thing preſumed, and not undertaken to be proved in this objection, without which all the obſervations from the Talmud are utterly invalid and unconcluding, and that one thing not at all to be granted by us, being indeed, as I conceive, very far from truth. It is this; that by the particle foreign and foreign [whatſoever ye ſhall bind, &c.] is noted the thing, and not the perſon, for ſo that interpretation requires [what thing ſoever ye ſhall declare to be unlawful, &c.] whereas it's no new thing in all languages and dialects to put the neuter for the maſculine gender, things for perſons, and that in the New Teſtament, is not without example; as Joh. 17.7. 'tis our Saviours dialect (and it is the very word foreign, which we have now in hand) foreign ▪ &c. whatſoever, i. e. all thoſe men, v. 6. and ſo 1 Joh. 5.4. foreign expounded by foreign, &c. v. 18. every thing, i. e. every one, that is born of God. Thus when S. John, Apoc. 21.27. ſpeaketh of man, and other the like inhabitants of the new Jeruſalem, he ſaith, there ſhall not enter in there any thing that defileth, or that worketh abomination, or a lye; foreign in the neuter, which is, no doubt, no unclean abominable perſon, &c. So 2 Theſſ. 2.4. the Apoſtle ſpeaking of Antichriſt, ſaith, that he exalteth himſelf above all that is called God; where the [foreign all] in the neuter, ſure ſignifies in the maſc…line, every perſon that partakes of that name, the King and Potentates of the Earth; ſo Heb. 7.7. foreign in the neuter, for the leſſer or inferior perſon, v. 19. foreign for no man; and Ch. 12, 13. foreign for him that is lame: With which Examples the phraſe in this text bea…s ſuch proportion, that it cannot be unjuſt to reſolve, that it is at leaſt poſſible, that the neuters here may p. 54in ſenſe be maſculine alſo; which very poſſibility were enough to evacuate the Talmudical obſervation, the accommodation of which to this place ſuppoſes the neutral ſenſe of the foreign and foreign to be certainly there meant, and is not reconcilable with the Maſculine. For to ſay [Whomſoever you ſhall declare to be unlawful or prohibited, &c were not ſenſe; whereas on the other ſide, the granting the neutral ſenſe, would not ſo neceſſarily deſtroy our pretenſions, this rendring of the words being proper enough, and home to our turn, [whatſoever yee ſhall bind on earth, i. e. whatever ſins of any treſpaſſer ye ſhall conclude under the Cenſures] or again, whatſoever puniſhment you ſhall bind on mens ſhoulders (the ſpeech being ſtill limited to this one ſort of puniſhments) it ſhall be bound or ratified in heaven: though the truth is, the perſonal notion of the foreign, being ſo agreeable to other phraſes of the Scripture, I have no temptation to doubt but that it is the importance of the place [whatſoever, i. e. whomſoever you ſhall bind on earth, by the power of the Keyes, ſhut out of this lower kingdom of heaven, conclude under the Eccleſiaſtical bands, or cenſures, &c. ſhall be bound in heaven, &c.] i. e. by God ratified there, (ſuppoſing that what they do, they do according to the rule,) this is moſt commodious & agreeable to the mention of the Keyes (to which 'tis annext, Matt. 16.) which certainly denote power of receiving, or excluding not ſome thing, but ſome perſon, & to the treſpaſſing brother ſuppoſed to become refractary (to which 'tis annext, Matth. 18.) who is ſtill a perſon alſo; to which I will onelyonly add that in the beginning of that diſcourſe, Matth. 18.11. there is another manifeſt example of a neuter word in a maſculine ſenſe, The Sonne of man came to ſave, foreign, that which was loſt, i. e. thoſe little ones, v. 10. of whom God would not that one ſhould periſh, v. 14.

Sect. 18 To this account of that firſt argument (ſufficient I conceive to prove that this interpretation hanging thus looſe from the Talmudical uſe of the word, is not in the rendring this text of the New Teſtament, neceſſary to be received) I ſhal yet farther add theſe two obſervations more, 1. That the Talmudical ſenſe cannot have place in the latter part of Chriſts ſpeech [foreign ſhall be bound in heaven] and therefore will be improbable in the former. For ſure the binding in heaven] is ſomewhat p. 55more then Gods interpretation or declaration of the lawfulneſſe of any thing; and if the Church ſhould be thought unfit to have any kind of power, yet heaven is acknowledged capable of it; beſides, the form and compoſure of the words will enforce, that if that pretended Talmudical ſenſe were admitted in both places, Gods declaring any thing to be lawful, or unlawful, muſt be conſequent to the Miniſters declaration here, which will be very unreaſonable; for though Gods Cenſures may by vertue of his promiſe follow the Cenſures of the Church, yet Gods Laws (for ſuch are his declarations of what is law) ſure cannot, or if they do, this will be a great aſſurance that there is ſome power in the Church, when it is ſo backt by God.

A ſecond argument to this purpoſe may be taken from the Sect. 19 Analogy of Scripture, or comparing the two places in Matth. of binding and looſing, with that third in John of remitting and retaining; which I conceive is proved to belong to the ſame matter, whatſoever that ſhould prove to be, but then will not be ſo capable of the Talmudical interpretation, for ſure that will not be ſo clear from thoſe writers alſo, that foreign to retain, hath that ſenſe among the Talmudiſts, which was impoſed upon foreign, to bind, which for the preſent I ſhall take for granted, till ſome proof be offer'd to the contrary, and in that found the power of the Church, (ſuppoſing it were not deducible from S. Matthew) and then by analogie of thoſe places in S. Matthew, with this in S. John, apply it to thoſe places alſo.

Now for the ſecond proof which is offer'd by the ſame hand Sect. 20 againſt the received interpretation, the places in Greek authors where the word foreign or binding is vouched to ſignifie forbidding onelyonly, though I might juſtly ſay, that forbidding is much more then declaring, or interpreting a thing to be forbidden, that an act of power, and not onelyonly of doctrine, of a Magiſtrate, and not onelyonly of a Caſuiſt; and ſecondly, that we are not wont to require the dictions of the New Teſtament, which have ſo much of the Old Teſtament Hebrew idiom in them, to be tryed by Attical heathen Greek writers, y…t ſhall I not now need to refuſe that trial which is here offer'd. Two onelyonly places there are produced (or in the margent appointed to be conſulted with) to p. 56purpoſe, Euſtathius and Didymus in Hom. II. foreign, and Inſcription. Iſidis ap. Diod. Sic. l. 1. Theſe two places I have with all attention conſidered, and ſhall truly report what I have found in them.

Sect. 21 Euſtathius brings ſeveral interpretations of theſe words in Hom. the firſt of which is, that foreign may ſignifie foreign, i. e. foreign; which that you may underſtand, you muſt know the occaſion of Homers ſpeech, it was this; Patroclus was ſlain, and Achilles knew not how to help him, or avenge his death, for which he hath very paſſionate ſorrow, even to wiſh he were dead himſelf, becauſe he could not avenge that death of his, this he thus expreſſes in Homers language:

foreign

foreign

foreign.

I would, or, O that I might preſently dye, in that I was not able to avenge the death of my Companion! He dyed far from his countrey, and Mars, or the Fate of war hath bound, or hindred, or reſtrained me from being avenger of his blood: where it muſt be obſerved, that Mars did not give any precept or interdict to Achilles not to avenge Patroclus, or declare that it was unlawful, but only that the fate of the war had not ſo far favour'd him, as that he could find any means to do it, which he calls binding or hindring him; and therefore Didymus, to whom we are referred, renders it foreign, hindred, and explains the whole matter by this paraphraſe: foreign. The fight having deprived me of my Arms, would not ſuffer me to go out and help Patroclus; and ſo it ſeems the forbidding, by which they render foreign, is only that of hindring or ſtopping (which is a natural effect of the vulgar notion of the word, as it ſignifies hinding, he that is bound being hindred or ſtopt from his courſe or action) not of prohibiting or interdicting. But then moreover you muſt conſider, that the ſame Euſtathius and Didymus obſerve in that laſt verſe many different lections, as for example, one eſpecially, in ſtead p. 57of foreign Mars in the Nominative caſe, foreign hurt, or miſchief in the Genitive, which reading they reject not, but accordingly explain the place, and render foreign, damni averruncatorem ▪ and foreign, Patroclus had need of me, to avert that miſchief from him; and this, ſaith Euſtathius, the antients thus paraphraſe foreign, Mars wanted my action, or the help which might have come by me; and Ariſtarchus ſomewhat to the ſame purpoſe, foreign, he wanted me to avert the danger of the warre; and agreeably Didymus, foreign: which different lection thus explained by them, takes off all colour, or pretence of affirming that binding ſignifies prohibiting, or interdicting in that place, but onelyonly ſtanding in need of, which is another ſenſe of the word foreign, and ſo ſtill 'tis apparent, that foreign may ſignifie ſomewhat elſe in that place, and if it doe ſignifie binding, and that be rendred foreign to forbid, that yet it muſt not be taken in that ſenſe, that forbidding ſignifies preceptive interdiction, eſpecially not the bare pronouncing a thing unlawfull, (the ſenſe which 'tis brought to prove, and which alone is againſt our pretenſions) but only forbidding, as when the matter forbids, hindring, or reſtraining, or binding from a poſſibility of doing it, and juſt ſo the Hebr. foreign by which Philip de Aquin. renders foreign binding, ordinarily ſignifies to hinder.

As for the other place referr'd to, the Inſcription of Iſis, thus Sect. 22 it lies in Diodorus Siculus, l. 1. p. 16. of Stephanus's Edition. foreign, I am Iſis the Queen of the whole Region, educated by, or under Mercury, and whatſoever I ſhall bind, no body can looſe. What advantage can be taken at theſe words thus lying (& not reſtrained, by either antecedents, or conſequents) toward the juſtifying or approving of the foremention'd interpretation, or acception of the phraſe, for declaring, or pronouncing of the unlawfulneſſe of a thing, I do not fully diſcern; for why may not the later words paſſe for an interpretation of the former, and ſo the ſenſe be, that ſhe being Queen of the whole region had all power in her hands, to do, or conſtitute (not onelyonly p. 58what lawes, but) what puniſhments ſhe would, and then, that no body had power to undo whatſoever ſhe thus did, to reſcind, or looſe, or abſolve what ſhe ſo bound? In as wide a ſenſe as this, I could produce many places in Greek Authors, particularly a paſſage of Proclus out of Plato in his ſixth Diſcourſe about the Eternity of the world; where to prove the world cannot be diſſolv'd by the Creator of it, and yet by none but the Creator, he expreſſes it often in theſe two words, foreign [foreign] meaning by binding, the compoſing the whole compages of the world, and by looſing the deſtroying, or, as we ſay, the diſſolution of it: this, I confeſſe, is nothing to our ſenſe of the words, (and as little to that other) and yet very neer as much as the place now cited. Being left to gueſſe what was the occaſion of producing this place to that other purpoſe, I ſhall think it poſſible that it was occaſion'd by this, that in the margent Stephanus hath ſet foreign, in ſtead of foreign, which if it were conceived to be a Scholion, might be taken to be a teſtimony, that binding ſignifies making of lawes, as far as that Scholiaſts authority would reach. For the preſent, I ſhall ſuppoſe that this is it, becauſe I cannot think of any other way to help this medium to inferre the deſired concluſion in any degree, and yet make no queſtion but there was ſome: But then, if that be it, I muſt interpoſe, 1. That that in the margent is not a Scholion, but an emendation, or various lection, as the mark prefixed ſignifies; and then ſeeing 'tis aſſured, that Diod. Sic. or the inſcription it ſelf which he ſets down, had not both theſe readings, it will thence follow, that either it was truly foreign, (and then there is no authority from thence for any ſignification of foreign) or elſe that it was foreign, and then there is no appearance of proof, that foreign ſignifies there foreign; and this is ſufficient to the matter in hand, which part ſoever of the dilemma be accepted.

Sect. 23 But having ſaid this, I ſhall ſuperadde ex abundanti my opinion of the importance of that inſcription, viz. that Iſis the Queen of that region, was taught or inſtructed by Mercury in the foreign, hidden philoſophy▪ foreign, dark repreſentations of truth, foreign, the enigmatical wiſdome which their theologie was full of, mention'd by p. 59kkEdit. Pariſ. p. 354. B.Plut. de Iſ. & Oſir. and that no body was able to reveale, or expound her riddles or myſteries. The ground of this my interpretation is, an inſcription of Iſis's temple mention'd by Plutarch, immediately upon his diſcourſe of that enigmaticall theology in the place foremention'd. foreign. The temple of Minerva (which they take for Iſis) in Saos had ſuch an inſcription (not literally this, but ſuch an one, or to this purpoſe) I am every thing that hath been, and that is, and that ſhall be, and my vaile (or what I ſhall think fit to conceale) no mortall hath ever been able to diſcover. This ſeems to be a paraphraſe of that other inſcription in Diodorus, and then though the words differ (which the foreign [not the very ſame, but ſuch an one] intimates) yet the ſenſe of the one ſeems to be fully expreſt by the other, & then the concluſion will be this, that as foreign in Diodorus, ſignifying no more then foreign to reveale in Plutarch (as to looſe a riddle, a ſecret, is to reveal it, to which the Key of Knowledge in the Scripture may alſo referre,) belongs not at all to the matter in hand, or declaring a thing to be lawfull, ſo the contrary foreign is not applyable to that purpoſe of forbidding, or declaring a thing to be forbidden ▪ and ſo much for that teſtimony alſo.

To all this which hath been ſaid the Reader may farther add, Sect. 24 that Suidas, Heſychius, and Phavorinus have no other notion of foreign ▪ then that of binding in bands, and therefore render it by foreign, …nd foreign OnelyOnly in Heſychius in one place I find theſe words, foreign: which words ſtand in need of ſome emendation (as a very great part of that book doth) & may be thus ſet right, foreign, A man bound by law, i. e. a priſoner; or foreign, bound, i. e. a priſoner of the law; or elſe this ſeems to be the deſigne of them, that the word foreign is uſed in a ſenſe proportionable to that wherein foreign law, is foreign a band, as indeed every law is a band to all thoſe that are under it: but then you may obſerve, that this is a very diſtant ſenſe of the word from that which was cited from the Talmudiſts, (where the thing bound is ſaid to be forbidden,) for here foreign ſignifies bound, or commanded, and ſo this (beſide that it gives the Church a power from Chriſt, of commanding and p. 60making laws, to which in any probability the power of puniſhing would be conſequent) is little to our preſent diſquiſition.

Sect. 25 I cannot ſatisfie my ſelf, that I have vindicated my poſition ſufficiently, unleſſe unto the conſideration of the former objections, I add alſo ſome few words in taking notice of what the Socinians have reſolved to this matter; which I ſhall tranſcribe out of Volkelius, de ver. cel. l. 6. c. 4. Where having expreſt the power of binding and looſing, to be the power, Alios quidem reatu peccatorum quodammodo conſtringendi, alios verò ab illo abſolvendi; of binding ſome in ſome manner under the guilt of ſins, but of abſolving others, he reſolves this to conſiſt in this onelyonly, ut pro authoritate muneris, quod tanquam Chriſti ligatus ſuſtinebat, aliis quidem nempe omnibus in Chriſtum credentibus, atque ex animo ei obtemperantibus, remiſſionem peccatorum, ipſius nomine offerret, aliis verò poenas ſempiternas denunciaret. That by authority of that office which he ſuſtains as an Embaſſador of Chriſt, he ſhould offer in his Name remiſſion of ſins to ſome, to wit, to all that believe in Chriſt, and cordially obey him, but denounce unto others eternall puniſhments. So that in effect the power of binding and looſing ſhould be onelyonly the power of offering remiſſion of ſins to penitents, that is, preaching the Goſpel, and no more.

Sect. 26 This magiſterial affirmation having no tender or offer of proof annext to it, will need no long ſtay to conſider it; what ever is in it of poyſon, or danger, will eaſily be diſpell'd by an antidote, which the very ſame ſhop in another box will yield us, and that is another very diſtant interpretation of that power of binding and looſing, c. 15. of that book (how faln from the ſame pen of him that had before ſaid in eo tantum fuiſſe conſtitutam, ut remiſſionem offerret, &c. that it conſiſted onelyonly in the offering of remiſſion, &c. or, by what means reconcilable with that ſenſe, I will not go about to conjecture) where affirming the power of exterminating impious Chriſtians, to be intruſted to the Church, he proves it, 1. from the words of St. Paul about the excommunicating the inceſtuous Corinthian; then from this, that Chriſt ſpeaking of the contumacious treſpaſſer refuſing to obey the Church, and thereupon commanding him to be accounted as a heathen, and a publican, in coelo ratum eſſe dicit, quicquid Eccleſia in terris ligat, p. 61aut ſolvit, affirms that to be ratified in heaven, whatſoever it is the Church on earth bindes or looſes, i. e. quoſcunque vel à fidelium commercio ſegregat, vel in eorum numerum reponit, whomſever the Church ſeparates from the commerce of the faithfull, or reſtores to the number of them: where I conceive it apparent, (unleſſe ſome very cloſe ſophiſme lye hid under plain words) that binding ſignifies diſterminating, excommunicating, ſegregating from the commerce of the faithfull, which I willingly embrace, as the conceſſion of that man, and the ſenſe of his fellows, very fit to be confronted to his former negation, eſpecially being backt, as it is, with a conjecture of his (which I have long thought to be moſt probable) that St. Paul forbidding Timothy, to lay hands ſuddenly on any man, 1 Tim. 5.22. leſt he partake of other mens ſins, refers to the reception of penitents that had been formerly excommunicate. For ſuch, he truly ſaith, were wont to be received into the Church again by impoſition of hands.

Evidences of that cuſtome he brings from the narrations of Sect. 27 Victor, about the Vandalick perſecution, l. 2. Qui nobis poenitentiae manus collaturi ſunt, & reconciliationis indulgentiam, obſtrictos peccato peccatorum vinculis ſoluturi: Who confer on us the hands of penitence, and favour of reconciliation, looſing from the bands of ſinnes, thoſe which are bound by ſin. Where the poenitentiae manus, the hands of penitence, and looſing from bands of ſin, belong to thoſe which were bound, but now are reconciled: and the like from the 5^th Canon of the Councell of Carthage, diſt. 50. Presbyteris ac Diaconis, ſi quando de gravi aliquâ culpâ convicti à miniſterio remoti fuiſſent manus non imponerentur, ut poenitentibus, vel aliis ex fidelium laicis. That Presbyters and Deacons, when upon conviction of any grievous fault they are removed from the Miniſtry, ſhould not have impoſition of hands, as penitents, &c. and out of Fulgentius, Ep. 1. de conjug. Illâ aegrotâ acceptâ manus impoſitione poenitentiam ſecundum morem, quem habet Chriſtiana religio, peregit; ſhe performed her penance by receiving impoſition of hands according to the manner obſerved in the Chriſtian Religion. To theſe you may add that of Alcimus Ep. 24. Manus impoſitionem adhibete converſo ab haereſi; They that were recover'd from hereſie, were to have impoſition of hands, a ſigne of abſolution. Interdictâ nominis ejus in poſterum, ſi ex corde convertitur, mentione; and his name no longer to be mention'd in the bedrole p. 62of the hereticks. p. 148.And the Author contra Praedeſtin. l. 3. Non auſi ſunt Eccleſiarum Pontifices manum imponere poenitenti, niſi confeſſionem voluntariam oſtendenti. The Biſhops durſt not impoſe hands on the penitent, unleſſe he expreſt a voluntary confeſſion; and many the like. And in the Chron. of Jo. Gerundenſ. ſpeaking of the Arrians Synod of Toledo, congregated by Leovigildus, one of the Canons is, De Romanâ religione ad noſtram Catholicam fidem venientes non debere baptizari, ſed tantummodo per manus impoſitionem & communionis perceptionem ablui. They which came over to them from that which they counted hereſie, ſhould only have impoſition of hands, &c. and not baptiſm anew, and many other paſſages there are of that kind. This is a very probable interpretation, as antient as S. Cyprian, and may, by the way, farther be atteſted not only by the analogy between abſolution, and healing diſeaſes, of which Impoſition was the ceremony, but alſo by the context it ſelf, where v. 19. is ſet down the proceeding, by way of Cenſure, againſt a Presbyter, and the publike checking of ſinners, v. 20. a charge to do all foreign, v. 21. without prejudging, and foreign, nothing by favour or inclination; and then immediately follows, lay hands on no man ſuddenly; Abſolution very properly annext to Cenſures, (and I conceive a caution, that by knowing mens ſinnes, he be not brought to partake with them, but that he keep himſelf unpolluted, in the remainder of that verſe, upon which the 23. verſe may follow pertinently, though as in a parentheſis, that Timothy may drink a little wine for his health, and not incurre that danger of partaking of other mens ſinnes) and then v. 24. a rule of direction for that whole matter, that as ſome mens ſins are conſpicuous before-hand, and ſo bring them per modum meriti praecedentis, by way of precedent merit, to cenſure; and in ſome other men the ſins follow after cenſure alſo, as when there is no reformation upon cenſures, (in which caſe there muſt be no abſolution) ſo in like manner alſo mens good works (in caſe they do reform upon cenſure) are, or muſt be manifeſt before abſolution, (and therefore the antient Canons require the foreign good works or almeſ-deeds in the penitent to prepare for abſolution) and thoſe that are not ſo, (i. e. their not bringing forth ſuch worthy fruits of repentance) cannot be concealed, and ſo by that means Timothy may diſcern who are fit to be abſolved, who not, and ſo all the p. 63context clearly belongs to this matter. But this by the way.

OnelyOnly having ſo pregnant an opportunity, I ſhall add what Sect. 28 I conceive concerning the impoſition of hands, Heb. 6.2. joyned there with the doctrine of Baptiſmes. The Apoſtle there had mention'd foreign, the diſcourſe of the beginning of Chriſt, i. e. the firſt things that we read of in the Goſpel; and he refers them, as I conceive, to four heads, 1. Repentance, or change from dead works; 2. Faith on God: Theſe two he calls the Doctrine of Baptiſmes, & of the Impoſition of hands, either by way of foreign (of which I gave you llCap. 1. ſec. 10.examples in the ſacred ſtile) and then the Doctrine of Baptiſmes will be appropriated to Faith on God, unto which men are baptiz'd, and the doctrine of Impoſition of hands to repentance, which is the preparatory to abſolution; or elſe both of theſe together, Faith and Repentance, muſt be affirmed to be the doctrine both of Baptiſmes in the plural, and of Impoſition of hands too, and that both as it denotes confirmation, Act. 15.41. parallel to Chriſts bleſſing (of thoſe which had been baptized before) with laying his hands on them, and abſolution too, parallel to his laying hands on the ſick, Luke 4. when he healed them, which is called looſing foreign from a band, Luk. 13.16. and all this will be proper: for both the Baptiſme of John, and of Chriſt, required of them that came to it, Repentance and Faith; and Confirmation being but a kind of ſealing, and repetition of the Covenant, and the promiſes made in baptiſme, (without water, onelyonly by laying on of hands) was ſo too; and Abſolution, though it peculiarly required Repentance, yet it included alſo Faith on God, and peculiarly that branch of it, the believing remiſſion of ſins upon repentance. Beſides theſe, there follow two doctrines more, the Reſurrection, and Eternal judgment, which may be alſo reduced to theſe two heads, The Reſurrection to that of Faith in Baptiſme, of which it was a peculiar part, (the trina immerſio, the three dippings, ſo antient in the Church, referring diſtinctly to his riſing the third day, and ſo perhaps the foreign, 1 Cor. 15. i. e. in S. Chryſoſtomes opinion, being baptized into the Faith, or belief of that Article, intimated, or briefly expreſt by foreign the Dead) and Everlaſting judgment to that of Repentance from dead works, which if not repented p. 64from, i. e. forſaken, would bring that judgement upon men. But this by the way, and a… a conjecture incident, and agreeable to the former.

Sect. 29 I have thus far proceeded in this matter for the removing of prejudices, & vindicating our poſition from two ſorts of objecters, & might now think it reaſonable to proceed to a third view, viz. of Eraſtus's ſtructure, and all that he hath ſaid of this matter; but this would require ſo intolerable a length, that if I ſhould apply my ſelf to it, I ſhould both tire the moſt patient Reader, and leave the reſt which I have to ſay on the other points at firſt propoſed, to be overwhelmed or loſt under the ſhade of ſo vaſt a foreign. Some prudence therefore there will be need of for the compounding of this buſineſſe, that I may neither too much deſpiſe, nor too largely proſecute this objecter: And the moſt convenient middle betwixt theſe two extremities, I ſuppoſe, will be, 1. To bring you acquainted with the Perſon, 2. To give you an account how he fell out, or on what occaſion his quarrell to Excommunication began. 3. To view the place, and the weapons, at which we are likely to meet, i. e. to follow him foreign· ſo far, till we ſee directly what the ſtate of the queſtion is, wherein the point of the difference between us conſiſts; and then to put off the combat, till the ſpectators are ready to call for it, and ſhall profeſſe themſelves armed with patience to fit it out.

Sect. 30 For the firſt of theſe, the view of the perſon, I ſhall ſay no more, then that he was a Dr. of Phyſick in Geneva, who having fallen on an age when novelties were in faſhion, (the Biſhop turn'd out, and a Government brought in, which within few years before was acknowledg'd ſo new, that Calvin was fain to write to the Proteſtants in Helvetia, that they would but ſignifie their approbation of it, and could not obtain that neither, though ſoon after, it undertook to be the only divine Modell in the world ſince Chriſts time) thought it not unreaſonable to ſtep out of his profeſſion, and offer to the world his novelty too; and having in his own profeſſion expreſt in ſome particulars, a zeale, which others of his faculty will affirm to have been without knowledge, (as when he ſpeaks of the preparation of Stibium, p. 65or crocus metallorum, and the Antinomian receits, he reſolves that no man can ſalvâ conſcientiâ, with a ſafe Conſcience adminiſter them, which yet every Phyſitian knows now by daily experience to be very uſeful and ſafe) it will not be matter of wonder, if he committed the like miſtake in the buſineſſe of Excommunication (a medicine more out of the proper rode of his ſtudies) and conceived that poyſonous noxious recipe in the Church, (judging, it ſeems, at a firſt view, that they which were moſt wicked needed rather to be invited to the Church, then driven from it) which the experience of all Chriſtian Churches, and the advice of Chriſt himſelfe, as a Phyſitian of Souls, have concluded to be very harmleſſe and medicinal. I ſhall ſay no more of his perſon, but that he doth not ſeem by his book to have conſidered much of Divinity, ſave only of this one head, and in order to that preſent controverſie. And then though I ſhould not make an objection againſt an Author, that his book and he were of divers Profeſſions, and faculties, becauſe he that is not a Divine by profeſſion, may yet, if he have no calling, have ſpent his whole time on Divinity, and if he have undertaken another profeſſion, may yet neglect that, that he may ſpend his time in this nobler faculty, or may have thoſe excellent abilities, that he may attain to as great an height in two faculties, as others of meaner parts may do in one, yet, if it appear by any ſure foreign that that Phyſitian which writes in Divinity, hath ſtudied little more Divinity then at that time a few moneths could help him to, and thinks this proviſion ſufficient to furniſh him, to write contrary to the whole judgement of the Church before him, I may as ſafely commend a Divine, that when he is ſick firſt of a diſeaſe, then, through impatience of his Phyſitian, ſhall by looking over ſome Phyſick-hooks take confidence to control his Phyſitian, and that he may do ſo the more authoritatively, caſt off all the antient Maſters of that faculty before him, or affirm that in them he finds nothing contrary to his opinion, when they that have read them all, know there is nothing more contrary. This I have ſaid, becauſe this Doctor makes his complaint of the oppoſition, and contempt, I… Praef.and affronts put upon him by thoſe friends, to whom before the ſetting out he had communicated his book, objecting, ſaith he, nothing p. 66againſt him, but that he was beſides his calling, which therefore with him, I confeſſe, to be an unſufficient argument againſt his book, if it have no other to joyn with it; and I rather conceive, that it was a civility in his friends which uſed it, then an entire and ſole objection, deſigned by them as a means to take him off from a confidence that he had done well (by telling him, he was no competent judge whether he had or no, and adviſing him, that being a ſtanger in that faculty, he ſhould not depend too much upon his own judgement) rather then an acknowledgement, that they had nothing elſe to object to him. And if civilities be apt to be thus miſtaken, the truth is, a little plain dealing were a more friendly office. I ſhall therefore have no neceſſity of replying to his anſwers to thoſe friends: That [Scrutamini Scripturas] and [Probate ſpiritualia] [Search the Scriptures] and [Try the things that are ſpiritual] were a ſufficient comminſſion to him for that attempt, eſpecially if 'twere true which he addes, mmSi ſtipendio conductus theologica docerem, nihil ſec. ipſos ab officio, & muncre in hac parte alieni facerem. P…aeſ.that if he had had a ſtipend to read Divinity, this fact of his would then have nothing in it, in their opinion aliene from his office or duty. Where yet, I ſuppoſe, the office might be diſtinguiſht from the ſtipend; and though the money be not apt to inſpire, as a foreign or grace, yet ſure the mun…s, or calling to the office may go for a foreign, to which we may hope for the annexion of Gods bleſſing, more then to the foreign, (the meddling in faculties, or ſtudies that belong not to us,) we have any promiſe to authorize us to expect.

Sect. 31 2. For the occaſion of his quarrel againſt Excommunication, I ſhall give you no other account, then what from himſelf I have received (who, I ſuppoſe, was able to ſpeak the bottom of the truth, and nothing elſe) and while I do ſo, ſhall deſire the Reader to obſerve, how certain it is, that the fabrick of the Church of England, I mean the antient ſtructure, as it ſtands by Law, and the doctrines thereof, would never have provoked him to this enmity, if he had lived here under the beſt, or perhaps worſt daies of our Epiſcopacy; and then as his Hippocrates in his excellent tract foreign, will tell us of a mighty influence, that the place, the air, or ſome ſuch accidentall circumſtance may have upon the bodies firſt, and through them, the minds of men, ſo will the Read…r find, that his having chang'd p. 67the air, had been excellent effectuall Phyſick for him, and in all probability, might have made a ſhift to have changed his opions alſo.

The firſt thing, which, ſaith he, caſt him on thoſe conſiderations Sect. 32 againſt Excommunication, was the unſeaſonableneſſe of the time for the adminiſtring of ſuch purging Phyſick. There was then ſaith he, a great paucity of Proteſtant Profeſſors, and the number of Papiſts extremely overtopt them in thoſe parts; and of the Proteſtants ſcarce the thirtieth part underſtood, and approved the doctrine; and therefore it muſt be, in his opinion, a ſtrange improper ſeaſon for the ſetting up this courſe of ſevere ruggid diſcipline, which would exclude from the Sacrament ſo many of the few Proteſtants, that it would both unpeople their aſſemblies, and neceſſarily cauſe a dangerous ſciſſure in the multitude.

The ſecond thing was his having obſerv'd the unfitneſſe of the Sect. 33 perſons, that were imploy'd and preſided in this matter (their Miniſters and Lay-Elders) fit, ſaith he, neither for age, nor experience, nor wit, nor judgement, nor manners, nor authority, to be eſteem'd able to ſuſtain ſo great an office with dignity.

The third thing (and that which advanced him in his conceit Sect. 34 that he had faln upon the right ſenſe of the Scriptures produced and pleaded for this diſcipline) was, the conſideration of the ſtate of the Commonwealth and Church among the Jews, God having ſaid, Deut. 4. that that people had Laws and Statutes ſo juſt and wiſe, that the inſtitutions of no Nations, the ſanctions of no Commonwealth, no Ordinances, though never ſo wiſely thought on, could compare with them, and therefore that that Church muſt needs be beſt, and moſt wiſely diſpoſed, which came neareſt to the Jewiſh form. A conſideration indeed, that it ſeems, was of great weight with him, not obſerving that that compariſon in Deut. was made only betwixt the Jewiſh, and other heathen nations of the world at that time, and only in relation to their preſent ſtate, and not to the prejudice of Chriſts inſtitutions after, when that nation and religion was deſtroyed; and that if that argument were of weight, (beſides that he muſt be bound to prove his Modell out of the Moſaicall Law) he muſt be obliged alſo to bring back all the Sacrifices, Paſſeover, Circumciſion, Ceremonies of the Jews into the Chriſtian Church, and turn both the Lords Day, the Sacraments, p. 68and the very Religion of Chriſt the foreign, the Law of Faith, out of it.

The fourth thing, ſaith he, and that which ſet him on writing was, an accident that he then obſerved, An Engliſh man which at that time had quitted this Kingdome on the diſlike of Ceremonies, and came to Geneva, and propoſed his Theſis there de adiaphoris & veſtibus, of things indifferent, and of veſtments; particularly, the Surplice, &c. he was, ſaith he, not permitted to maintain them publickly, ne Anglos offenderent, that they might not offend the Engliſh; This man therefore changing his purpoſe, choſe a new Theſis, In quavis rectè inſtitutâ Eccleſiâ hanc ſervari procurationem, in quâ miniſtri c…m ſuo delecto ad eam rem Presbyterio jus teneant quoſvis peccantes etiam Principes excommunicandi: That in every well o der'd Church this government was to be obſerved, in which the Miniſters with their Elderſhips choſen to that purpoſe ſhould have power of Excommunicating all offenders, even Princes themſelves: and this Theſis, ſaith he, he was permitted to maintain. I hope, he did not beleeve, that the Engliſh would be better pleaſed, or leſſe offended with it, then with that other about Surplices, but only that 'twat a doctrine, wherein that Common-wealth of Geneva was more concern'd, and ſo did not ſo much conſider how the Engliſh might take it from them, as in the other, where they were leſſe intereſſed, they had leaſure to do. That the doctrine of the Anglican Church, and conſtant practiſe of it, is utterly abhorrent from this dangerous ſacrilegious exceſſe, I ſhall not be ſo wary or humble, as to think it neceſſary to demonſtrate, but confeſſe that he which ſaw that doctrine ſo confidently, and ſo early avow'd by the Diſciplinarians, had a great temptation to write againſt their Excommunication, though no ground of aſſurance, that all which he ſhould ſay againſt that ſubject, would therefore prove true, becauſe that one doctrine of thoſe which aſſerted it was ſo far from being ſuch. M^r Hooker hath given a very good judgement of his enterpriſe; that Beza and he divided the truth betwixt them, neither of them ſaying all truth, nor all falſhood, each of them foreign, diſguiſing, and allaying, and drowning a little of wholeſome doctrine, with a great deal of the contrary. And let me ſay, to conclude this point, that both in the taking up his opinion, and in maintaining p. 69it, Eraſtus hath more to impute to Beza's and the Genevan's errors, and innovations, and exceſſes and extravagances (which upon inquiry into the antient Church records, he truly ſaith, he could not find avowed, or authorized) then to his own grounds, or arguments againſt Excommunication.

The laſt motive, which, he confeſſes, perfected the work, and Sect. 35 put him upon the Preſſe, was the contempts and affronts of his friends, i. e. in effect, the opinions and good adviſes of all men that ſaw his Theſes, and could by no means like them: but this hath been occaſionally mentioned already, and only gives the Reader occaſion to admire, and bewail the infelicity of paſſionate men, who cannot receive any benefit by their friends, are in the unluckieſt condition of all men living, (beyond which no enemy can wiſh them a greater curſe) ſure to be the worſe for that, which God meant us for the moſt ineſtimable bleſſing, I mean th… foreign, their telling us truth, and (out of deſire of doing us good) admoniſhing us of our miſcarriages; which he that cannot make any other uſe of, then to interpret thoſe hugeſt obligations for affronts, thoſe friendſhips for rudeneſſes, and therefore reſolves to publiſh his conceits, becauſe all his friends to whom he communicates them, adviſe him by all means to ſuppreſſe them, may well be allowed to write a volume againſt all kind of Excommunication, being already, it appears, ſo far from being able to bear ſuch ſtrong Phyſick, that the moſt private prudent, firſt, or ſecond admonition of ſingle perſons, or foreign, the joynt act of a College of friends and Phyſitians do but make him more incurable.

I come now to my third undertaking, i. e. to view his Theſes Sect. 36 of Excommunication, and follow him ſtep by ſtep, till we have ſprang the point of the difficulty between us; and, I think, that part of the progreſſe will ſufficiently diſcover the weakneſſe of his fabrick; at leaſt how little appearance of advantage he hath againſt us, that are not for the Geneva-Presbytery, how well ſoever ad homines he may be thought to have diſputed.

His nnTh. 1. Excommunicationis nomen videtur ex 1 Cor. 10. deſumptum eſſe, atque amotionem ſignificare à communione illâ, quae ibidem corpus Chriſti nominatur.1 Cor 10firſt Theſis layes the ground of his diſcourſe, and of his Sect. 37 miſtake. The word [Excommunication] he will have taken from p. 701 Cor. 10. which is falſe, and not endeavored to be proved, and upon the back of that errour, another falſity, viz. that Communion is there call'd Corpus Chriſti, The body of Chriſt; all that is there ſaid toward that matter, is, that the wine is foreign, The Communication (not Communion) of the bloud of Chriſt, the beſtowing his bloud upon us, a means or a pledge of making us partakers of that rich mercy, that bloud that was ſhed for us. That that is the right rendring of foreign, is undertaken in another diſcourſe upon the Sacrament, and needs no further to be repeated here, the notion of the word Excommunication being moſt clear and uncontroverted, that it is the ſequeſtring of an offender from the ooSané nunc excommunicatio ab omnibus definitur excluſione è ſocietate & communione fidelium. Ib.Communion, i. e. the viſible Society of Chriſtians, without ever thinking to cut him off, but on the contrary deſiring to engraffe him the more firmly into the inviſible, and then alſo again into the Church, the viſible (but myſtical) body of Chriſt. And therefore,

Sect. 38 For the diſtinction of that Communion in the ppTh. 2. Est autem duplex fidelium Societas, interna, ſc. …c ſpiritualis, externa ſeu viſibilis ac politica.ſecond Theſis, into internall and externall, viſible and inviſible, we ſay that one onelyonly member of the diſtinction belongs to the point in hand according to our ſtating of it. (And if the adverſary of Geneva did preſſe the other, we do not defend him in it) viz. the externall and viſible Society of Beleevers or Chriſtian Profeſſors, from which onelyonly we affirm any man to be cut off by the act of Excommunication; and if he that is ſo cut off from that, be alſo finally cut off from the other, this is but accidentall, and very extrinſecall to that act, and diſtant from the deſign and end of it, being the effect onelyonly of his ſin, which, before he was excommunicated for it, is ſuppoſed to have concluded him under the wrath of God and of his Contumacy, which will not permit this moſt fatherly puniſhment of the Church to work any good upon him; to which though it be conſequent indeed, that this cenſure obtaining not the deſired effect, ſhall tend to his greater condemnation, yet will this conſequent no more be chargeable on that cenſure, then on any other the methods of mercy or chaſtiſement, by God uſed on purpoſe for his Reformation.

p. 79In qqTh. 3. Tantum verò inter utram que diſcrimen eſt, ut qui in alterutrâ continetur, non etiam comprehendatur in alterâ neceſſariò. Nam ut membrum Chriſti eſſe poteſt qui injuste ex viſibili aliquâ Eccleſiá ejectus eſt, aut inter infideles latere habitar…ve cogitur, ita qui in viſibili c…tu num…rantur non omnes etiam membra viva ſunt Chriſti, ex quo ſequitur diſcrepare res illas poſſe, quae uni nos conjungunt non alteri, & ab unâ nos abjungunt & non ab alterâ.the third Theſis it is by us acknowledged true, that internall Sect. 39 and externall ſociety go not alwayes together; and the conſequents which Eraſtus builds on that, are true, and acknowledged in an unjuſt Excommunication, but theſe belong nothing at all to a juſt, nor conſequently infer any thing againſt the inſtitution, which giving rules that it may, and commands that it ſhould be alwaies exerciſed juſtly, may be permitted to ſuppoſe it is ſo; or if by error or miſcarriage it be not, it doth not exclude him from that inward Communion, that was not before excluded, (ſuppoſing that he behave himſelf meekly and Chriſtianly under that unjuſt cenſure) and if there be (as indeed there is) great difficulty to judge, whether the perſon thus to be excommunicated, be firſt excluded from the inward communion or no, yet will not this conclude the cenſures unlawfull, becauſe if he be not quite out before, this puts him not out (nor is occaſion of doing ſo, any more then chaſtiſement from God, which may poſſibly work impatience and blaſphemy in the perſon, but is not of neceſſity, or in any propriety of cauſation to do ſo) but rather is a means of keeping him in, of ſetting him upon his guard, of awaking or reſcuing him from the danger of falling out of it, (and then abundans cautela non nocet, he that is awake already will be never the worſe for calling) and withall of exerciſing ſome Chriſtian virtues in him, which might poſſibly lye uſeleſſe by him, if they were not thus imploy'd, and call'd out to practiſe.