The Covenant Sealed, Treatise · Chapter 7 · Section 15

The Covenant Sealed · Treatise · Chapter 7 · Section 15

p. 225SECT. XV. Propoſition. 12.

THoſe that are in a preſent inaptitude, All of preſent incapacity to receive benefits by the Lords Supper, are to be denyed acceſſe to it.and incapacity to improve this Sacrament to any ſpiritual advantage, but are under an inevitable neceſſity, either to receive no good, or much danger, and damage (whatſoever intereſt they may claim, or on their behalf be claimed) are juſtly debarred from it, and in preſent denyed admiſſion to it. And on the contrary, All that are in a preſent aptitude, and capacity to improve it for spiritual advantages are regularly to be received and by no means to be denyed. This is plain, it muſt be adminiſtred to the Churches advantage, and edification, unto every members poſſible advantage; They that are in an utter incapacity to receive benefit, are in all reaſon to p. 226be denyed it, and thoſe of capacity to be received to it. Some would have thoſe debarred (or at leaſt to debar themſelves) that hopefully may profit; and we may not plead for their admiſſion, that are, in the judgment of all reaſon, in an incapacity of profiting. Thoſe that ſtand in this preſent incapacity, are of two ſorts; 1. Such that through inabilities cannot make any improvement of it. 2. Such that reſolvedly, and obſtinately will not.

Thoſe that through inability cannot, are of four ſorts.

Firſt, Thoſe that by reaſon of minority and non-age are not yet ripe for the uſe of reaſon, as Infants, and younglings.

Secondly, Thoſe that by providence are denyed it, as natural idiots.

Thirdly, Thoſe that are bereſt of it, as diſtracted perſons, aged perſons grown children.

Fourthly, Thoſe that by their groſſe neglect in ſpiritual things, never made improvement of it.

Firſt, Infants, Theſe the Church, as well Popiſh, as reformed by an univerſall received cuſtome denies to admit; As the Diſciples ſometimes rebuked thoſe that brought infants to Chriſt to receive a bleſſing: ſo the Church now provides, that none ſhall bring them to partake of this Sacrament. And though the Diſciples ſuffered a check from our Saviours mouth in the one. Infants having title to, and being in a capacity to receive benefit by that Church-priviledg, as being Church-member: yet we believe the Church is free from reproof in the other, upon the ground laid down before, viz. their incapacity to improve it to their ſpiritual benefit. It is true that the practice in the Church for at leaſt ſome Churches) anciently was otherwiſe: as thoſe know, that are verſt in antiquity; ſeveral quotations out of Dionyſius Areo pagita, Cyprian, Auſtin, the Councell of Tolet, may be ſeen in Suarez, diſput. 62. quaeſt. 79. Art. 8. ſect. 4. Though according to Thomas Aquinas Dionyſius his words make not for it, as may be ſeen, part. 3. quaeſt. 80. Art. 9. This cuſtome Maldonate in Joh. 6.53. ſaith continued in the Church, 600. years, but he onelyonly ſaith it; and Suarez in the place before quoted ſaies, it was never received of the whole Church, and perhaps (ſaith he) the practice was not Common, ſeeing there is no more mention of it among the Ancient; and quotes the opinion p. 227of ſome, that day, The Fathers never obſerved this cuſtome, but onelyonly tolerated it, becauſe they could not reſiſt the multitude. And one that ſpeaks enough in favour of it, findes the practice of it in Africk, and Europe, but can bring no teſtimony out of Aſia for it; onelyonly he ſaies, that he does not read, that the cuſtome was contrary in any part of Aſia. The Schooles have diſputed infants capacity of it; Thomas Aquinas, in the place quoted, is againſt it, together with many others, whoſe names Suarez mentions. Suarez himſelf is for the affirmative, that infants are in capacity of it, as that which (he ſaith) is farre the more probable, and hath moſt reaſon and authority for it. And in the concluſion hath much ado to excuſe the Church of Rome for the neglect of it, as Janſenius hath for their Communion onelyonly in one kind, Harmon. Evang. cap. 131. when the practice of all antiquity he confeſſes was otherwiſe; and Bellarmine for their eating on faſt daies before the evenning againſt all Scripture precedent, Bellar, de bon. oper. lib. 2. cap. 2. But the Church of Rome her ſelf hath reformed this, and hath not put our Reformers to the trouble of it, though a man might wonder what moved them to it, giving ſo much to this Sacrament as they do, to conferre grace by the work done, and to fortifie the foul againſt Satan. But it is plain, that the high reverence they gave to their tranſubſtantiated elements, moved them to it, leſt any thing unworthy of them ſhould befal them; upon the ſame account that they deny their cup to their laity, they deny the bread to thoſe that are in minority, ſee Janſenius ut ſupra: an eminent Writer of the Proteſtants appears much in favour of this practice, not upon the reaſons that moved thoſe Fathers, (which was a ſuppoſed neceſſity of it grounded on thoſe words of Chriſt, Joh. 6.53. Except ye eat the fleſh of the Sonne of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you, underſtanding it of Sacramentall eating at the Lords Table) but on other grounds, 1. Thoſe that are partakers of the thing ſignified, are not to be denied the ſign. 2. Infants are of the Church, they ſerve to make up that body, and Chriſt the Saviour of the body. 3. Chriſt himſelf ſaith. Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of ſuch is the Kingdome of heaven. And from each of theſe he drawes up formal Arguments for infants admittance. And he ſuppoſeth that that text which is brought as a barre to hold them back, 1 Cor. 11.28. Let a man examine himſelf, and ſo let him eat of p. 228that bread, and drink of that cup, may be eaſily anſwered, that it is to be underſtood of thoſe onelyonly that are in danger to eat and drink unworthily, and ſo to be guilty of the body and blood of Chriſt, of which (ſaith he) there is no fear of infants. Theſe Arguments undoubtedly are of ſtrength to conclude their fundamental right and title, as to baptiſme, ſo to the Lords Supper, but they are two weak, to give them actual admiſſion; They conclude their jus ad rem, but not their jus in re; They have upon theſe grounds a firſt right, but they muſt wait a further growth till they have a ſecond. Baptiſme gives right in the face of the Church to all Chriſtian priviledges, and this is a Chriſtian priviledg; ſo alſo the hearing of the Myſteries of Faith, the higheſt of Myſteries, to be taken into debate of doubts, of the higheſt nature are Chriſtian-priviledges, yet as every baptized perſon hath not forthwith theſe high Myſteries communicated to him, nor yet is admitted to ſuch high debates, as Chriſt was at the age of 12. years which is recorded as a miracle: ſo neither are they therefore to be actually admitted to the Lords Table. And if that text of preexamination may be avoided, yet ſufficient may be ſaid for a barre to their admiſſion. They cannot do that which is outwardly to be done at this Table, they cannot take and eat; ſee Whitaker, pag. 373. And in caſe the bread be put into their mouthes, it is more like to be caſt out then eaten. They cannot anſwer the end of the Sacrament, to do it in remembrance of Chriſt, or to ſhew forth the Lords death in that ordinance; And ſo no poſſible benefit can be conceived in reaſon to come to them by it. In baptiſme it is otherwiſe, there is nothing required to be done by him that is baptized. It is ſufficient to be paſſive, there is advantage by it, the perſon (whether infant or of age) is enrolled into the ſociety of the people of God, is a member of the body of Chriſt, viſible, myſtical: and upon that account intereſſed in the prayers and bleſſings of the Church: is enrighted, and upon that account, as growth makes fit, to be admitted to other priviledges, and aſſoon as of any diſcretion to diſcern, they know to what ſocietie they do belong, and accordingly to applie themſelves; And therefore infants have a bare fundamental right to the Lords Table, but actual admiſſion to Baptiſme. And where as it is objected, that infants had not onelyonly right to the Paſſeover, but were alſo actually admitted to it, they had not onelyonly their jus ad rem, but their jus in re, and p. 229conſequently infants have like right to the Lords Supper: To this I anſwer, 1. That infants properly ſo called, did not eat of the Paſſeover, being by reaſon of infancie in an incapacitie, for ſuch ſolid meats, as Rivet obſerves. 2. It no where appears, that infants did partake otherwiſe then as they were involved in the houſhould. There is no Ordinance requiring infants to repair to the place that God choſe for it; It is for thoſe males (ſaith Ainſworth) which were free-men perfect, males in health, able to go up to the place of publick worſhip: quoting withal the Rabbies Authority, That all men are bound, except the deaf and the dumbe, and the fool, and the little child, and the blind, and the lame, and the uncircumciſed, and the old men, and the ſick and the tender, and the weak that were not able to go on their feet. When we read of the pains that they took to go up to Jeruſalem on theſe occaſions, through the valley of Baca, Pſal. 84.6. we hear nothing of their pains to carry along their infants, which muſt have been their care if by Divine appointment the Paſchal Lamb as a Sacrament had been ordained for infants. 3. The Paſſeover as Manna, and the Rock is conſidered two waies. 1. As common food, and means of preſent livelihood and ſubſiſtance. 2. As viſible pledges of Gods abode among them, and protect… on of them. As common food, and means of preſent livelihood, infants did eate of the Manna, and drink of the water of the Rock, and ſo alſo did their cattel, Num. 20.8. and young ones (as ſoon as able to digeſt it) of the Paſſeover, when they were preſent with the reſt, of the houſhold: But as viſible pledges of Gods abode among them, and protection of them, or remembrance of their preſent deliverances; onelyonly profeſſed believers, and neither infants, nor bruit creatures could make uſe of it, and in this ſenſe onelyonly it was a Sacarment: ſo that we ſee infants title, and alſo their bar to this Ordinance.

For thoſe that by Providence are denyed the uſe of reaſon,Natural Idiots. Diſtracted perſons are uncapable as natural Idiots, their caſe is the ſame with infants, as alſo thoſe that are beſt of it, as diſtracted perſons, and thoſe that by age, or diſeaſe are grown as Children: Thomas Aquinas in the place quoted diſtinguiſhes of diſtracted perſons, ſome wholly want the uſe of reaſon, and ſome have onelyonly a weak uſe of it; as ſome ſee not at all, and ſome have a weak ſight. The latter in ſome caſe being reſtored in part to the uſe of reaſon, he would not have to be denyed; In this caſe prudence muſt judge, in caſe before this p. 230ſtroke, by the hand of God upon them, they were judged meet for this Ordinance, as they were for other civil employments, and now upon recovery or upon their intervals (as many times it happens) are able in ſome good meaſure to manage their buſineſſe; as way is given to them in one, ſo it is not to be denyed them in the other.

For thoſe that never made improvement of their reaſon in ſpirituals, but being men of years, are ſtill children in knowledge, they have their title or fundamental right,Groſly ignorant ones a rein an incapacity. (as I ſaid before of infants) but they are no more meet for this Ordinance then infants; ſuch I mean, that for the time might be teachers, and yet have need to be taught which be the firſt principles of the Oracles of God. If I ſhould demand, why boyes and girles as ſoon as they can eat of the Bread, and drink of the Cup, be not received to this Supper; but all in non-age by general conſent exempted, and therefore none offer themſelves? No reaſon (to me imaginable) can be given, but their inability of improvement of it to their Spiritual advantage; years of diſcretion are expected, and then they are to be admitted: and this is generally acknowledged to ſtand with reaſon, And what reaſon is there that without any diſcretion they ſhould be admitted at the uſual year of diſcretion? At one and twenty years men arrive at the age to enter upon their poſſeſſions: yet when it may appear that at theſe years they have not abilities to manage it for their benefit, the Law hath provided that they ſhall not be intruſted with it. The ignorance before mentioned in the ſeveral kinds was ignorantia purae negationis, They underſtand not, becauſe God hath denyed them underſtanding: It is their defect or affliction, but it is not their ſin; this that we now mention, is ignorantia pravae diſpoſitionis, a withſtanding of the light that is tendered and offered. All of theſe are in an equal incapacitie of benefit by the Sacrament: but theſe laſt in a ſinful incapacitie. And when the former, whoſe ignorance is not their ſin, are confeſt to be uncapable, I do not ſee how ſin can put the latter into a better capacitie of it. When a Covenant was entered in Iſrael, Nehem. 9.10. all ſorts and ſexes having knowledge and underſtanding entered, Nehem. 10.28. If any had ſworn to the articles, and had not at all underſtood them, ſuch an oath would have done no ſervice; therefore it was provided, that onelyonly they that underſtood, ſubſcribed, and ſealed. They that receive this ſeal, and conſequently put to p. 231their ſeal, when they know not the articles of it, or any uſe of theſe Sacramental ſignes, they ſee not themſelves at all obliged, when the Covenant of Iſrael was to be ſealed underſtandingly, the Covenant of the Goſpel is not to be ſealed ignorantly: A book in the hand of the unlearned that cannot read, is of as much uſe as this Sacrament to him that doth not underſtand. It is to theſe, as the painted frontiſpices that we ſee in many books, without any key to open them; they be full of myſteries, but the ignorant beholder ſees nothing but an outſide. He may gaze an hour together, and be as wiſe as before. Such an one ſees bread and wine, but what they mean, he knowes nothing, nor any proportion between ſign and thing ſignified, or what the Miniſters tender, or his own receiving ſpeaks to him. Theſe may (perhaps) have ſome blind devotion towards this Sacrament (which Popiſh Schoolmen judge ſufficient, if not obſtructed with mortal ſin) by reaſon of the Churches cuſtome to receive it, and ſome high opinion of ſome hidden and unknown vertue in it, but it is not the leaſt account that they can give of any neceſſity of it, as a reaſon of their devotion towards it, being ſcarce able to produce any command for it, not knowing either the author, time, or end of the inſtitution of it; much leſſe are they able to underſtand any need their ſoules have of it. When the Corinthians came unworthily to the Lords Table, all is laid upon this, that they diſcerned not the Lords body: I do not think that this is alone the ignorant mans ſin: All are in their meaſure guilty that do not conſiderately obſerve the glory of that Ordinance, and of Chriſt in it. A man of rude behaviour, in a great Perſonages preſence, is told that he knowes not where he is, or to whom he ſpeaks, when he well enough knowes, and needs no information; but doth not conſider his diſtance: but I ſay there is a neceſſity of that guilt in all that are ignorant. All do not conſider as they ought, that know; but none that does not know, can conſider. This is to be done in remembrance of Chriſt, which contains in it a calling into our thoughts all the work of his ſacrificing himſelf for ſin, which is never done by the man that knowes not ſin, that knowes not the Law, which is tranſgreſt by ſin; that neither knowes the nature of ſin, nor the guilt of attending it; that hath not any poſſible experimental ſenſe of the danger of it, and that remaines ignorant of Chriſt that redeems from it; being able to p. 232give no account why the blood of Chriſt, rather then the blood of any other ſhould take away ſin; or how this death hath any ſuch ſatisfying temitting vertue, as to anſwer the Juſtice of God, or merit his Grace; neither knowing the Perſon of Chriſt in his humanity, or Deity, nor able to give account which Perſon in the Trinity took our nature, and gave himſelf a ranſom: perhaps they will ſay that Chriſt was God, and Man; and as ready to ſay that the Father, the Holy Ghoſt, were God and man in like ſort: knowing as little or leſſe of his offices, what he does as a King, or what he does as a Prieſt, or what he does as a Prophet, for his Church. If you look on the Sacrament as a ſpiritual medicine, they never knew their ſoules ſickneſſe, nor ever underſtood any healing vertue in it. If you look upon it as ſpiritual food, for the ſtrengthning of graces, they never knew what hunger was, or any ſtrengthning vertue that here can be found: look upon it as a ſpiritual cordial, and they never had ſenſe of ſin to any ſwooning fit, nor yet knew any reſtaurative vertue to be found in it: look upon it as an heart-breaking, ſoul-melting Ordinance, as the Law never diſcovered to them the danger of ſin, ſo they ſee nothing here held out for the aggravation of ſin. They ſee what in courſe the Miniſter does, and what the Communicants do; But any end, or reaſon why he, or they do it, they know nothing. If the Word which is added to the element to make up a Sacrament, were a bare Word of conſecration, to be muttered over the elements for their change, ſo that the bare participation would ſerve turn, (as Phyſick works without any regard of the Patients knowledge or ignorance) it were ſomewhat. But the Sacrament (as hath been ſaid) is a ſeal appendant to the Covenant of God, and there is no improvement of it, other wiſe then as the Covenant and the Promiſe is improved, (which muſt be known before it can be believed and applyed) ignorance is a neceſſary barre to all benefit by it. Though I account it the weakeſt thing in the world, to make ignorance of this nature in the parent, any juſt ground of non-admiſſion of the Infant to Baptiſme. There is no neceſſity to conclude, that the child (who is born, and to be bred, in a vally of viſions, and intereſted in Ordinances able to ſave the ſoul,) ſhould unavoidably be ever held with Parents in blindneſſe; yet I can Judge no otherwiſe, but that it is a juſt barre to the parents, when it is enough for the Infant to be paſſive, in his firſt admiſſion, p. 233the parent muſt act and make uſe of his light, for further growth and confirmation. Some (I know) have ſaid, Who can tell but the perſon deemed to be ignorant, and heretofore ſuch indeed, yet making addreſſe to the Lords Table, and there hearing that myſtery laid open, and the uſe of thoſe elements unfolded, and cleared, may in that very time receive competent inſtruction, and be put into a capacity for this Ordinance knowingly to partake of it. Whether or no there be any abſolute poſſibility in this, I will not determine. I am ſure there is little moral probability, or poſſibility, that a man that hath lived under Ordinances 20, 30, 40, 50, perhaps more years, and all of this time hath been confeſſedly ignorant; and upon that account, in an incapacity of this Sacrament for his profit: that now at this time, in a few minutes he ſhould grow ſuch a proficient as to fit himſelf for it; And in caſe any ſuch thing, if not by miracle, yet, to wonder and amazement, ſhould happen, it will be little loſſe for ſuch a one, to delay his actual participation for once, that he may give an account of his profiting, and upon a further progreſſe in knowledge have admittance the next time with greater ſatisfaction. If any do deſire to know the minimum quod ſic, where is the loweſt pitch of knowledge, that will put a man into a capacity of improvement of this Ordinance to his advantage? this of neceſſity muſt be leſt to miniſterial Chriſtian prudence, in which there muſt be much of care and tenderneſſe, not to make blear-eyedneſſe, blindneſſe, nor a dim-light midnight darkneſſe, where the wretchedneſſe of ſin is known, and Chriſt (who is our remedy) ſo underſtood, that account can be given of his perſon, and that there is no other name under heaven by which we can be ſaved, and the Sacrament ſo underſtood, as that Chriſt crucified is there held but under thoſe elements, and tendred to believers: I durſt not paſſe a vote to have ſuch a one excluded let this be got out of them, in language of any kind, ſuch that we may diſcern that they know it, though they can ſcarce expreſſe it: in which alſo many circumſtances ſhould be prudently weighed, as the natural ingeny of the party, if ripe in other things, it is an evidence of affected ignorance, to be havy and dull here: The means that they have enjoyed for help in their knowledge, the longer at School, the better the Maſter, the more inexcuſable the truant: The growth of years that he had upon him, when he firſt manifeſted a care to know, age is unteachable in p. 234compariſon, of youth, a low meaſure of light ſometimes drawes on more ſtrength of affections; But where ſin is not ſeen, nor Chriſt known, and conſequently the ſoul is ſo in the dark, that no uſe can be made of this ordinance, for ſpiritual advantage, the perſon may juſtly be judged to be in a preſent incapacity. In which for the moſt part, it will be more ſafe to delay, then deny to perſwade the party to forbear a little time: and in the mean while to commend meanes of further growth, by all means to endeavour his help, that he may be fairly drawn on, and not driven back from this Supper.

In the next place, thoſe that reſolvedly will not make improvement of this Supper, but wilfully put a barre to their benefiting by it, are to be taken into conſideration. And his is done,

1. By error entertained in their judgments, by a taint in the faith that they profeſſe.

2. By viciouſneſſe of life, or a profligate courſe.

Now, either of both theſe (to ſpeake a few words of them joyntly) are either ſuch that are ſo in private and ſecret, or elſe openly and profeſſedly. Thoſe that are indeed ſuch, though in way moſt ſecret, in the preſent poſture as they ſtand, are in an equall incapacitie to make inprovement of this ordinance, with him that moſt openly proclaimes it; Judas was unfit when he did communicate, as well as Barabbas, if he had communicated. But of theſe the diſpenſers of this ordinance can take no cognizance,Men wicked in ſecret cannot be debarred from the Sacrament. they cannot follow men into their chambers, and cloſets much leſſe can they make a ſcrutiny into their hearts. Here may be a juſt barre, when yet none may juſtly debarre them. Here there is almoſt an univerſal agreement; thoſe that pretend to the the greateſt care in their admiſſions, not diſſenting, though it give no ſmall check to that glorious homogeneity of which they ſpeak in the Churches of Chriſt, and utterly overthrowes the definition given by many of the Church viſible. He that pleaſes may read Suarez in tertiam partem Thomae; diſput. 67. Sect. 4. putting this to the queſtion, whether it be lawfull to deny the Sacrament to a ſecret ſinner deſiring it publiquely, and by many reaſons determining it in the negative, as alſo in the following Section, reſolving the queſtion: who is to be accounted a publick, and who a private offender? And what is ſpoken by him of ſin, may be applied to error.

p. 235Thoſe that are openly ſuch,Excommunicate perſons are to be judged to be in a preſent inaptitude for the Sacrament. by ſufficient detection of their error or crime, are either ſuch that are under the Churches cenſure, and ſtand excommunicate, or elſe they are ſuch that the Church doth tolerate, whether becauſe that cenſure is not in uſe in the place, or otherwiſe. Thoſe that are under the Churches cenſure upon account of that ſentence, muſt be deemed in an incapacity, when the ſentence, whether for error or for ſcandal, hath had its due work for reformation (as upon the inceſtuous Corinthian) it muſt be ſuppoſed that the Church will again reſtore them to their freedome: in the mean ſpace, whether the Church hath proceeded right or wrong, be over rigid or juſt in her cenſure, it is not in any one ſingle Miniſter to determine. There is a famous ſtory related by Mr. Hooker. in His Eccleſiaſtical Policy, of one Bertelius, that was excommunicated by the ſentence of the Elderſhip of Geneva, and had procured from the Senate of the place, by common conſent, under their ſeal, a relaxation, further decreeing (with ſtrange abſurdity, as the Author cenſures it) that it ſhould belong to the ſame Senate, to give final judgement in matter of excommunication, and to abſolve whom it pleaſed them. Calvin hearing the report of it, ſaid, Before this decree ſhall take place, either my blood or baniſhment ſhall ſign it. And two daies before the Sacrament, kill me if ever this hand ſhall reach forth that which is holy, to them whom the Church hath judged deſpiſers. Men under publique ſentence muſt be deemed to be ſuch, as by ſentence they are adjudged. But for others that ſtand free from cenſure, their preſent aptitude for this ordinance is to be conſidered.

Firſt,Error in judgment, and wickedneſſe in life, equally indiſpoſe to this ordinance. As to them that are in error of judgement ſome (otherwiſe ſufficiently auſtere) would have all indulgence ſhewen, and men of all judgements admitted, enlarging liberty of conſcience ſo farre, that it ſhould exempt men (reſpective to their judgements) from any ſentence ſecular, or Eccleſiaſtical; not conſidering that as we find one ordered tO be ſentenced for lewdneſſe, 1 Cor. 5. ſo alſo others under the ſame ſentence for errors, 1 1 Tim. 1.20. 2 Tim. 2.17, 18. And concealing (if it may be) that the ſame words that are produced by them, for cleanſing the Churches of wicked perſons, 1. Cor. 5.6. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump, is by the Apoſtle applyed in ſo many words, to ſet out the danger of error, Gal. 6.9. upon which account, doubteſſe it is that ſome that profeſſe ſo much zeal againſt looſeneſſe p. 236of life and plead for ſo much indulgence, in difference in judgement, ever quote thoſe words out of Pauls Epiſtle to the Corinthians, concealing that text to the Galatians, that it may not appear that there is a like danger in either; But whileſt ſome are over indulgent, others muſt not be too ſevere, but carry an equal hand in regard both of errors in judgement and in practice.

As for errors in judgement, they may be either immediately againſt theſe Sacramental ordinances or againſt Chriſt the ſumme and ſubſtance of them, and all Goſpel promiſes in Chriſt. Errors of the firſt kind are, 1. Theirs that are above ordinances, either upon pretence of the Spirits immediate work, without any agent or inſtrument on earth, ſo that there needs not, either Word, prayer, or Sacraments, the opinion of Swenkfeldius; or elſe becauſe all is grown corrupt, ſince the Apoſtles times, that a company cannot be found with whom they may communicate, as Muſculus ſpeakes of one in his Common places, that had not received the Sacrament of the Lords Supper of twelve eares, becauſe he could find no pure Church in which to obſerve it. I fear ſhortly we ſhall have many ſuch; But we need not here trouble our ſelves with theſe, ſeeing of their own accord, they keep at a diſtance from us. 2. Theirs that look upon the Sacraments as matters either antiquate and obſolete, as belonging to the Churches infancy, in which it was indulged, thoſe carnal obſervances, too low (as they think) for grown Chriſtians; or elſe as things of meer indifferency, which may be uſed or neglected; ſuch are unmeet to be received. If any ſuch be detected, ſeeing though the ſubſtance of religion be not in the Sacrament ſo much as in the Covenant, yet a man of ſo low an opinion of this ordinance, of neceſſity debarres himſelf of any benefit of it. a diffident opinion of a medicine, or conceit againſt it, is ſaid to hinder the working; I am ſure it will obſtruct the working of the Sacraments, which have no innate phyſical vertue, nor any other efficacy further then our underſtanding, and faith makes improvement. For errors againſt Chriſt, the ſumme and ſubſtance of the Sacraments, as every error is ſome way againſt him who is the foundation and carries on the whole work of our ſalvation) that which I have delivered, Treatiſe of the Covenant, pag. 232. (where I made it my buſineſſe, to give rules concerning ſeparation, when we are to ſtay with a Church, and p. 237when to leave it) may here be taken into conſideration, weighing both the kind and degree of theſe errors, and the place that they have got in the affections and reſolutions. Thoſe errors that neceſſitate us to leave a Church, when it is in the whole face of it tainted and polluted; may juſtly give occaſion to deny a member acceſſe, in caſe he tender himſelf to this ordinance. Theſe (as hath been ſaid) are either ſuch that render Chriſt in an uncapacity to be our Mediator and Saviour, or ſuch that are inconſiſtent in whole or in part with his Mediatourſhip; of the former kind are thoſe that are againſt his perſon. 1. Thoſe that impugne the Godhead of Chriſt, ſuch that though they give him the glory to be above Angels, yet will have him to be no more then a creature, a God in title and place, as are Magiſtrates, not in nature or power; an opinion that involves the Apoſtolique Church, and all Churches in ſucceſſion, in Idolatry; giving the honour of God, the worſhip due to God, unto him who by nature is no God; a doctrine that will make Chriſt an impotent, and not an omnipotent head, too weak for his work, to governe the world, to bring under his enemies. 2. Thoſe that deny his manhood, as having not taken our fleſh, and ſo no ſuitable head, but a phantaſtique, or ſeeming body. Thoſe that are againſt his Mediatorſhip, are either ſuch that obſcure, or ſome way eclipſe it, (as every error doth that is any way conſiderable) or ſuch that raſe, if not utterly overthrow it, in ſome of the neceſſary parts of it, his Kingdome, Prieſthood or Prophetical office. Theſe are overthrown either directly, in termes of full oppoſition, or elſe by conſequence; and this either is immediate and evident, (the truth being confeſt, they cannot be denyed) or elſe the conſequence more remote, and not ſo eaſily diſcerned. Theſe things being premiſed, we muſt bring it home to our purpoſe. 1. Where fundamental truths are not onelyonly queſtioned, doubted, and diſputed; but abjured and denyed, errors directly,Errors directly againſt the foundation, or by clear conſequence, oppoſing fundamental truths, tender the pe… ſon uncapable of benefit by the Sacrament. or by immediate cleer conſequence introduced, ſo that the fundamental truth cannot be known, but the error muſt be ſeen; Here is ſuch a flaw in the Covenant, that no improvement can be made of the ſeal, to allude to that of the Pſalmiſt, Foundations are deſtroyed and what can the ſtewards of the myſteries of God do? Such a ſoul hath framed to it ſelf, ſuch a Chriſt as the Goſpel never held out for his ſalvation: Theſe are ſuch (of whom the Apoſtle ſpeaks, Col. 2.19.) that hold not the head, from which p. 238all the body by joynts and hands, having nouriſhment miniſtred and knit together, increaſeth with the increaſe of God: and how can they then find any ſpiritual nouriſhment? When they thus withdraw from Chriſt, they are juſtly denyed to ſit at his Table. But when the error is of an inferiour nature, as neither rendring Chriſt in an incapacity to be a Saviour, nor yet wholly inconſiſtent with the work of his Mediatorſhip; or at leaſt, not ſuch directly, but only by way of conſequence; and that not immediate and evident, but more obſcure, and remote: ſo that it may juſtly be hoped, that in caſe the conſequence were ſeen, the concluſion that they draw would be beſt, rather then the principle of truth denyed, the caſe is then otherwiſe. As we might live in ſuch a Church, in caſe doctrine of that kind were received and taught; ſo we may not refuſe ſuch a member, making his farther conviction, our buſineſſe; where ignorance may ſtand with grace, there errour is not wholly inconſiſtent with it: And where there is any fair poſſibility that Chriſt may be, there this Ordinance is not to be denyed. And in caſe the opinion entertained, and contended for, be yet more ſoul, ſo that we have juſt cauſe, as the Apoſtle of the Galatians, to ſay, that their doctrine is inconſiſtent with grace; yet being not (as we can diſcern) fixedly ſettled, and reſolutely received, and concluded upon; but with heſitancy and wavering, their faith rather ſtaggered then deſtroyed; theſe ſhould not haſtily be refuſed; But as the Apoſtle gives counſel reſpective (as I take it) to private converſe, After once or twice admonition reject: ſo let it be here, make eſſay to regain a brother rather then loſe him. It cannot be conceived that the Apoſtle when he wrote his Epiſtle to the Churches of Galatia, would upon the account of their error how dangerous ſoever, have diſcontinued this ordinance as long as he ſaw any hopes of their reeſtabliſhment; though they were in eminent danger to be diſchurched, yet he would continue Church-ordinances.

Men of a reſolved profligate courſe of life, are uncapable of benefit by the Sacrament.As for thoſe that put a bar to their benefiting by the Sacrament by their vicious life or profligate courſe, moſt mens verdict is ſooneſt of all other againſt them, with the Poets Peribomius, Morbum greſſu inceſſuque fatentur, they have their faults written in their foreheads. And certain it is, that thoſe men that are in their ſin, and reſolved for ſin, in preſent can receive no benefit by the Sacrament.

Firſt, They that look upon Chriſt to receive benefit in the Sacrament p. 239look upon him pierced by their ſins, and that withall ſorrow and grief of ſpirit: The greateſt grief in Family or Common-Wealth is borrowed to expreſſe it, Zach. 12.10, 11. They ſhall mourne for him, as one mourneth for his onelyonly ſon, and ſhall be in bitterneſſe for him, as one that in bitterneſſe for his firſt-born: In that day ſhall there be a great mourning in Jeruſalem, as the mourning of Had adrimmon in the valley of Megiddon. VVhichWhich was the mourning upon occaſion of Joſiah's ſlaughter, 2 Chron. 35.24. But theſe now look upon him ſuffering for ſins with all pleaſurable delights and content in ſin: they ſee him under all this burden for our trangreſſion; and in the mean time, take delight to add to the weight of it, and ſo ſtand at the greateſt diſtance from acceptance.

Secondly, They that worthily ſhew forth his dearh, and acceptably keep a memorial of it, will not without horrour and trembling, have a thought of drawing upon themſelves the guilt of it; we would hot bear the guilt of the blood of the meaneſt peaſant in the world, not of ſuch a one that Job would not ſet with the dogs of his flock, Job 30.1. Such may with David, Deliver me from blood guiltineſſe: How much leſſe would we bear the guilt of the Prince of life? To have this in our thoughts, that he muſt be our Judge, we have been his murderers, may indeed ſet pricks in the heart, as it did in Peters hearers, Act. 2.37. Theſe men of ſin that come to the Sacrament in ſin, wilfully, furiouſly draw this guilt upon themſelves, and become acceſſary to it: He that ſleightly paſſeth over the death of an innocent perſon, making a ſmall matter of it, either he makes the innocent, to be indeed nocent, one that hath juſtly deſerved to be ſlain, who being ſlain deſerves ſo little regard; or at leaſt he makes himſelf nocent, breeding ajuſt ſuſpition that he was, or would have been conſenting to that mans death, ſaith M. Pemble, pag. 33. Theſe in the ſleigheſt way paſſe it over, not with the leaſt evidence of zeal or indignation againſt it.

Thirdly, They that judge Chriſt fit to be numbered with malefactors and tranſgreſſors, diſcern not his body, do not judge of him according to his glory and excellency, and ſo cannot with comfort come to the Lords Table: But theſe judge him fit to be numbered with tranſgreſſors, when in their fouleſt ſins they dare joyn themſelves to him, and have communion with him: This is their caſe that come in ſin to the Lords Table.

p. 240Here ſome may object, that according to the principles laid down, the Ordinance may be an hopeful meanes to take ſuch off from their wayes of ſin; having previous light to ſee what they do hear they may ſee high aggravation of their wickedneſſe; An heart-breaking, a ſoul-melting Ordinance being ſet before them, there may be all hopes that it may be efficacious unto ſoul-melting and heart-breaking; here they may ſee what their ugly ſins have done, and who it is that their ſins have pierced and crucified, whereof a Publican or Harlot may eaſilier be convinced then a Phariſee or juſticiary. And Chriſt being here ſet out both bearing ſin, and a ſacrifice for ſin, the ſight of their juſt demerit in his ſuffering, and hopes of freedom from guile by his blood-ſhed; there may be expectation of conviction, and contrition, and conſequently ſomewhat at leaſt done towards converſion: and upon this account ſome would have the worſt of men admitted to the view, though not to participation in this Ordinance; Others taking advantage of this admiſſion of them to the view of it, and knowing it to be a novel thing, that any ſhould gaze, and not partake, they conclude they are to be admitted unto both. The further improvement of it by them ſeems at leaſt ſome way hopeful, when to the ignorant and erroneous it is impoſſible.

That I may ſpeak my whole thoughts to this thing, ſomewhat is neceſſary to be premiſed, both by way of conceſſion and aſſertion. By way of conceſſion it muſt be yeelded,

1. That there is more weight in this objection then perſonally hath been acknowledged, which I ſee upon conference with many godly learned is more and more diſcerned. It is not ſo eaſie to evince all hopeleſneſſe of good in a bad mans receiving the Sacrament, as in a man that is groſſely ignorant; no text ſo fully and clearly to any grounds to put a barre to men in ſin, as to thoſe that are in ignorance; neither doth the nature of the Sacrament ſo clearly evince it. 2. Arguments uſually brought to conclude againſt their admiſſion to this Ordinance that are in wayes of ſin, and under no ſentence of excommunication, ſeem to me ſcarce concluding. It were too long to name the Arguments, and point out the exceptions: Some of them alſo perilouſly enſnaring, and upon ſeveral accounts, 1. Their Arguments conclude equally againſt ſuch mens, hearing, praying, and attendance upon any other Ordinance, as they do againſt their p. 241participation of the Lords Supper; the ſame Medium wherewith they conclude againſt one, concludes againſt all, as hath been ſhewn. 2. Theſe Arguments intended: onelyonly againſt the ſcandalous to conclude a neceſſity of their excluſion equally, conclude againſt all that are not actually in grace, when yet the diſputants themſelves will not yeeld, that either actual grace or poſitive ſignes of ſuch grace ſhould be any rule in ſuch proceedings, as to inſtance; ſome ſay that Miniſters in holding out the Sacrament to wicked perſons whom they have excommunicated in the Word, ſhewing that no unrighteous perſon ſhall enter into the kingdom of heaven, they abſolve them in the Sacrament; and if this have any force in it, it muſt conclude in this manner; None may be admitted but theſe that may be actually abſolved, and while they aſſume that the wicked may not be actually abſolved, others will alike aſſume, that no unregenerate man, how knowing civil and unblameable ſoever, may be abſolved. And the ſame guilt that theſe in their reaſonings conclude that Church-officers bring upon themſelves in admiſſion of the ſcandalous, they contract that admit of any ungenerate ones.

By way of aſſertion it muſt be delivered, 1.2. By way of aſſertion. That the fundamental proper right unto, or intereſt in, this Ordinance is not queſtioned, Church members lay a juſt claime to Church Ordinances, viſible members to viſible Ordinances; If this be once denyed we are in inextricable ſnares. 2. Here can be no ſuch prophaneneſſe in promiſcuous adminiſtration of this Ordinance, as the putting of Gods ſeal to blank paper: There is no blank, but a name legibly written where there is a Covenant entered; and that there is a Covenant entered with ſuch, as it cannot be denyed by any that will confeſſe that the Scripture ſhould be umpeir; ſo it is yeelded by all of thoſe that baptize the infants of ſuch perſons. The firſt right of parents that are ſuch is taken for granted, when their children are thus received. 3. It is then an orderly edifying and prudential wa in adminiſtration that is here enquired after, and this admits of a greater latitude then Covenant, and no Covenant regenerate or, non-regenerate in which if an hairs breadth ſhould misſe there were a tranſgreſſion; as we diſcern the perſon to whom it is meet to give onelyonly milk, and to whom to give ſtrong meat, ſo we judgeof thoſe that we admit onelyonly to the Word and Prayer, and thoſe that we admit to the Lords Table. And though I ſee not concluding p. 242ſtrength in ſeveral Arguments produced, but ſuppoſe they are grounded on miſtakes (which alſo apt to lead into danger, otherwiſe I had been ſilent) yet I cannot recede from that ancient received opinion of Fathers, Schoolmen, Proteſtants, whether of the Epiſcapal, Presbyterial, or Congragational judgement; that ſcandalous perſon is are juſtly dibarred from this Ordinance, ſeeing any poſſible hopes of gaining good is very low if any which yet is all that can be pretended tor the expediency; and Arguments on the other hand for the inconvenience and danger, are many and weighty. Theſe Sacramental ſignes are not barely teaching, but engaging ſignes; and not barely ſignes, but ſeals, in which by acception of theſe ſeales, we engage to God to make good his terms and propoſitions. The Miniſter of Chriſt therefore hath little encouragement, and ſlender hope: to tender it to ſuch, or to admit ſuch to it, that are in a continual way of Covenant-breaking, and proclaime to all their reſolutions in it. A continued diſſolute courſe of life ſpeaks no better then a full purpoſe, and ſetled reſolution for ſin; it can then little avail ſuch a one to take anew theſe ſymboles and badges of a Chriſtian profeſſion upon him, and put himſelf on an hypocritical profeſſion of tht ſervice of Chriſt, making diſcovery of ſuch reſoluſion, it doth appear to be in vain to give this way and freedom to him. Knights of the poſt, that have often forſworne themſelves, are not by any prudent Judge permitted to ſweare; and thoſe that have ſo often deſperately broken Covenant, and wilfully gone againſt all former engagements, and ſtill palpably appearing that way, are as unfit to engagae; And the more clearly any that is produced as deponent appears to be ſuch, with more full reſolution any prudential Judge will except againſt it.

And whereas it may be objected, that ſuch upon the grounds here laid may as well be admitted to the Lords Table, as to hear Sermons, joyn in Prayers, obſerve Faſts: They are engaging Ordinances whileſt they are done by perſons in Covenant, as is receiving of this Sacrament.

Anſw. Firſt, They are not certainly ſo highly and explicitely engaging; The very name Chriſtian is an engaging tye indeed to Chriſtian duties and wayes; To enjoy any further Chriſtian priviledge is more; But to take theſe pledges on the tearms propoſed, hath ever heen accounted the higheſt.

Secondly, Though the Sacrament ſerve as hath been ſaid for p. 243aggravation of ſin, yet as the Word is the alone means in the diſcovery of ſin, ſo it hath infinitely the advantage in the aggravation of it. The Sacrament doth nothing at all in this work without the Word, and the Word does exceedingly much more then the Sacrament; and when it is clear, that the Word for ſo long hath wrought nothing for conviction, there is little hopes that the Sacrament will work any thing to aggravation.

Thirdly, As the hope of good is either low or none at all, ſo the danger on the other hand is high and full of terrour, as we ſee it by the Apoſtle aggravated, 1 Cor. 11.27, 28. The unworthy receiving of the Word is indeed of danger, and a ſavour of death to death; But the hopes are fair by hearing to be brought to worthineſſe. The danger of unworthy Communicants is far greater, and the hopes little, if any at all.

Fourthly, The ſcandal here taken is exceeding great, and though happily ſometimes weak ones take more offence then is given, and are offended above reaſon, yet when there is ſo little of good to be hoped in that in which they are ſo ſcandalized, and ſo much danger in the offence, it is by no means to be neglected.

Fifthly, There is more fair hopes of good to be done them upon their denyal then upon admittance to this Ordinance; when they ſee their own unworthineſſe obſerved, and thoſe proceedings upon it, they may more ſeriouſly reflect upon their unworthineſſe. When a Phyſician ſhall forbid ſome meats upon obſervation of a patients diſeaſe, it is a way to make him more ſenſible that he is in danger; ſo when the Miniſter of Chriſt upon obſervation of mens wayes, ſhall deny this Ordinance, there may be hopes of an anſwerable work to bring the perſon to ſome more ſad and ſerious reflections upon his own ſtate and condition. If any think that theſe arguments ſingly conſidered, not to be of that ſtrength to evince a non-admiſſion of men of openly ſinfull courſes to this Ordinance, I ſhall anſwer in the words of the Aſſembly of Divines, unto the reaſons of the Dſſlenting brethren againſt the inſtance of many Congragations in the Church of Epheſus: Arguments of neceſſity are to be anſwerable to the things they prove, which as well holds int hsi of expediency or inexpediency, to which I ſpeak, as it doth in matter of fact, of which they ſpeak; and ſo ſay they, Though the ſeveral particulars of this proof ſhould be ſingly but probabilities, yet being joyned p. 244together make a ſufficient proof, as many concurring likelihoods in Courts amount to a good evidence, and many leſſer ſtars make up a Galaxia. They are with me at leaſt ſo far prevailing, That I believe that ſuch are worthily excluded; and as they do not come without ſcandal, ſo they cannot come to their advantage. In caſe after a former way in ſin, or ſad fall to the ſcandal of the Church, upon admonition there appear, convictions, and ſerious promiſes, the caſe is otherwiſe; there is all cauſe then to take in ſuch a one to this Ordinance, in which his ſin appears in the higheſt aggravation, and a tender and offer is made, and the way held forth of pardon and forgiveneſſe. Many of the Ancients were haſty enough to give the Sacrament to men at the inſtant of their death, as a Viaticum to heaven, when it was all too late to make any right improvement of it: But we are in the mean ſpace too ſlow, and over-rigid, in admiſſion of profeſſed penitents to it, as appeares in many examples. That of Serapion is notable mentioned by Euſebius, who had lived a great while in the Church, without blame, but at laſt fell in time of perſocution; And often deſiring to be received again by the Church, no man hearkened to him, till at laſt being ſick, and ready to dye, he ſent a boy ſuddenly to fetch a Prieſt, who was found ſick by the meſſenger, that he could not come to him: But he gave the boy a little of the Sacrament, and bid him put it into the mans mouth; who when he had taſted of it, preſently dyed. That was expected here from the Sacrament, which it wanted, viz. ſome hidden power to carry up the ſoul for heaven and glory; and in the mean ſpace that was not ſeen for which it was inſtituted, A provocation to repentance, and corroboration, and ſtrengthning of the ſoul in wayes of holineſſe; when there was hopes of good, to accrew by it, it was denyed; and when all hopes were paſt, it was indulged. After-ages appeared more facile, but then profeſſion of repentance was turned into a form of auricular confeſſion; they might confeſſe and take penance, and be fit for the Sacrament; and ſin as ſoon as it was over, and go again to confeſſion; That formality of confeſſion put the Sacrament as they thought into a poſture of working, which ſin unconfeſt did hinder. To deny penitents, where there is any fair and poſſible hopes, by reaſon of conviction wrought, is their ſad diſcouragement; we ſee them lame, and weak, and we deny them a Crutch that is provided for them. And to receive obſtinate p. 245ones, that without remorſe carry it on in wickedneſſe, ſeems dangerouſly to ſtrengthen them in their wayes; and not at all to help them out of their ungodly courſes. From this that hath been ſpoken, a fair anſwer therefore may be given to the arguments before paſt by, concerning any power in this Ordinance for converſion. And firſt, for that from the, Directory where the ignorant, ſcandalous, and prophane that live in any ſin, or offence againſt their conſcience, are warned not to preſume, to come nigh that holy Table, it is meant of thoſe that purpoſely reſolve to hold their ſin, and doubtleſſe that purpoſe ſtanding, here is no comfort to be put into their hands. It is no other then that counſel of our Saviour, Matth. 5.23, 24. If thou bring thy gift to the Altar, and there remembreſt that thy brother hath ought againſt thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way, firſt he reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. Sacraments will not be accepted from that hand, where malice is ſeated in the heart, and implacably continued; but it followes not but that where the ſoul is ſtartled, and ſuch reſolutions for ſin do not appear, this maybe a means further to awake; and provoke to a reſolution againſt it. As to that of Communicating to Heathens, Pagans, enough hath been ſaid before, It can neither be done with allowance, nor any poſſible benefit. And for Excommunicate perſons, they are ſuppoſed to be in an obſtinate way of wickedneſſe. The laſt is onelyonly worthy of conſideration. That Ordinance that is not communicable nor lawfull to be adminiſtred to any known impenitent ſinner under that notion, but onelyonly as penitent ſinners truly repenting of their ſins, is not a converting but a ſealing Ordinance: But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is not communicable nor lawfull to be adminiſtred to any known impenitent ſinner, &c. Ergo. Here I might juſtly except againſt that oppoſition that is ſtill put between converting, and ſealing Ordinances; as though it muſt be taken for granted; that no ſealing Ordinance could have any hand in, or towards converſion. Gods ſeal added to his promiſe, may by the bleſſing of God be ſerviceable here, as well as his oath, added for confirmation; but this is grounded upon the miſtake of the way of the Sacraments ſealing, in which I have ſufficiently expreſſed my ſelf. For anſwer to the Argument it ſelf, The major Propoſition is not true, unleſſe it be underſtood with juſt limitation; Reproof is an Ordinance that may well be reckoned among p. 246thoſe that work to converſion, being the way of life, Prov. 6.23. and called the reproof of life, Prov. 13.31. an excellent oyl, Pſal. 141.5. and upon that account to be uſed towards a brother in ſin, Levit. 19.17. And yet prudence muſt be uſed in the application of it. Every man is not a meet ſubject to get good by it. There is no ſuch warineſſe explicitely required in the diſpenſing of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, as there is in the application of reproofs; nor yet any ſo punctually pointed out not to communicate, as there is not to be reproved. The Wiſemans obſervation is, that He that reproveth a ſcorner, getteth to himſelf ſhame; and he that rebuketh a wicked man, getteth to himſelf a blot: Therefore he gives advice upon it, ver. 8. Reprove, not a ſcorner, leſt he hate thee: rebuke a wiſe man, and he will love thee. Every Ordinance therefore that is for converſion, is not meet to be applyed to every man in an unconverted condition: Rebukes ſet out the danger of ſin, and the Lords Supper is for the aggravation of it, in holding forth the ſad effects of it, yet neither of both meet to be applyed to all in ſin. That charge of our Saviour is deliveted in an univerſal way, Caſt not holy things to dogs, nor pearles before ſwine. The Propoſition there included is general. Nothing that is holy, nothing that is of the honour of a pearly, is to be caſt to any dog or ſwine; whence we may aſſume; But there is no converting Ordinance, but it is of the number of holy things: Ergo. No converting Ordinances are to be given to any that are dogs and ſwine, which way ſoever any think to extricate themſelves, by putting limits to any term in the Propoſition, they muſt neceſſarily be brought to yield, that all converting Ordinances are not promiſcuouſly to be applyed to all in ſin; But choyce muſt be made unto whom they may with profit be delivered. And thus I have ſpoke my full thoughts of the ſubjects of this Ordinance, concluding without the leaſt heſitancy or ſcruple, That all in Covenant have a fundamental, or firſt right to it, a jus ad rem, and making it my buſineſſe to find out who they be that may be admitted, in expectation of benefit by it, and who are juſtly detained from it; In which I truſt I have given juſt offence on no hand, either in giving way to the admiſſion of any that according to any Scripture-rule, or juſt deduction thence ſhould be held back, and ſo hardening them in any way of ignorance or ſin, in giving them any encouragement. I have a witneſſe in p. 247heaven, that I intended nothing in this but to find out the mind of Jeſus Chriſt, and to have this Ordinance ſo adminiſtred, that the edification of the viſible Members of Jeſus Chriſt might be moſt prompted, and godlineſſe encouraged. And in caſe that this which I have done, may not be ſerviceable this way, I deſire that it may prove an abortive. I know there is a diſtinction uſed by ſome, and applyed to admiſſion both of Infants to Baptiſme, and men of growth to the Lords Table; that there is a twofold title, one in foro Dei, in the Court of Heaven, and here onelyonly the Infants of the elect regenerate have title (as they ſay) to Baptiſme, and the elect regenerate themſelves to the Lords Supper. The other in foro Eccleſiaſtico, in the Court of the Church, and here all tiie Infants of profeſſed believers have right in Baptiſme, and the knowing and not ſcandalous, though unregenerate, to the Lords Supper. By the favour of which; diſtinction, thoſe of that judgment and I may be well enough agreed; and as I think there is ſmall difference about the perſons to be admitted to this Supper, yet for the diſtinction, I confeſſe I do not underſtand it; Both the Sacraments being Church-Ordinances, I ſuppoſe God keeps no other Court about them, ſave the Court of his Church. If they have this right in foro Eccleſiaſtico, then it is the mind of God that the Church ſhould admit them, and ſo they have right in foro Dei likewiſe. And I marvel how thoſe that bring this within the power of juriſdiction, can here apply this diſtinction, ſeeing it overthrowes that which they apply hither, Whatſoever you bind on earth, ſhall be bound in heaven; and whatſoever you looſe on earth, ſhall be looſed in heaven. Many that are admitted ma want acceptance in heaven; but having their right, and putting in no viſible barre, their confeſſed Eccleſiaſtical right concludes, that their admiſſion is with acceptance of heaven; and my great buſineſſe hath been for their comfort and encouragement that give admittance, that their benefiting is poſſible that are thus admitted, And here I might take into conſideration the opinion of thoſe that would have a promiſcuous admittance, and indeed I had it in my thoughts to have given a brief anſwer to Mr. Humphrey's Scriptures, and Reaſons, ſo much by ſome applauded, and ſo ſtrongly bottomed, Becauſe all Communicants muſt drink of the Cup, therefore all muſt communicate, with ſome limits, which being yielded, as I have proved they muſt, will draw the limit p. 248neceſſarily, yet ſomewhat more narrow. But this is by one hand already done, and I have lately had the happineſſe to ſee a ſecond learned Piece fitted for the Preſſe; dealing largely in it, which I doubt not may both ſatisfie the Adverſary and the Reader, ſo that my pains may well be ſpared; onelyonly I cannot but take notice of his fourth Reaſon for a promiſcuous admiſſion, which he faith will ariſe from the vanity, formality, impoſſibility of ſelecting people to this Ordinance: Look to the heart of all theſe ſeparations, they come to nothing: For put the caſe you will have a gathered company, I pray who do you account indeed to be fit and worthy receivers? If not all that make profeſſion, as we do mixtly, then thoſe onelyonly that have an intereſt in Chriſt, and are true believers. Well, but how will you be able to know them? The heart of man is deceitfull above all things; who can know it? And if we can hardly diſcover our own hearts, how ſhall we diſcern others? ſo that all will come, but to theſe that have the faireſt ſhew, thoſe that ſeem ſuch, and you cannot be ſecured, but there may, and will be ſome hypocrites; and ſo this true partaking as all one body, and one blood, in ſuch an unmixt communion, as you pretend vaniſhes, and there can be no ſuch matter: But now if men ſtand here upon a formal purity, and will have the outward pureſt Church they can, they go to ſeparating again, and never leave ſeparating and ſeparating, (as we have daily teſtimony) till they are quite ſeparated one from another; Even as in the peeling of an Onion, where you may peel, and peel, till you have brought all to nothing, unleſſe to a few tears perchance, with which the eyes of good men muſt needs run over in the doing. To this I anſwer, If the rule to take in this gathered company, be intereſt in Chriſt, to take in thoſe of a ſaving intereſt, and refuſe all others, if regenerate, then he ſhall be admitted; in caſe unregenerate, then he ſhall be refuſed; then I ſhall yield his concluſion, I ſhall leave that diſtinction to him, that knowes what is in man. I ſhould fear many a man of non-intereſt might be let in, and many a man of true intereſt refuſed; a glozing tongue may here carry it, further then an upright heart. And for his next of a formal purity, to get the Church as pure as we can; though this ought to be our endeavour, to get the Church as pure, not formally, but really, as poſſible; yet I make it no rule: But following the Apoſtles rule, to do, as all things elſe, ſo this, to edification; though it be a matter of much care and prudence, yet not vain and impoſſible p. 249in a good meaſure, to determine it; upon this rule I pitch, till I hear ſomething that may take me off it.