A Double Reply, Chapter 13

A Double Reply · Chapter 13

p. 125CHAP. XIII.

QUEST. 3.

Whether Suſpenſion (juridically or miniſteriall, privative or poſitive) diſtinct from abſolute Excommunication, be a dreame of the Phariſees or no, or whether it hath not been the conſtant judgement and practice of the Servants and Churches of Chriſt in all ages?

MAſter Boatman tells us, he ſaith it, yea, and againe he ſaith it, that Suſpenſion diſtinct from Excommunication is a dreame of the Phariſees; yea, and it was a Phariſaicall dreame that invented it. It is no matter what he ſaith, the queſtion is whether it was ſo or no.

1. If he meanes by the Phariſees that particular Sect amongſt the Jews ſo called, he ſcar e ſpeakes ſenſe, for they never owned the Ordinan…e of the Lords Supper, and how they ſhould invent Suſpenſio… from it I cannot tell.

p. 1262. He ſpeakes it ancient enough, as old as Chriſts time.

But becauſe I am willing to beleeve he thought he ſpake ſenſe, I conceive his meaning was,

That it was an invention of ſome particular men, who were of proud phariſaicall diſpoſitions, and would bring in their inventions to mingle them with Gods Ordinances.

If he ſpake ſenſe, this was his meaning; and if it were, it was one of the moſt bold and ignorant ſlanders of the Churches and Servants of God in all Ages that hath been heard, and as impolitickly ſpoken for his own credit; when any one, who hath either lookt into Fathers, or Schoolemen, or Divines of any ſort, Papiſts, or Proteſtants, and thoſe of any perſwaſion, Epiſcopall, Presbyterian, or Independent, as to Church Government, is able to ſay, that either he ſpake againſt his knowledge, or elſe never read any of them, (the latter of which (out of charity to him) I am moſt apt to beleeve.) But if they were Phariſees, and dreaming Phariſees too, they were many of them holy and learned dreamers. And the Church of Chriſt hath from Chriſts time been in a dreame till Mr John Boatman awakened it; and we hope to prove anon that this confident Gentleman was the Dreamer himſelfe, whoſe tongue ran (like a wild fancy in a dreame) when the eyes of his underſtanding were ſealed up with lamentable ignorance of the generall practice of the Churches of God: It was bad enough for Joſephs eleven Brethren to call him Dreamer, but ſurely it had been worſe for him, the younger, to have called all them ſo. If Mr Boatman had been ſome grave Doctor in Divinity, ſome Biſhop, or Archbiſhop, or Pope, the Cenſure had ſavoured of a great deale of more ignorance, and boldneſſe, than judgement, or diſcretion; but for one who never ſo much as took p. 127the loweſt degree, not ſtaying at any Univerſity halfe ſo long as is required of him that would commence Batchelor of Arts, and if he had taken his degrees, had not yet been Maſter of Arts above foure or five yeares ſtanding, to cenſure ſo many Reverend Fathers, Learned and Acute Schoolemen, ſo many holy and Reverend Divines of all ſorts, yea, and ſo many Churches, all as Dreamers, Phariſaicall Dreamers too, was enough to let the world know the Character of himſelfe. But let us a little examine how many this young Rabbi hath at once called Dreamers, Phariſaicall Dreamers, bold uſurpers of Chriſts authority &c. I ſhall only premiſe this one thing.

That I ſhall not undertake to prove their judgement as to this, or that ſort of Suſpenſion, whether by the ſingle Paſtor, or the Presbytery. For although there be ſufficient ground in Scripture to prove the divine right of Ruling Elders, and ſufficient Record to prove that they were in the Primitive Church, as our Learned Brethren of the Province of London have proved out of Tertullian, Origen, Baſil, Optatus, Vindication of ſus divinum, p. 12. Tert. Apol. c 39. Orig. l. 3. cont…a Celſum. Baſil in Pſ. 33. Optatus. l. 1. adv. Par…n. A…b…ſpin. ibid. H…er. in Iſ. ….2. Aug. ep. 137. l. 3. con. …. c. 56. Serm. 19. in Pſal. 3…. Greg. Mag. l. 11. ep. 19.Ps 33Ps 3Albaſpineus, Hierom, Auguſtine, Gregorius Magnus, &c. And our learned Countryman Mr Brinſly hath proved out of Deane Nowels Catechiſme, which quotation is evidently true from the ancient Copies of that Catechiſme Greeke Latine printed, as alſo in the Latine Copies, yet I know there are many that do queſtion the divine right of the Ruling Elder.

But it is enough to me if I can prove that in all Ages ſome have been kept from the Lords Supper (by whom matters not whether by the Pre…bytery or ſingle Miniſter, who yet were not excommunicated.

And this I hope to do; which i… I do, let the world judge whether it be ſuch a dreame as we are ignorantly told it is.

And with what humility my Antagoniſt hath condemned p. 128Fathers, Schoolemen, Divines of all ſorts, in all Ages, of all perſwaſions, yea, all reformed Churches, and our own ever ſince the firſt reformation, as dreamers, and uſurpers of a new authority.

As for the firſt Century, or one hundred yeares after Chriſt, we have no writings extant but thoſe of the Apoſtles, except the conſtitution of ſome Canons of the Apoſtles, and ſome fragments of Clement, and of Dionyſius Areopagita: (who was an ancient writer but judged by moſt long after) and ſome few Epiſtles of Ignatius, who according to Helvicus and Euſebius was made Biſhop of Antioch one hundred yeares after Chriſt.

There is little credit to be given to the Canons, or the teſtimony of the pretended Areopagite, as to matters of fact in the firſt Century; for it is upon very good grounds ſuppoſed, that the Canons were made long after, and that Dionyſius lived long after, but yet their writings being all the record can be pretended, let us examine what they ſay.

For Clements two Epiſtles I want them, and cannot examine what they ſay. In the pretended Canons of the Apoſtles, I find it ſufficiently proved Canon 130.

If any Clergy man, foreign, Canon. Apoſt. Canon 13.or Lay man, excommunicated or ſuſpended, go to any other City, and be received into Communion there, let him that receives him, and he who is received be both excommunicated.

Here is plainly Suſpenſion diſtinct from Excommunication aſſerted; there were ſome foreign as well as foreign.

For the pretended Areopagite, I ſee reaſon enough to beleeve he lived not in this Century, but admit p. 129he did, and he ſpeakes plaine enough.

Here he tels us, that the Catecumeni, foreign. Dion. Areop. cap. Υ. ex edit Morellii octavo. 1562. p. 141.and the Poenitents, and Energumeni were excluded from the Lords Supper, which he tels us was adminiſtred to none but thoſe who had perfect eyes to diſcerne the Lords body, &c. This is ſufficient, but this is not all.

For preſently after he ſubjoyneth, that if Penitents ought not to be admitted, much leſſe ought profane perſons, who lived in luſts, and teſtified no repentance; who he ſaies ſhould be admitted to no other Ordinance but the preaching of the Word. I will tranſcribe the place.

foreign, Ibid p. 144.foreign, p. 130This quotation being ſo full to ſhew what perſons in the Primitive Church were ſuſpended, yet not excommunicated, though it were ſomething too large, yet I have tranſcribed it all.foreign, &c.

I have been willing to tranſcribe this paſſage fully, becauſe it ſpeakes ſo fully to our caſe. Dionyſius in this Chapter doth profeſſedly treate concerning the Lords Supper, and here concerning the order of adminiſtring, in the firſt place he tels us, ſome were put away, or went away. 2. Then the Adminiſtration proceeded.

Now who were they who were enjoyned to go away? he reckons ſeverall ſorts:

1. foreign, thoſe who were yet not made compleat members of the Church, that had never yet been initiated in thoſe holy myſteries; doubtleſſe, by theſe he meanes the Catechumeni, ſuch as God had begun to worke upon, and they had evidenced ſome good affections to the doctrine of the Goſpell, but had not yet ſufficient knowledge to fit them for either Sacrament; In lib. 4.and this is conforme to what Renatus Laurentius de la Farre, in his Annotations on Tertullian, Tert. adverſ. Mare.tells us: This order of Converts were likewiſe by Tertullian and Cyprian, &c. called p. 131Audientes, & Auditores, and they had a particular Teacher. Euſeb. l. 5. l. 6. cap. 3.Euſebius tels us Pantaenus was their firſt Teacher, then Clemens Alexand. afterward Demetrius made Origen their Teacher; and Cyprian tels us, Cypr. ep. 22.that with the conſent of the Presbyters he after made Optatus their Teacher. Now there were the firſt ſort, which were not come to the Table, ſaith Dionyſius; and ſo Pachymeres expounds him foreign.

2. The ſecond ſort excluded he ſaith are foreign. Thoſe who had apoſtatized from an holy life. By theſe doubtleſſe he meanes ſcandalous ſinners who had been former Profeſſors, otherwiſe they could not be Apoſtates. George Pachimeres expounds it foreign, men given up to vile affections, who had returned to their former luſts.

3. The third ſort were thoſe foreign, &c. ſuch as through the terrours of perſecutors had been tempted to ſin, and fallen into it, &c. There are two or three other ſorts, mentioned by him, who were kept away, ſuch as were Penitents, that is, who had fallen into ſin, and the Church had appointed them a time of ſhame, and repentance after the profeſſion of their reſolutions to amend; and laſtly, thoſe who were not altogether foreign, without any ſcandall or ſpot, theſe were all removed, ſaith Dionyſius, before the Lords Supper was adminiſtred, but ſurely theſe were not all excommunicated, here is not a word of that. Thoſe who will ſee more may looke into Maximus and Pachymeres, the two Scholiaſts upon Dionyſius. I have not tranſlated the paſſage becauſe it was large. But Dionyſius ſaith plainly, that ſuch as are foreign, &c. men given to their luſts, &c. ſhould much more be kept from the Lords Table than either Catechumeni or Poenitentes.

p. 132I know none elſe in the firſt Century, but Ignatius, who hath left us any Writings, and it is queſtionable whether any of theſe, or his either be foreign or no. But doubtleſſe Dionyſius was ancient, though I beleeve not thus ancient; his Scholiaſt Maximus lived within the fourth Century. Let us ſee what we have in the ſecond Century, ad annum Chriſti 200.

In this Century we have Juſtin Martyr, who hath ſomething conſiderable extant to tell us the practice of the Church in his time, and he hath ſpoken fully enough to our purpoſe in his ſecond Apology for the Chriſtians, foreign. Juſt. Mart. Apol. 2. ex edit. Lutet. Paris. 1615. p. 97, 98.which Helvicus ſaith he wrote about the yeare 160. where he tells us, how in thoſe daies they adminiſtred the Ordinance of the Supper, and hath theſe words.

This nouriſhment (ſaith he) is with us called the Euchariſt, of which none may partake with us but he, 1. That beleeves our Doctrine to be true. 2. He that is waſhed with the Laver of Regeneration for the remiſſion of ſins. 3. He that lives ſo as Chriſt hath Commanded.

We deſire no more than the recovery of this ancient Diſcipline of the Church, viz. that none may be admitted to the Lords Supper but ſuch as firſt are baptized. Secondly, Such as beleeve the Doctrine of the Goſpell, which they muſt know before they can beleeve. 3. Such as do not live according to the rule of the Goſpell; but if none elſe were admitted in Juſtine Martyrs time, queſtionleſſe there were ſome ſuſpended who were not excommunicated.

In this Century alſo lived Tatianus, Melito, Ireneus, Theophilus Antioch. Policarpus, Apollinaris, Athenagoras, Clemens, Alexandrinus, Pantaenus, Tertullian, &c.

If teſtimonies could be produced out of theſe it were to little purpoſe, Juſtin Martyr having ſufficiently evidenced for that Century. But the truth is, p. 133ſome of them have nothing extant, and others very little, and upon reſtrained ſubjects, in the handling of which they were not led to this theme. And in thoſe pieces of Clemens Alexandrinus and Tertullian I find very little ſpoken concerning the diſcipline and order of the Chur…h. Something there is in Tertullian, but Juſtin Martyr hath already ſpoken enough for this Age conſidering the occaſion of his ſpeaking, it was in an Apology for all Chriſtians in his Age, and Apologizing for them he ſets out their pure worſhipping of God, and inoffenſive practice.

From the yeare two hundred to the yeare three hundred.

In this Century were ſeverall Synods, but none of which we have any Record but only a Provinciall Synod, called Conſilium Anchyritanum by Gratian. Genebrard in his Chronology puts this Synod anno 298. Helvicus anno 312. Caranza and Mr Gilleſpy anno 308. certaine it is it was either in the latter end of this, or the beginning of the next Century. I ſhall with learned Genebrard account it into this. Caranza ſaies it was before the Oecumenicall Councill of Nice, but in what Emperours time is not determined. But in that Councill we find Suſpenſion eſtabliſhed with a witneſſe. That for ſome ſins, if any committed them before he was twenty yeares old, he ſhould ſpend fifteene yeares in penitence before he ſhould be admitted to pray with the Church, and five yeares he ſhould have no more than a communion in Prayers with the Church, and afterwards be admitted to the Lords Table. This Canon may be ſeen in Caranza, p. 28. can. 16. I find the Greeke Copy thus elſewhere.

foreign; p. 134foreign.

I neither juſtifie this Councill, nor this Canon of it in all things, but if there were ſuch a Councill, and ſo ancient as we are told, it plainly ſhews us Suſpenſion diſtinct from Excommunication was ſo ancient in the Church of God; the ſame is alſo confirmed by the 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. Canons of that Councill; the Copies of which may be ſeen either in the booke called foreign Greek-Latine, or Latine in Caranza and Benius, &c. The two moſt Famous Fathers in this Century were Origen about the yeare 202. and Cyprian 250.

Origen hath ſome, not obſcure, hints of the judgment of the Church in his time. O…ig. in Levit. Homil. 23.— Cibus iſte Sanctus non eſt communis omnium, nec cujuſcunque indigni ſed Sanctorum eſt.

Severall other hints are in Origen, though he no where ſpeakes directly to the caſe.

For Cyprian, he that reads his tenth Epiſtle ad clerum de Presbyteris. &c. or his book de lapſis, will find enough: I had thought to have tranſcribed ſome paſſages: but I am prevented by Mr Gilleſpy in his Aarons Rod l. 3. cap. 17. where the Reader ſhall find them quoted.

From the yeare three hundred to foure hundred.

In the Century, beſides other Councils, was the famous Oecumenicall Councill of Nice, and for Ancients, Arnobius, Athanaſius, Hilary, Macarius, Optatus, Baſil, Greg. Nyſſen. Nazianzen, Epiphanius, Ambroſe, Chryſoſtome, Hierome, Auſtin; Some of theſe will doubtleſſe tell us the practice of the Church in their times.

p. 135For the Councill of Nice we have an imperfect Record, but if thoſe Canons, which are printed as theirs, be ſo, they ſpeake plaine enough, Can. 11.

foreign.Concil. Nicen. Can. 11.

Reader, this Synod was queſtionleſſe the moſt glorious Orthodox Synod that ever the Church of Chriſt could glory in. Here were 318 of the moſt eminent ſervants of Chriſt, in the worke of the Goſpell, which the world then afforded. Theſe all determine, that ſuch ſinners as were ſcandalous, though they had ſinned through temptation, for feare of their lives or eſtates, (worſhipping Idols, I ſuppoſe they meant) though they did profeſſe repentance, yet they ſhould give three yeares proofe of it before they ſhould have any communion with the Church; if in this time they were found not to contradict their profeſſion, they were admitted to ſome Communion, but no otherwiſe than penitents for ſeven yeares more, after theſe ten yeares they muſt have no nearer communion than in prayer for two yeares longer; here was a Suſpenſion of ten yeares for ſcandalous ſins, diſtinct from Excommunication: were all theſe dreamers thinke we? For the length of time I do not juſtifie them, nor can I altogether condemne them, conſidering the juncture of time, and ſtate of the Church then.

In this Century, they ſay, was Concilium Neocaeſarienſe, if it were ſo, and we have a true account of p. 136their acts. In their ſecond Canon they decree, that if a woman marry two brothers ſhe ſhould be rejected to her death; foreign, yet it is plaine ſhe was not excommunicated ſo long, for in the ſame Canon they determine ſhe might have the Sacrament given her in her dying houre.

In the ſame Century was Concilium Gangrenſe, who in the preface to their acts do plainely diſtinguiſh foreign, one who is denied Communion with the Church, and one who is quite ſeparated from it.

What the Councill of Arles, determined in the ſame Century is plaine.

The firſt Councill of Arles Can. 11. Can. 12. Can. 23. plainely eſtabliſh Suſpenſion diſtinct from Excommunication.

The ſecond Councill of Arles, Caranza p. 55. a.in the ſame Century, determines the Suſpenſion of ſuch from the Lords Supper for five yeares, as had, through feare in time of perſecution, ſacrificed to Idols. See alſo Canon 20, 25.

Concilium Elebertinum, in which, Caranza ſaith, were nineteene Biſhops, doth plainly diſtinguiſh betwixt ſome ſinners, to whom the Sacrament at death ſhould be denied, and others who ſhould be ſuſpended from it, but yet might have it at their death, deſiring it, which if they were excommunicated they could not, V. Can. 1, 2, 3, 14, 21, 31, 40, &c.

For particular men in this Century, Aarons rod, l. 3. c. 17.the Opinions of Baſil, Thaumaturgus, Chryſoſtome, Ambroſe, Auguſtine, are evident in their ſeverall workes.

Baſil is enough for all, in his Canonicall Epiſtles ad Amphilochium, ſee Canon 34, 38, 44, 56, 57, 58, 59. for murther, he determines twenty yeares ſuſpenſion, Can. 36. for man-ſlaughter, eleven yeares, Can. 57. for Adultery, fifteene, Can. 58. for Fornication, eight yeares, p. 137Can 59. for theft, though the thiefe firſt accuſed himſelfe, one yeare, Can. 61. for perjury eleven yeares, Can. 64. But if they before gave good evidence of their repentance and change, they were to be admitted ſooner, Can. 74.

It were an eaſie but tedious worke to ſhew that this was the judgement of the ſucceeding Councils and Fathers, but if we could not, theſe were the moſt pure and incorrupted times of the Church: and ſurely the Servants of God were not all this time in a dreame.

For the time of Antichriſts prevailing, betwixt the time of the purer Church and the beginnings of Reformation by Luther and Calvin, we ſhall eaſily know what was the generall opinion by the Schoolemen, and by their decretalls and Councils: the Schoolemen moſt of them handle this Queſtion.

An peccatori hoc Sacramentum petenti Sacerdos denegare debeat?

Whether if a Sinner deſire the Sacrament of the Lords Supper the Prieſt ought to deny it him? They generally diſtinguiſh betwixt a ſecret ſinner and a publike and notorious ſinner, and betwixt his deſiring it in private and in publike.Vaſq. in tert. par. Thom. t. 3. q. 80. diſp. 209. cap. 2. In quâ re ſcholaſtici omnes, ut dixi, conſtanter affi…mant, publico peccatori, nimirum de quo non conſtat, ad meliorem frugem fuiſſe converſum publice etiam, Euchariſtiam done gandam eſſe, ibid.

1. They all generally determine, that if the ſinner be a manifeſt open ſinner, the Prieſt ought to deny it to him, (though not excommunicated) which is enough for to prove Suſpenſion diſtinct from Excommunication.

They are not ſo well agreed in determining who ſhould be accounted publike notorious ſinners: Nor whether the Prieſt may not in ſome caſes deny the Lords Supper to Occulto peccatori?

Gabriel Vaſquez aſſures me that all the Schoolemen do agree, that the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is to be denied to an open ſinner, of whoſe repentance there is no evidence.

p. 138I ſaid before, they are not ſo well agreed who ſhall be judged a ſcandalous ſinner. Adrianus, in his queſtions de Euchariſtia, ſaies, he is a publike ſcandalous ſinner if his ſin be known to ten perſons. Sylveſter and Navarrus thinke enough if it be known to ſix. Dominicus Sotus and Vaſquez, thinke that ſuſpicion is not enough, but the party muſt appeare ſcandalous, either 1. Per ſententiam, he being declared ſo by the Judge; or 2. Per confeſſionem ab ipſo in judicio, or by his own confeſſion in Court; or 3. Per rei evidentiam, when the thing is evident and cannot be denied. But though they diſagree here, yet they plainely enough agree, as to the granting a Suſpenſion diſtinct from Excommunication.

Now that this is the concurrent opinion of the Schoolemen, Bonavent. in l. 4 ſent. diſt. 9. art. 2. q. 4. Duran. in ſent. d…ſt. 9. q 5. Etius in l. 4. ſent. diſt. 9. ſect 4. Vaſq. in 3. p. Tho…. 3 q. 8. art. 6. Alex H…len. in 4. p. ſum. q. 11. art. 3. Aquin. ſum. 3. p. q. 80 art. 6. Becan. In ſum. Scholaſt. Thcol. p 3 c. 5. q 8.I ſhall prove by referring the Reader to thoſe places in Bonaventure, Aquinas, Durandus, Becanus, Halenſis, Eſtius, Vaſquez; where they profeſſedly handle the queſtion and give Arguments for it. Vaſquez, as I ſaid before, tels me, it is the unanimous Vote of all his Brethren of the Schooles; I am ſure it is the determination of all theſe (which prove it the opinion of the Schoolemen in all Ages) Bonaventure, Aquinas, and Durandus being all betwixt 1250. and 1300. Vaſquez (ſaith Helvicus) died 1604. and Eſtius died 1613. as may be ſeen in the account of his life, and Writings prefixed to his Commentaries on the Epiſtles.

If Suſpenſion diſtinct from Excommunication be a Dreame, theſe were ſome of the learned Dreamers.

It remaines that we examine the judgement of others, and it is no great matter to whom we turne, let them be Papiſts, Lutherans, or Calviniſts, we ſhall find them all in this point foreign

As for Papiſts, I ſhall not trouble my Reader, with quotations out of them (though it were a very facile p. 139thing to do) partly becauſe the ignorance of ſome may judge it one of their ſuperſtitious practices, and partly becauſe their Schoolemen have ſpoken enough to let us know their minds; to which Salmeron may be added, who hath ſpoken enough to prove it in a place I have before quoted.Salmeron. t 5. tract. 60.

For the opinion of the Churches of the Switzers it is not conſiderable in the cauſe, becauſe moſt of their Churches have no Excommunication at all, and ſo could not hold Suſpenſion as diſtinct from it, yet I obſerve that none of them plead for admiſſion of any to the Lords Table, but ſuch as make a profeſſion of their faith and repentance, ſo Brentius, Bullinger, Gualther, &c.

Philip Melancthon, who was one of the firſt Reformers in Germany, hath ſaid enough, as it is recorded by Chriſtophorus Pezelius.Pezelii pars oct. argum & reſp. theol. contexta ex ſcriptis Melanct. de Excom. p. 409.

In veteribus Canonibus duo gradus ſunt poenarum, ſeparatio foreign & excommunicatio foreign. Separatio eſt poena qua homo per ſententiam Eccleſia cogitur aliquantiſper omittere officium publicum, & uſum Sacramentorum, ut exploretur ejus obedientia an volens ſtatim emendaturus ſit, & veniam petiturus, Melancth. in Eth. 287.an vero contumaciter defenſurus errorem. &c.

Altera poena ultima, & ſumma in Eccleſia eſt Excommunicatio, &c.

This is plaine enough for our purpoſe.

The next which I ſhall name of thoſe holy and learned men, whom Mr Boatman hath called Dreamers, &c. amongſt the reſt is holy Bucer.Bucer in Comment. in Epheſ. cap. 4.Eph 4

Et Cavendum eſt Eccleſiis ne cui cauſam praebeant ſumendi ſibi judicium, in ſumendo Sacramento ſalutis quod faciunt quicunque, abſque verâ peccatorum ſuorum Poenitentiâ Sacrament is Domini communicant. Quamobrem ſiqui in gravius aliquod peccatum incidiſſent & in manifeſtum flagitium, ut Corinthius ille inceſtus inciderat, p. 140eos priſcae Eccleſia quae Chriſti diſciplinam adhuc rectè tenebant, ligabant certo tempore ad agend…m, hoc eſt demonſtrandum poenitentiam per opera, & fructus veros poenitentiae, etiamſi illos jam tum peccati ſui poenitere appareret, id enim erat conſentaneum verae poenitentiae de tetriore lapſu, quae (ut dictum) ſi vera ſit, aliquandiu haeret, tum utile ad cavendum peccatum tam ipſe qui ligabatur quam totae reliquae Eccleſiae, — Atque hinc eſt quod Divus Cyprianus tantopere urgebat, lapſis in perſecutionibus, non ilico dandam eſſe veniam, ſed diu, ac juſto tempore eos agere poenitentiam, de quo v. Epiſt. ejus 2. & 3. lib. 1. & lib. 3. ab Ep. 14. ad 20. & in Sermone de lapſis. Item exemplum Ambroſit inlegatione Theodoſii apud Theod. l. 3. c. 18. & apud Sozom. l. 7. c. 24. Porro licet abſtinendi ſint ad tempus qui gravioribus peccatis Eccleſiam funeſtarunt, tamen ſeverior debet eſſe Excommunicatio eorum qui Eccleſiam non audiunt, &c.

In the next place let us heare what our Reverend Calvin ſaith, Calv. inſtitut. l. 4. cap. 12. ſect. 5, & 6.and he ſpeakes plaine enough. In his fifth Paragraph, having ſpoken before of Church-Cenſures, he treats of the three ends which the Church aimes at in ſuch Cenſures: 1. The glory of God. 2. The preſervation of the Churches purity. 3. The amendment of the offender. In his ſixth Paragraph he comes to ſhew the method and order of the Churches proceedings in Church-Cenſures, that he doth by making uſe of a former diſtinction he had laid down between publike and more private ſins. By private ſins he tels us, he doth not mean ſuch as none know of, ſuch as are the ſins of hypocrites, but ſuch whoſe nature is not ſo ſcandalous, &c. For open, groſſe, publike ſins, he tells us the Church need not proceed ſo gradually; 1. By private admonition. 2. Then by admonition more publike, &c. For leſſer ſins the Church takes no cogniſance of them till private p. 141admonition be refuſed when it comes to them; if the offence be lighter, ſufficit verborum castigatio (ſaith he) it is enough for the Church at firſt to admoniſh, and that, ſaith he, muſt be levis & paterna, quae non exaſperet peccatorem, nec confundat, ſed reducat ad ſeipſum, ut magis gaudeat ſe correctum quam triſtetur. But if the offences be of an higher nature, they muſt be corrected by a ſharper remedy, for (ſaith he) it is not enough if one hath committed a ſcandalous ſin, and grievouſly offended the Church, ſhould be, reproved by words, Ibid. Sect. 7, 8, 9.10, 11, 12.but for a time he ought to be deprived of the Communion of the Lords Supper, till he hath given evidence of his repentance. — And this, ſaith he, was the way of the ancient and better Church, &c. But for Excommunciation he determines that muſt be done after a great deale of waiting, and with a great deale of wiſdome and caution, &c. thou maieſt read him at large, whoſe diſcourſe is too large indeed to be tranſcribed: This is enough to ſhew thee that he is one of Mr Boatmans Phariſees and Dreamers too; (we ſhall have good company I hope anon.)

In this ſixteenth Century were ſo many eminent men, that it were endleſſe to tranſcribe all their teſtimonies to this truth; thou haſt, Reader, already heard what Melancthon and Bucer, and Calvin have ſpoke, (who were all three within this Century,) I ſhall not trouble thee with many more.Zach. Urſinus in doct. Chriſt. 2. p. de Coenâ dom. q. 8.

What Reverend Vrſine thought may be read at large in his eighth Queſtion de Coenâ Domini, where he ſpeakes to theſe two Queſtions: 1. Qui ad coe…am accedere debent, who ought to come to the Lords Table. 2. Qui debeant admitti, who ought to be admitted to it? In anſwer to the latter he determines;

Thoſe are to be admitted by the Church, who by words and deeds profeſſe true repentance, and who by the actions of their life expreſſe their profeſſion p. 142of faith and repentance, but they are (ſaith he) not to be admitted who barely ſay, they beleeve all things; for he who ſaith he beleeveth, and ſheweth it not by his works, is a liar, and doth in deeds deny what in words he affirmeth. For this he gives reaſons, and anſwers objections largely in that Chapter, which the Reader may ſee in Latine or Engliſh. And that he thought this Suſpenſion ought to precede Excommunication is plaine, for in the ſame Book in his fifth Queſtion de Clavibus, He determines that Excommunication muſt be uſed as the laſt remedy to correct thoſe who are found impenitent. And in the preceding Queſtion he proves by fourteen Arguments that ſcandalous perſons ought to be kept from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper (which I wiſh thoſe who are ſo zealous for the profanation of that Ordinance would ſeriouſly weigh) poſſibly they might amaze their conſciences (if they have any) more than Mr Boatman's ſtartling reaſon ſcares us.

I confeſſe, in this Century I find ſeverall of the Germane Divines pleading for promiſcuous Communion, eſpecially Wolfangus Muſculus; but they are not ſo conſiderable in this cauſe, becauſe their Judgements are alſo againſt all Church Diſcipline where there is a Chriſtian Magiſtrate. The Lord hath made their names upon other accounts exceeding famous, though in point of Church Diſcipline they have no name in the Church. God ſhall reveale this alſo to thoſe Churches (as we hope.)

What was Peter Martyrs opinion is plaine from his common places, Pet. Mart. loc. com. Claſ. 4. c. 5. ſect. 7.where he tells us in what order the Churches of God formerly proceeded to the ſolemne ſentence of Excommunication: he indeed tels us, that their ſeverall degrees of Catechumeni, of which ſome were Audientes, ſome Competentes, and of their Poenitentes, of which they had foure ſorts, p. 143(all of which were kept in the Primitive Church from the Lords Table, at leaſt all but their fourth degree of Penitents,) cannot be proved from Scripture. But in his fifteenth Section moving this Queſtion, what ſhould be done in reference to ſcandalous ſinners, if the community refuſed to conſent to their Excommunication, He anſwers: Saltem id curandum eſſe, ut damnatis atque convictis, de publicis & manifeſtis criminibus paſtor Sacramenta non diſtribuat. Care at leaſt muſt be taken that the Paſtor doth not adminiſter the Sacrament to ſuch as are convicted of groſſe ſins; from whence it is plaine, that he judged ſome that might be kept from the Supper of the Lord who were not Excommunicated. And that Reverend mans judgement is not ſo clearely to be judged from his common places (which were collected out of his works by others, and by them publiſhed) as by the Book called Reformatio legum Eccleſiaſticarum (of which more anon.)

In the next place let us heare what Polanus thought, Polan. Syntag. Theol l. 7. c. 18. Abſtentio publica uſurpatur, cum coram Eccleſia jubetur abſtinere Sacrae Coenae uſu is qui contra privatum interdictum aliis ad menſam domini accedentibus ſe ingerit, &c.whoſe judgement the Reader ſhall find in the ſecond part of his Syntagma, l. 7. c. 18.

Where he tels us, that the Publike Cenſures of the Church are three: 1. Admonitio. 2. Abſtentio. 3. Excommunicatio; Admonition, Suſpenſion, and Excommunication.

Publike Suſpenſion, ſaith he, is when in the face of the Church he is commanded to abſtaine from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, who either againſt a private prohibition intrudes, or whoſe ſin is ſo ſcandalous that the Paſtor of the Church cannot, without ſcandall to the faithfull, adminiſter the Sacrament to him, So Ambroſe ſuſpended the great Emperour Theodoſius.

Come we now to learned and Reverend Zanchy, who hath a large diſcourſe upon this point in his firſt p. 144Book of Epiſtles, Zanch. in epiſt. l. 1. in ep. ad Fred tert. A…quorum peccata ſunt omnibus nota, & quorum etiam pertinacia nemini eſt ignot A…bos ex verbo Dei cum totá vetuſtate & doctiſſim is quibuſque noſtri ſaeculi contendimus ad Coonam Domini minimè eſſe admittendos ib.in an Epiſtle to Fredericus tertius, where he determines that Excommunication is to proceed only in caſe of contumacy. But confirmes the keeping away of ſcandalous and impenitent ſinners by thirteen Arguments, and ſaies, they are egregiouſly charitable who would have none kept away, and determines the admiſſion of the profane to be againſt piety, and charity, and anſwers the trite Objections of Judas his receiving, and from that place, Let a man examine himſelfe; Ergo, none elſe may examine him, and determines the admiſſion of the profane; 1. Againſt the will of God. 2. A profanation of the Sacrament. 2. A ſcandall to the Church. In ſhort, ſaith he, For thoſe whoſe ſins, and whoſe obſtinacy in ſinning is known to all, we contend, both in the behalfe of Gods word, and according to all Antiquity, and all the Learned of our Age, that they are not to be admitted to the Lords Table. He produceth the authority of Juſtin Martyr, Chryſoſtome in ſeverall places, Cyprian, &c.

In the next place let us heare the judgement of Reverend Danaeus, L…bert. Daneus in Iſagoge Chriſt p. 3 c. 59. p 4. l. 5. c. 53.and that may be read plaine enough in the third part of his Iſagoge Chriſtiana, cap. 59. where he diſtinguiſheth the publike cenſures of the Church into Admonition, Suſpenſion from the Lords Table and Excommunication; and in his fourth part, and fifth book, cap. 53. he ſufficiently proves, that the Ignorant and Scandalous are to be kept away from the Lords Table, for which he gives reaſons, and anſwers objections.

Of the ſame mind is Learned and Reverend Zepperus, as may appeare at large from his Tract of the Sacraments in genere & ſpecie, l. 4. de ſacrâ Domini coenâ, cap. 5. where he handles this queſtion, for whom Chriſt inſtituted the Sacrament of his Supper; and determines it was only for his Diſciples, who p. 145theſe are he explaines from Joh. 8.31. Mat. 16.24. Zepperus in tract. de ſacram. l. 4. de ſacra Coenâ, cap. 5.Joh. 13.35. And determines that the ſcandalous and obſtinate ought not to be admitted, becauſe they are none of Chriſts Diſciples, becauſe holy things are not to be given to dogs, becauſe it hath been the conſtant practice of the Church to keep them away, this he proves not only from the practice of the Jewiſh Church, in reference to the Paſſeover, but from the Writings of Tertullian, Cyprian, Chryſoſtome, &c. and anſwers the objection of Judas his ſuppoſed receiving.

I have a Book wrote in Latine, anno 1574. Eccleſiaſticae diſciplinae & Anglicanae. Eccleſiae ab ill â aberrationis plena dilucidatio. p. 127, 128, 129, 130.by ſome pious learned man, who I know not, I am informed it was Mr Dudly Fenners, it is called, Eccleſiaſticae Diſciplinae & Anglicánae Eccleſiae ab illâ aberrationis plena è verbo Dei & dilucida explicatio; where Suſpenſion, diſtinct from Excommunication, is maintained and proved from Scripture and Antiquity.

What was Bucanus his Judgement is evident enough from his Inſtitutions; in his 44. common place he propounds this as his tenth queſtion: Quot ſunt partes ſive gradus Eccleſiaſticae correctionis. How many degrees are there of Eccleſiaſticall Cenſure? He anſwers three.

1. foreign, ſeu foreign, admonition.

2. Excluſio ſeu abſtentio, &c. Bucan. inflit. theol. loc. 44. q. 10, &c.Suſpenſion from the Lords Supper for a time.

3. Excommunication, (of which ſee more there.)

So that it is plaine, he alſo thought there was ſuch a thing as Suſpenſion diſtinct from Excommunication, viz. abſolute Excommunication.

Reverend and Learned Beza's judgement is ſo known, that I need quote nothing out of him; but yet in regard that I am credibly informed, that M Boatman had the confidence to quote the French Churches, as if they were of his mind, and I have met with a p. 146paſſage in Beza, which not only ſpeakes his Judgement, but the Judgement and Practi…e of the Churches of God in France, I ſhall tranſcribe it; it is in the Preface of the Book which he directs againſt Eraſtus, Beza de Pieſbyterio & Excom.he calls it Tractatus pius & moderatus de verâ Excommunicatione & Presbyterio; In the Preface of that book you ſhall find this paſſage.

Conſiſtorium igitur habemus, &c. We have, ſaith he, a Conſiſtory, in which not only the Miniſters of Gods word, but twice as many more, ſit as Judges choſen (out of the leſſer and greater Senate) not without publike notice firſt given to the people, Diſſenters as to the received doctrine of the Church, are firſt friendly, and brotherly admoniſhed: if they will be quiet, they are commanded to remaine ſtill for the time to come, and there is no further vote of diſgrace put upon them; if they be ſtubborne, and a ſecond more ſerious admonition will not profit, then they are ſummoned to the Conſiſtory: if they pertinaciouſly reſiſt their admonition, then they are forbidden the Lords Supper, (being the ſeale of that doctrine in which they diſſent from us) and the whole Senate is informed of them. The ſame courſe is taken againſt them who diſcover their profane mind by an open contempt of holy meetings. As to the manners of the ſeverall perſons, when faults are ſecret, we uſe gentle admonitions, as the Lord preſcribeth; nor is any one called to the Eccleſiaſticall Judicatory for a private fault, (which is not conjoyned with the publike ſcandall of the Church) unleſſe he contemneth private admonitions; but ſuch as do contemne them, are againe admoniſhed by the Church, and being convicted by due teſtimonies, if inſtead of asking pardon they ſhew themſelves obſtinate, they are according to the word of God, Mat. 18.17. p. 147commanded to keep from the Supper of the Lord till they declare a change of heart. As for more manifeſt and infamous ſins, which the Church cannot winke at, he that hath ſo offended (for an example to others) is ſummoned to the Conſiſtory; but if he askes pardon, he is diſmiſſed: but if he be admoniſhed the ſecond time, and doth not acknowledge his ſin, and promiſe amendment, then as one who goes on ſcandalizing the Church, he is kept away from the Holy Supper, which is a ſeale of our mutuall communion with Chriſt, and each with other, untill he hath given evidence of his repentance. In more groſſe and open ſins, which deſerve greater than verball corrections only, the Church having firſt had lawfull cogniſance of it, thoſe that ſo ſin are commanded to humble themſelves before the Lord, and to keep away from the Lords Table for ſome time, (in order to publique edification) untill it appeares that their ſin is indeed grievous unto them. But for open and publike Excommunication, denounced before all the Congregation, we do not uſe it but againſt perſons altogether deſperate and hopeleſſe, [non niſi in poenè deploratos] that is his phraſe) yet, ſaith he, for Apoſtates, we do not receive them to communion againe, though they profeſſe repentance in the Conſiſtory, unleſſe they alſo beg forgiveneſſe in the open Congregation. Thus far this holy, and learned, and Reverend man, which ſpeakes his judgement, and the French Churches, clearely enough.

Holy and learned Ames ſpeakes clearely enough:Ameſii medullae. theol. l 1. cap. 37. …. 19, 20, 21.

Excommunication, ſaith he, is not to be uſed unleſſe to the ſin be added contumacy, n. 19. Mat. 18.17. The ſinner being duly admoniſhed muſt appeare poenitent or ſtubborne, he that is penitent ought not to be excommunicated, therefore the contumacio us only.

p. 148N. 21. V. Ameſium de conſcientia & ejus jure & caſibus, l. 4. c. 29. q. 8.When the buſineſſe can admit delay, it is agreeable to Scripture and reaſon, that Excommuni…ation be begun firſt by Suſpenſion and keeping away of the ſinner from the Sacrament, and other Church-priviledges, this ſaith he, is the leſſer Excommunication.

N. 22. But the Church muſt not ſtay here, but urge the ſinners repentance by this way, and in this time of his Suſpenſion, and when they are out of hopes of that, they muſt proceed to a compleat ſeparation of him from communion with the Church, this is the greater Excommunication.

Anthony Wollebius, Ant Wollebii compendium Chriſt. theol. l. 1. cap. 26.Profeſſor ſometimes in Baſil, is of the ſame mind.

Ligationis gradus ſuns, &c. The degrees of Cen… ſures, ſaith he, are,

1. Severe admonition by the Presbytery, private admonition being rejected.

2. Suſpenſion from the Lords Table, which he proves from Mat. 7.6.

3. Excommunication, by which the Party is caſt out of the Church.

4. Anathema, when he is given over as one deſperate.

I will adde the teſtimony of Wendeline, Wendelini l. 1. Chriſtianae theo. cap. 23. theſ. 18.who in his firſt book Chriſtianae Theologiae, in his 23. Chapter in his 18. Theſis, determines, that he who is ſubjectum Coenae Dominicae, a Subject fit for the Lords Supper, muſt be 1. adultus, one grown up. 2. Doctrina fidei Chriſtianae imbutus eique addictus, one who is endued with a knowledge of the Doctrine of Chriſtianity, and a friend to it. 3. Vitae Sanctae ſtudioſus, one who is ſtudious of an holy life; therefore, ſaith he, theſe muſt be ſhut out from the Lords Table.

1. Infants, becauſe they cannot remember the Lords death. 2. Becauſe they cannot prepare themſelves.

p. 1492. Thoſe that are ignorant of the Doctrine of Chriſtianity, or ab eâ alieni, Becauſe, ſaith he, this Sacrament is ordained for none but the Citizens of the Chriſtian Church: and thoſe who are partakers of the ſame ſaith, and who embrace and profeſſe the doctrine of the Goſpell; for as nothing is promiſed in the Goſpell to thoſe who know nothing of Chriſt, or are enemies to the doctrine of the Goſpell, but the wrath of God is denounced to ſuch: ſo nothing is ſealed to them, and therefore they are not to be admitted to the ſeale of the Promiſe.

3. Laſtly, ſuch as are manifeſtly wicked and profane, and that for three cauſes:

1. Becauſe by their impiety and profaneneſſe they profane the Lords Supper.

2. Becauſe they eate and drinke unworthily, and ſo procure Judgement to themſelves.

3. Becauſe the Church admitting ſuch provokes God to wrath againſt it, caſting holy things and pearles before Dogs and Swine.

This is enough to ſhew the judgement of particular men, who have been the eminent ſervants of Chriſt in all Ages. Let us now take in the judgement of whole Churches.

And it will be fit we ſhould begin at home, out of our duty to our mother, and conſidering that of all the Churches of God, now in the world, the Engliſh is and hath been moſt famous.

The Church of England may be conſidered either in her ſtate of Virginity, or of her pollution by the man of ſin; or laſtly, ſince her honeſt divorce from him.

For our Church, what her judgement was before, Auſtin the Monke was ſent over to eſpouſe her to the Romiſh Biſhop; we have very little Record, the beſt p. 150which I know, Concilia Pan. Brittanica, p. 92.is in the learned book publiſhed by Sir Henry Spilman.

Auſtin came over anno 597.

The firſt councill that learned Knight tells us of, is that of Arles, held in Conſtantines time, and at his command, the place of their Seſſion was in France; it was held, ſaith Binius, anno 326. Balaeus ſaith 350. Baronius ſaith 314. There were preſent for England at the Synod Eborius Biſhop of Yorke. Reſtitutus Biſhop of London, and Adelfius Biſhop of London. Sacerdos a Presbyter, and Arminius a Deacon.

They made 22. Canons, their third Canon, and fourth, and fifth determine Suſpenſion of Stage-players, &c. So doth their eleventh Canon for young women married to heathens. — Placuit ut aliquanto tempore à communione ſeparentur. Their fourteenth Canon determines a Suſpenſion till death for thoſe who falſely accuſe their Brethren; indeed the words are Can. 3. A communione abſtineri. Can. 4. A communione ſeparari. So Can. 5.11. but by communio is meant the Communion of the body and bloud of Chriſt only, as is plaine from the laſt Canon, and from the ſins mentioned, Can. 3, 4, 5. not deſerving abſolute and plenary Excommunication.

After this time, Pag. 47.ſaith Sir Henry Spilman, till Auſtins time, in regard of the great troubles of Brittaine, through the continuall inrodes of the Saxons, the Biſhops themſelves, being forced to retire into Wales, were very few Synods in England.

In Ireland, ſaith Sir Henry Spilman, anno 450. was a Synod held. He hath a Copy of the Canons agreed upon at it in their fourteenth Canon. They determine a yeare for repentance to any who had killed any, committed fornication, or conſulted a wizard, Can. 15. they determine twenty daies poenitence in caſe of theft; this they diſtinguiſh (as is apparent from their p. 151other Canons) from one who is anathematizandus, Can. 19. in caſe of adultery they determine Excommunication.

This is all the Record I find concerning our Churches in that time, excepting only ſome imperfect Records, mentioning ſome ſingle acts of Cenſure; Monricus was excommunicated for the murther of Cynetu in a Synod at Landaff, anno 560. another Synod there enjoyned King Morcant penance for murthering his Uncle Frioc; and at a third Synod there, Guidnerth was excommunicated for the murther of his Brother.

But a more perfect account I cannot find. From the time of Auſtine the Monkes comming over till King Henry the eighth our Church was Popiſh, and ruled by the order of the Romiſh Church, who we know allows Suſpenſion, as I have ſufficiently proved by their Schoolemen.

In the time of King Hen. 8. Reformation began to dawn; He directed a Commiſſion to thirty two perſons to draw up a body of Eccleſiaſticall Laws. Afterwards King Edward 6. by his Commiſſion dated November 11. in the fifth yeare of his Reigne revived and perfected the worke. Cranmer, Peter Martyr, Dr Cox, Dr May, Dr Taylor of Hadly, and ſome others, being his Commiſſioners to perfect the body o… the Laws, which was called Reformatio Legum Ecceſiaſticarum,, and was printed at London anno 1641. In which book the judgement of thoſe eminent men, the Fathers of our Church (two of which, viz. Cranmer and Taylor were Martyrs afterward) is evident, p. 151, 152, 153, 154. they have nine Chapters concerning Suſpenſion. In the ſecond Chapter they ſhew the cauſes of Suſpenſion amongſt which this they alledge as the maine.

Becauſe in leſſer offences Excommunication cannot p. 152proceed, Quoniam magra lequeretur, b…norum pertu… hatio, ſi cum hujuſmodi perſon is infamibus Sacramenta communicarent.and oft-times ſuſpicions of groſſe ſins which may ſcandalize the Church may appeare where the fact cannot be fully proved, which they ſay muſt be taken notice of by the Church. For it would cauſe a great diſturbance in the Church if the members of it ſhould receive the Sacrament with infamous perſons.

In their fourth Chapter they determine, that he who continues a whole yeare ſuſpended ſhall be Excommunicated, &c.

In their fourth Chapter they determine, that he who continues a whole yeare ſuſpended ſhall be Excommunicated, &c.

Soone after this the Biſhops prevailed to have the Common Prayer and Rubrick confirmed, and from thence, as to this, we may know the judgement of our Church till the yeare 1641. It is true they were as tender of the buſineſſe of Suſpenſion, as they were free of their Excommunications. But yet we have thus much in the Rubrick prefixed to the forme for adminiſtring the Lords Supper.

If any be an open and notorious liver, ſo that by him the Congregation is offended, or have done any wrong to his Neighbour by word or deed, the Curate, having knowledge thereof, ſhall call him and advertiſe him in any wiſe not to preſume to come to the Lords Table, V. The Book of Common Prayer concerning the order for the adminiſtration of the Lords Supper.untill he hath openly declared himſelfe to have truly repented and amended his former naughty life, that the Congregation may thereby be ſatisfied, which before were offended, and that he hath recompenced the perſons whom he hath done wrong unto, or at leaſt declare himſelfe to be in full purpoſe ſo to do as ſoone as conveniently he may. The ſame order ſhall the Curate uſe with thoſe betwixt whom he perceiveth malice and hatred to reigne, not ſuffering them to be partakers of the Lords Table, untill he know them to be reconciled, and if one of the parties ſo at variance be contented to forgive, from the bottome of his heart, all that the other p. 153hath treſpaſſed againſt him, and to make amends for that he himſelfe hath offended, and the other party will not be perſwaded to a godly Unity, but remaine ſtill in his frowardneſſe and malice, the Miniſter in that caſe ought to admit the penitent perſon to the Communion, and not the obſtinate.

Thus you ſee our Church while it was under Epiſcopall Diſcipline, yet allowed Suſpenſion diſtinct from Excommunication.

After that Epiſcopacy was voted downe, and Presbytery eſtabliſhed, Forme of Church Government. p. 29.firſt by an Ordinance for three years, then for ever by the Form of Church Government paſt and printed 1648. ſine die. All may read the Presbyterian Judgement for Suſpenſion diſtinct from Excommunication, a. p. 27. of that booke to the end.

For our diſſenting Brethren, it is their practice, when once they have admoniſhed an offender, to ſuſpend him from the Sacrament till he repent, or be wholly caſt out of the Church. At this time, in this City, is one who hath been ſo ſuſpended theſe twelve Months, if he be not lately reſtored nor Excommunicated.

Leſt any one ſhould not thinke the Rubrick cleare enough to ſhew the Judgement of our Church in Epiſcopall times, I ſhall produce a proofe or two more.

There was a Provinciall Synod held at London anno 1603. where it was decreed, Canon 26, 27. Conſtitut. & Canons printed 1628. Can. 26, 27.That no Miniſter ſhall in any wiſe admit to the Communion any of his Cure or Flock which be openly known to live in ſin notorious without repentance; nor malicious perſons, nor unfaithfull Churchwardens; nor ſuch as refuſe to be preſent at publike prayers, nor to any that depraved the Book of Common Prayer, nor who ſpake againſt the Kings Authority.

p. 154Let Reverend Deane Nowell ſpeake, Dr Nowels Catechiſm. p. 647.who in his Catechiſme Greeke-Latine printed London 1573. tels us, That if it doth appeare openly that one is unworthy, the Paſtor muſt not admit him, becauſe he cannot do it without the profanation of the Sacrament; and in order to the keeping of them away the Deane tells us in well ordered Churches Elders were choſen and joyned with the Paſtor, Ibid p. 652.&c

From all this it is plaine, That the Judgement and Practice of the Church of England in all times, ever ſince it was a Church, hath been to ſuſpend ſome from the Table of the Lord, who yet were not Excommunicated.

Let us look now into other Churches. The Reformed Churches are either thoſe in Germany, or in Holland or in France, or in Scotland.

For the Churches of the Switzers, they indeed practice no Diſcipline; but we ſhall find all other Churches concurring with us.

The Judgement of the Church of Scotland may be known, not only by the particular Writings of their eminent Gilleſpy and Rutherford, but by their forme of Church-Government, printed 1641. where they tell us p. 39.

All baptized perſons when they come to age and diſcretion are not admitted to the Lords Table, The Government of the Church of Scotland, p. 39, 40, &c.but ſuch only as upon examination are found to have a competent meaſure of knowledge in the Principles of Religion, and do profeſſe that they are beleevers, and do live unblameably, &c. — But this not-admiſſion to the Communion is one thing, and Excommunication of hainous, or obſtinate offenders is another thing very different, &c.—

The Judgement of the Church of God in Holland is cleare from their Corpus Diſciplinae, printed here anno 1645. chap. 4. Concerning Eccleſiaſticall Diſcipline, art. 8.

p. 155He that ſhall obſtinately reject the admonition of the Conſiſtory ſhall be ſuſpended from the Supper of the Lord, 1 Theſ. 3.14. that is in caſe of private offences.

Art. 10. He that hath committed a publike, Corpus diſciplinae Engl. pr. 1645. cap. 4. art. 8, 10, 11, 14.or otherwiſe hainous offence, ſhall alſo be ſuſpended from the Lords Supper, though he ſhould give ſigns of Repentance, according as the Conſiſtory ſhall judge moſt fitting.

Art. 11. He that hath been ſuſpended, if after divers admonitions he ſhall ſhew no ſigne of repentance, he ſhall be publiſhed to the Congregation.

Art. 14. And at length if he doth not repent followeth the Excommunication, &c.

I thinke here is Suſpenſion before Excommunication, and diſtinct from it.

I heare Mr Boatman hath quoted the Churches in France for him, how truly now my Reader ſhall ſee, when I had quoted them againſt him, a friend of mine telling him of it, he bad him aske Dr De-Lawne and he could ſatisfie him of the untruth of my quotation. I did not quote them by heare-ſay, but from Reverend Beza's account, which I quoted before. I conceived they had not altered their minds, yet I ſent to my Reverend Friend Dr Lawn, for ſatisfaction he came to me April 9. and 1. aſſured me it was the daily practice of their Church to ſuſpend the ſcandalous. 2. Promiſed me to ſend me all the books he had concerning the Diſcipline of their Churches to confirme me.

This day he ſent me two, having left one with me. the firſt is called,

The Eccleſiaſticall Diſcipline of the Reformed Churches of France, printed London 1642.

They ſay ſo much for it that I cannot tranſcribe all, let him who doubts read the 19, 20, 21. p. n. 15. — If it (ſay they) befalleth, that beſides the admonitions p. 156uſually made by the Conſiſtory to ſuch as have done amiſſe, Eccleſiaſticall Diſcipline of the reformed Churches of France, p. 19, 20, 21.there be ſome other puniſhment, or more rigorous Cenſure to be uſed, it ſhall then be done either by Suſpenſion, or privation of the Sacrament for a time, or by Excommunication &c. So they go on directing to the execution of either, &c.

Another book is called, Ibid. p. 42, 43. Art. 15.The generall and particular Acts and Articles of the late Nationall Synod of the Reformed Churches of France, at Charenton 26. Decem. 1644. Printed at London 1646.

They plainely and largely determine Suſpenſion, and charge their Conſiſtories to diſtinguiſh it from Excommunication. — The paſſages are too large to tranſcribe; Let the Reader view that book at his leiſure p. 42, 43.

There is yet one book more, containing an Extract of the foure Nationall Synods of the Belgick Churches, viz. that of Embda, 1571. Dort 1578. Middleburgh 1581. the Hague 1586. the Booke is written in Latin, and called Harmonia Synodorum Belgicarum, in the 36 page having before ſpoken of private and publike admonition, they determine: N. 8. Let him who hath pertinaciouſly rejected the admonitions of the Conſistory be ſuſpended from the Lords Supper.Qui pertinaciter Conſiſtorii admonitiones rejecerit, à Sacrae Coenae communione ſuſp…ndetur. Harm. Syn. Belgie. Si ſuſpenſus poſt iteratas admonitiones nullum poenitentiae ſignum dederit, ad Excommunicationem procedet Eccleſia. Ibid.

And againe Art. 9.

If he who is ſuſpended, after iterated admonitions, ſhew no ſigne of Repentance, then let him be Excommunicated.

I thinke here is Suſpenſion againe diſtinct from Excommunication.

As for our diſſenting Brethren, I ſpake ſomething before to prove it their practice let meadde one thing more.

Our Brethrn of New England are the moſt pure, p. 157and ſober, and conſiderable Churches in the world of that perſwaſion, and thoſe who alone would ever give us a joynt account of their faith as to Church-Diſcipline. Let us heare what they ſay; in their fourteenth Chupter, having ſpoken concerning publike admonition, they adde,

Which declaring the offender to lye under the publike offence of the Church doth thereby with-hold, A platforme of Church Diſcipline printed London 1653. Cap. 14. p. 21. n. 2.or ſuſpend him front the holy fellowſhip of the Lords Supper till his offence be removed by penitent confeſſion: If he ſtill continue obſtinate, they are to caſt him out by Excommunication.

I thinke here is alſo Suſpenſion granted precedaneous to, and gradually diſtinct from Excommunication.

There is only one thing to which I muſt ſpeake a word or two wherein in our preſent practice we differ from other ſetled Reformed Churches: As to the ſuſpenſion of any whom we, ſince the late Reformation, admitted to the holy Table, we agree both with other reformed Churches, with our owne in times of Epiſcopacy, and with our Brethren of the diſſenting party, we will ſuſpend none but after admonition for ſome ſcandalous ſin, and indeed this only is properly Suſpenſion.

We deny the Sacrament indeed to others, viz. ſuch as will not give account of their faith, and ſubmit to the order of the Church. But we would not have this lookt upon by our Brethren as if it were a ſtanding principle of ours, or as if we intended to put Chriſtians to give an account of their faith every time they come to the Sacrament, the contrary is evident in our practice; we muſt therefore be conſidered as a diſordered, and now reforming Church. Had all thoſe Miniſters, who went before us in our Churches, done their duty, they had ſaved us our labour. They p. 158ſhould have admitted none at firſt to the Sacrament but ſuch as had a competent knowledge of the principles of Religion, and ſuch as were blameleſſe in their lives, the principles of the Epiſcopall Government required this.

But we find ſome of them made no conſcience of it, but admitted any body for his two pence, and cared not how ſcandalous they were, (ordinarily they could not be worſe than their Parſon) we enter now into theſe mens harveſts, and finding what ſlovenly worke they made, we cannot thinke it ſafe for us to worke after their rate: this made the Reverend Aſſembly propound this expedient, to put us in order, that there might (pro primâ vice) be a review of all thoſe who had been formerly admitted, and ſuch as were found ignorant kept away, and ſo for the ſcandalous.

Nay, I will adde one thing more; Had our Biſhops been conſcientious in the buſineſſe of Confirmation, we had been ſpared this trouble and odium. For Confirmation was in order to the trying of peoples proficiency after Baptiſme. And as none not confirmed ſhould have come to the Lords Table, ſo he ſhould have confirmed no ignorant ſcandalous perſons though baptized: But we ſee the cleane contrary practice.

And there was no way but this to begin any Reformation amongſt us, who by our way of adminiſtration of that holy Ordinance had made our Churches a reproach to Papiſts, and a griefe of heart to all Proteſtants, and by it opened a way for Browniſts and Anabaptiſts, and others, to fill their Congregations with thoſe who were our ſtricteſt Profeſſors formerly, though they quickly taught them otherwiſe. And I thinke this may ſerve to ſatisfie any conſcientious Chriſtians.

p. 159Nor ſhall any, how godly ſoever, or great ſo ever, have any juſt cauſe to ſtumble at it that they muſt be enjoyned to give account of their faith; For beſides, that we ſtand not upon Examination, but ſhall be as well contented with a continued Narration of their faith from them, (which we are alſo ready to give to them) Chriſtians ſhould conſider how much the glory of God, and the good of others is furthered by their open profeſſion of their knowledge, and confeſſion of what God hath done for their poore ſoules; and their Reaſon may informe them, that we cannot ſpare them without partiality, which we muſt not be guilty of.

And now, Reader, I have ſhewed thee, that the Churches and Servants of Chriſt in all ages, have owned and practiſed this ſo much decreed Ordinance of Suſpenſion: Now judge whether Mr Boatman hath informed his people truly, in telling them it is a dreame of the Phariſees, which wiſer ages before never thought of.