A Double Reply, Chapter 14
CHAP. XIV. Containing a digreſsion, or rather a regreſſion, with an attempt to cleare from the Writings of the Ancients the ſeverall degrees of perſons not excommunicated, yet ſuſpended from the Lords Supper.
I Shall returne a little to try a little further how far the practice of the Church in the Primitive times, as to the keeping ſome from the Lords Supper, who yet were not de facto caſt out of the Church, and kept from all Ordinances, can be cleared from the Writings of the Ancients, or thoſe learned Atiquaries, who have laboure'd to find it out before me, and ſpent their paines to very good purpoſe, though their writings be in Latine, and ſo not ſo obvious to all; this I ſhall do the rather,
1. Becauſe I have heard of ſome holy and learned men that doubt it. 2. Becauſe it will expound ſome paſſages which I have already quoted out of the Councils, and the (pretended) Areopagite. 3. Becauſe the clearing of this will plainely evidence the practice of the Primitive Church as to this point.
All Chriſtians of old were diſtinguiſhed into three ſorts foreign. 1. Such as were Catechumeni under Catechiſme. 2. Beleevers. 3. Penitents. Hoſpites & viciui fidelium. Raban. l. 1. de inſtit. cler.Penitents were ſuch as had fallen into ſome ſins for which they were denied the priviledges of the Church.
The Catechumeni were ſuch as were probationers for Chriſtianity, or Church-Fellowſhip, and were put under the care of ſome Teachers to be inſtructed in the Principles of Religion in order to it, when this practice firſt began in the Church is not certaine; the firſt Maſter of theſe Chriſtian Pupils, which we read of in Eccleſiaſticall Hiſtory, was Pantaenus, who lived (ſaith Euſebius) anno 193. Euſeb. l. 5.6.9, 10. & in Chron. Bellarm. de ſcriptor. Eccl. p. 76. Euſeb. l. 6.6.7.and was Maſter of a Schoole of them at Alexandria; Clemens Alexandrinus, Pantaenus his Scholler, ſucceeded him in that employment (ſaith Euſebius,) he lived anno 204 ſaith Bellarmine, but Euſebius ſaith 194. which was ten yeares before. Origen, his Schollar, was the next we read of, Euſebius reckons him anno 208. Bellarmine reckons his 226. That the foreign were an ancient order of Chriſtians is plaine from Gal. 6.6. From which place the Magdeburgenſes conclude the Apoſtles leſt formes of Catechiſme; Centur. Magdeb. Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 7.it is probable to me that even from the Apoſ…les time there were in the Church foreign, and foreign, ſome that were Catechiſed, and ſome appointed to Catechize them, they are both of them Scripture termes. And And if we may admit the eight books of Apoſtolicall inſtitutions to be wrote by Clement (which I durſt not allow) they determine the caſe, Conſtit: Apoſt. l 7 c. 40.having a peculiar precept how thoſe Catechumeni ſhould be inſtituted, but (leaving them as ſpurious) it is cleare enough from ſeverall places of Clemens Alexandrinus, Clem. Alex. l. 7. ſtrom.who lived doubtleſſe in the ſecond Century, that they were an order in his time. Not only from that paſſage which my learned friend Dr Young hath quoted out of him, foreign, which is l. 7. ſtrom. but alſo from divers other paſſages, as in his 6. ſtrom. foreign.
My fore-mentiond, Dr Young in his Dies Dominica. l. 2 c 14. Albaſpin. obſ. l. 2 obſerv. 2.Learned and Reverend friend ſaith, there was of theſe two ſorts: Audientes, and Competentes. That learned Antiquary Albaſpinaeus tells us of foure degrees; I will tranſlate his words, or at leaſt give his ſenſe. As ſoone as divine light had ſhined upon any, and put in his heart to be a Chriſtian;
1. He was taught in ſome private houſe concerning the cheats and doting ſuperſtitions of Pagans, but was not yet admitted to heare Gods word, &c. this was their firſt degree.
2. Then they had liberty to go a little further, they might come and heare Sermons; De Catechumenis & Catechizandi ordine vide Rabanum Maurum. l. 1. de inſtitut. cleric. Cap. 26. & 27.hence they were called Audientes, theſe might only heare, not come into the Church at Prayer.
3. After this they had liberty to joyne with the Church in Prayer, theſe were called Orantes & genuflectentes.
4. When they had been thus far admitted, they were baptized, theſe were called Competentes.
I ſhall not trouble my ſelfe to ſearch what priviledges each of theſe ſorts had, it is certaine none of them were as yet admitted to the Lords Table, poſt ſermonem fit miſſa Catechumenis (ſaith Auguſtine) manebant fideles. And indeed the very right underſtanding of that terme fideles determines the buſines, to the clearing of which I ſhall tranſcribe a paſſage out of that incomparable Antiquary.
Fidelis diſtinguitur à Catechumeno, & confirmato, non enim inter fideles adſumebantur, Albaſpin. obſ. l. 1. obſ. 25.qui fidem in baptiſmo aut qui chariſmata & dona ſpiritus Sancti ipſumque Spiritum Sanctum in confirmatione adepti eſſent, verùm ii ſolum cenſebantur, & appellabantur fideles, qui iis duobus Sacramentis muniti, Euchariſtiâ inſuper donarentur, cum enim ea ſit ſummum Chriſtianae Religionis myſterium arcanum, & Sacramentum, non cuivis olim temere concedebatur; ſed ei duntaxat qui multo antea morum & probitatis ſuae ſpecimen exhibuiſſet, quique ſe it a fidum probaſſet, ut tutò ei myſteria divulgaripoſſent. Is igitur vocabatur fidelis, non qui baptizatus, aut confirmatus, ſedqui Euchariſtiae ſacris participâſſet. In Engliſh to this purpoſe.
A Beleever is diſtinguiſh'd from a Catechumeniſt, and from one who is confirmed, V. Etiam Pamelii annot. 256. in c. 41. lib. Tert. de praeſc. contra haeret. Catechumenos —cui fidelis oppointur, qui jam plene edoctus, & inſtruct us erat in fide, jamque receptus, & admiſſus ad noſtra myſteria percipienda. ib.for all thoſe who had obtained faith in Baptiſme, or who had received the giſts of the Holy Spirit were not preſently reckoned amongſt the Fideles; but thoſe alone were thought worthy to be called, and were called Fideles,, who having been prepared by Baptiſme and Confirmation [which he calls Sacraments] were ſurther admitted to the Lords Supper, for in regard that is the greateſt Myſtery, and Secret, and Sacrament of the Chriſtian Religion; of old it was not headily granted to every one, but to him only who of a long time before had given proofe of his honeſt Converſation, and had approved himſelfe ſo faithfull that thoſe myſteries might ſafely be adminiſtred to him. He therefore was called Fidelis, not who was baptized, or confirmed, but who was admitted to the Holy Table.
Clemens Alexandrinus ſaith, he is foreign, Clem. Alex. ſtrom. l. 2. impr. Lut. 1619. p. 371.foreign, who keeps faithfully what is committed to him; foreign (ſaith he) foreign. One who keeps Gods Commandements is Fidelis, in his ſenſe. But as to the Eccleſiaſticall acceptation of Fideles, Albaſpinaeus hath doubtleſſe told us the truth.
It is out of all doubt, that the Catechumeni were not admitted to the Lords Table. Tert. cum not is —de la Bar. l. 4. contra Marcionem. l. de Poenitentiâ. Quis Catechumenus, quis fidelis, incertum eſt, omnes pariter orant, Tert. de praeſcrip. con. haeret. c. 41. Alcuinus de divinis offic. I ſiod. l. 6. Etymol. c. 19. Raban. Maurus de inſtit. cler. cap 32. Ino. Epiſt. 73. Aug S rm. Concil. Carth 4. Amb. l. 5. ep. 33. Concil. Laod. cap. 19. Dion. Areop. loc. praed. Athan. apol. 2. contra Arrian.Renatus Laurentius de la Barr tels us, that — In templo manebant donec Evangelium expoſſuiſſet Epiſcopus. Tum clamabas Levita Catechumeni exeunt, vel ſiquis Catechumenus remanſit exeat; which ſutes with that of Auſtin, before ſpecified. And this is plaine from Tertullian, who uſually calls them Audientes, and Auditores, who ſaies, they might wiſh for the Sacrament of Baptiſm, but ought not to preſume to it, then ſurely not to the Lords Table. Nay, they were not admitted to any Prayers with the Church, ſubſequent to the Sermon, whence Tertullian cries out of it as a diſorder amongſt the Hereticks, that none could diſtinguiſh their Catechumeniſts from their Fideles, for they all prayed alike; yet I conceive it a miſtake of thoſe who conceive the Catechumeni were preſent at no Prayers of the Church, for then we muſt ſuppoſe the Primitive Churches had no Prayers before their Sermons, which out of all queſtion they had, and the diſmiſſion of the Catechumeni was not till the Sermon was done. Indeed, they might not be preſent at any prayers of the Church preceding the adminiſtration o… the holy Communion.
And thus much ſhall ſerve to have noted concerning the firſt order, the foreign; or (according to Pamelius) the ſecond, for he makes the firſt foreign.
Concerning the diſmiſſion of the Catechumeni they who deſire further ſatisfaction may read the Authors quoted in the Margent. Cyril. in Joh. l. 12. c. 50.I will ſum up all with what I find in Cyrill, in Book 12. Chap. 10. of his Commentary on John.
Prohibemus enim à ſacrâ menſâ Catechumenos, quam vis veritatem jam cognoverint, & fidem magrâ voce conſiteantur, quia nondum locupletati ſunt ſpiritu Sancto, qui non habitat in ijs qui baptiſmate non ſunt conſummati, &c.
From all this it appeares: 1. That they baptized none but were fully inſtructed in the Doctrine of faith, and had openly profeſſed repentance. 2. That till they were baptized, they admitted them not to the Lords Table.
Let us now ſee whether they admitted all baptized perſons.
3. Their third order were foreign. Let us examine: 1. Who theſe were. 2. From what priviledges of the Church they were reſtrained, Which happily were originally the way of receiving in poenitents, rather than the degrees of caſting them out. Rejoinder p. 46. Dies dominica l. 2. c. 14.and how long. 3. When this Order came up in the Church.
I am amazed at that piece of news which M. Humfry ſuggeſts in his late Rejoynder, that the ſeverall degrees of penitence might be in order to admiſſion into the Church, (except he meanes readmiſſion after falling) for he is the firſt who ever ſuggeſted any ſuch thing I thinke, (at leaſt the firſt I ever met with who hinted any ſuch thing.) But it is contrary to all I ever met with.
My highly honoured and learned Friend tells us right.
They were ſuch as, having embraced the Chriſtian faith, and being baptized, Dr Young.and their names recorded in the Church, had afterwards fallen into ſome open wickedneſſe, by which they had forfeited their right to the priviledges of the faithfull, and were cenſured by the Church till ſuch time as they ſhould declare ſufficient ſignes of their repentance.
With him Albaſpinaeus agrees, in his l. 2. Obſervat. Obſerv. 3. and doubtleſſe this is the truth.
Of theſe Penitents, ſaith Dr Young, there were five degrees.
1. V. Dr. Young die. dom. l. 2. cap. 14. Albaſpin. in obſ. l. 2. obſ. 22.Their firſt degree was called gradus foreign. Theſe might not come into the Church but were to ſtand without and beg the peoples Prayers; of this firſt degree mention is made by Zonaras, Thaumaturgus, and Ambroſe. I will tranſcribe Ambroſe his words.
Volo veniam reus ſperet, Ambr. de poen. l. 2. c. 16.petat eam lachrymis, petat gemitibus, petat populitotius fletibus, ut ignoſcatur, & obſecret, & cum ſecundò, & tertio fuerit dilata ejus communio, credat remiſſius ſe ſupplicaſſe, fletus augeat miſerabilior, &c.
Albaſpinaeus thinkes, that in the two firſt Ages this was taken up by thoſe that had fallen ſpontaneouſly, afterward enjoyned by the Church as the firſt degree of penitence. He proves this degree out of Tertullian; Tert. l. de. poen. cap. 9.ſo doth Dr Young; but to leave that Criticall diſpute, it is certaine they were not admitted to the Lords Table.
2. When they had thus continued a while, they were admitted to heare Sermons, as thoſe of the Catechumeni, who were called Audientes: they had the ſame Tutors, the ſame, and no other priviledges then they had, Albaſpin. ibid. Dr Young's dies dom. ibid.ſaith Albaſpin. the Church by this mending them, that by their ſins they had declared themſelves ſuch as againe had need of that milke, not of ſtrong meat; hence are thoſe frequent paſſages in the Canons of the Councils; Stent inter Catechumenos. Quicunque annos exigant inter Catechumenos, cum Catechumenis diſcedant, Chryſoſt. Hom. 3. in Eph. Sic Hom. 79. ad pop. Antioch.&c. Chryſoſtome determines this caſe in his third Homily upon the Epheſians, where he tells us, that when they came to the adminiſtration of the Sacrament, the Preacher cried out: All you who are appointed to be Penitents depart; and in the ſame Homily tells us, they might no more be there than the Catechumeni. They might not ſtay the adminiſtration of the Sacrament, nor the prayers attending it, but they were at any other prayers, as might eaſily be proved, V. Liturgiae palm. in miſſa Baſilii.eſpecially by the Liturgies of the Greek Fathers, if any cried it may be allowed to them (for which I have little to ſay.) But it is an unworthy conceit of us for to thinke that they had no prayers before they came to adminiſter the Sacrament, till which time they were not enjoyned to depart. This degree of penitence was called by the Greeks gradus foreign.
3. The third degree they called foreign, theſe the Latines call Subſtrati. when the ſcandalous ſinner had for ſome time ſtood at the Church doores only, and begg'd of them who went in to pray for him, and for another time come into the Porch, V. Dr Young dies dom. ibid.but no farther, and there heard the Sermons, but when they were done, went away before any of the latter Service, then they came to be Subſtrati. That is, they were admitted to come juſt within the Church doores, and to ſtand behind ſome Pillar, at ſome diſtance from the Congregation, where they one while ſtood and mourned for their ſin, by and by caſt themſelves groveling upon the earth. Then the Miniſter came mourning to them, and mourned over them, he and the whole Church, falling down with them on the ground; then the Miniſter or Biſhop riſeth up and lifts them up, and praying for them diſmiſſeth them. The Apoſtol. Conſtit. Conſtit Apoſt. l. 8. c. 11, 12.may be credited as to matter of fact in this caſe, though not for their antiquity; they give you the forme of Prayer uſed after which (ſay they) the Deacon bid the penitents depart, V. Albaſpin. obſ. l 2. obſ. 24.and then they went to prayer for the Communicants, and to the adminiſtration of the Supper; when it was ſaid the former ſort of penitents might not be preſent at prayers, it is to be meant of theſe prayers, and thoſe that followed for the Fideles. Concil. Arcl. ſocund. Can. 11.This degree, ſaith Albaſpinaeus, foreign, is called poenitentia by the Fathers, and in the Canons; and this third ſort foreign poenitentes, ſo the ſecond Councill of Arles, — Triennio inter poenitentes habeantur à communione ſuſp nſi, that is, inter ſubſtratos; and indeed here were moſt teſtifications of humiliations required. Thoſe that deſire to be ſatisfied more concerning the circumſtances attending the penitents of this forme, let them read learned Albaſpinaeus, largely Obſer. l. 2. Obſer. 24. who tels us, they were wont to ſtay upon this forme ſome good time, and had ſome kind of abſolution and leſſer reconciliation to the Church before they were removed from it; when they had done this, and had received impoſition of hands for their abſolution, they were judged to have jus Communionis, a right to Communion with the Church, ſaith Albaſpinaeus.
4. Then they might ſtay in the Church, (after the Catechument were gone with the three fore-mentioned degrees of Penitents) they might not only ſtay while the prayers for the Catechumeni were done, Gradus foreign.(which the Catechumeni themſelves might do) and the prayers for the other Poenitentes, Albaſpin. obſ. l. 2. obſ. 25. Dr Young dies dom. l. 2. c. 14. Zonar. in Can. 4, 5. Concil. Ancyr.(at which they alſo might be preſent) but they might ſtay and joyne in the prayers made for thoſe who were the Fideles, and in compleat communion, and ſee the Sacrament adminiſtred; but they might not themſelves receive the Sacrament, nor offer, nor might their names be mentioned in thoſe prayers, Ambr. ep. 28.nor might the Prieſt offer while they were preſent, whereupon Ambroſe refuſed to offer while Theodoſius, guilty of an unjuſt murther, was preſent.
Dr Young reckons another degree of Penitents, which he and others call Subſiſtentes, when they were admitted to full Communion: but he tells us he doth not judge it a diſtinct degree, agreeing in it with Albaſpinaeus, Loco praed. Theſe now were the ſeverall degrees of their Penitents, which were all ſuſpended from the Lords Table, as is evident, yet were they all Baptized. For, for that penitence which was before Baptiſme, Albaſpinaeus, I thinke, proves ſtrongly it was Voluntary, not impoſed as a Church-Cenſure.
But yet there is one queſtion to be ſpoken to before we diſmiſſe this particular, viz. whether all theſe were not firſt Excommunicated, and ſo theſe degrees of penance enjoyned them as teſtifications of their repentance before they were admitted againe into the Church? To this I anſwer.
I will not deny, but if any perſons were Excommunicated, they might have their way in their returne to the Church lie through theſe foure doores.
But it will eaſily be made appeare, that ſome were adjudged to this penance who yet were not abſolutely cut off, and caſt out of the Church.
1. He who was excommunicated was not only denied the liberty of praying with the Church, but none might pray with him in a private houſe, Albaſpin. Obſ. l. 1 Obſ. 1. & l. 2 Obſ. 4. Synt. Antioch. 1. Can. 2. Concil. Carth. 4. Can. 73. Concil. Arel. 2. Can. 15, 16, 18.all deſpiſed and avoided him as a putrid member; —(only he was to be admoniſhed as a Brother) but they might not kindly ſalute him nor bid him God-ſpeed, nor trade, nor eate, nor drinke with them. But we read of no ſuch injunction concerning any of thoſe who were Penitents, Can. Apoſt. 10. a man was to be ſuſpended if he joyned in prayer with an excommunicated perſon. They might by no meanes eate or drinke with them, nortalke with them, as any one may read in a multitude of the Canons of the firſt Councils.
2. Beſides, there are many inſtances may be produced both from the Councils, Concil. Tol. 1. Can. 3.and out of Baſils three Canonicall Epiſtles, where the time of the penitence was limited to three, or ſoure, or five, or ſixe, or ſeven yeares, according to the Nature of the ſin; but it was never known that a Church limited a time in Excommunication, how long the party ſhould ſo ſtand.
3. Albaſpin. Obſ. l. 2. Obſ. 4.Thoſe who were Excommunicate were not cenſured and adjudged ad agendam poenitentiam, but did pet ere poenitentiam, as a favour of the Church.
There were ſome in the Church that were adjudged ad perpetuam poenit entiam, for ſome ſcandalous ſin, to their death never to be received to Communion in the Lords Supper with the Church, but never was any adjudged to a perpetuall Excommunication.
5. Many who were adjudged to ſome kind of penance for ſome ſin, yet were admitted to the Laick Communion, as they call it, as Albaſpinaeus proves out of very many Canons in l. 1. Obſer. Obſer. 4. what that Lai…k Communion, was I ſhall not determine. Baronius, V. Pamelii anno…. 37. in Cypr. ep. 52.Pamelius, and Durantus contend that it was to receive the Euchariſt on the other ſide of the Railes, &c. others thinke it was receiving the Sacramentall bread only. Albaſpinaeus confutes them both, and ſufficiently proves, it was the fellowſhip of thoſe Chriſtians who were of the Laity. But thoſe who were Excommunicated had no ſuch priviledge allowed them.
By all this it evidently appeares: 1. That although thoſe who were excommunicated did ſometimes petere poenitentiam, crave the favour of the Church in order to their reſtoring, that they might be admitted to ſtand as penitents, and approve themſelves againe to the Church. 2. Or poſſibly when they deſired reſtauration might by order of the Church be enjoyned to come in by thoſe ſteps; yet thoſe frequent Canons of the Church, wherein for ſeverall ſins men were adjudged to ſtand as penitents for ſhorter or longer time, cannot be underſtood to concerne excommunicated perſons, but ſuch ſinners as were guilty of thoſe ſins, and yet the Church did not think fit wholly to cut them off, but according to the rule—Cuncta prius tentanda, appointed them to be deprived of a partiall communion with the Church for ſome time, that they might ſee whether they were pertinacious, or whether God would give them an heart to repent, that they might be againe reſtored; and the time of their Suſpenſion was ſet longer or ſhorter according to the nature of the ſins which they committed. V. Concil. Binii. V. Baſil. Canon. ep.Thoſe who had been guilty of ſins againſt Nature were ſuſpended all their life time, (in Tertullian's times) afterwards in the Councill of Ancyra, they had time of repentance prefixed; ſo in Baſils times for man-ſlaughter Theodoſius the Emperour was ſuſpended eight months, the Council of Ancyra gave them only the liberty of the Sacrament ſub exitum vitae, when they were neare their death. Baſil (as I remember) determines them fifteene or twenty yeares ſuſpenſion. Adulterers before Cyprians time were ſuſpended to their dying day, afterwards they had a ſhorter time ſet for to teſtifie their repentance.
3. Now we have ſeen what the practice of the Church was, let us conſider how ancient this practice was; That it was very ancient is out of all doubt, but how ancient cannot eaſily be reſolved; Tertullian was the firſt who wrote concerning it, who in his booke de poenitentia gives us hints of it, and as Albaſphinaeus proves, hints the ſeverall degrees of it. Helvicus reckons him within the ſecond Century. Thaumaturgus, who lived in the next Century, in his Canonicall Epiſtle reckons up all the degrees, but that Epiſtle is ſuſpected. Magdeb. Cent. 2 cap. 6.The Magdeburgenſes tels us, that in the ſecond Century there was a Cuſtome of ſetting ſinners a time of publike repentance. But in the third Century is evident enough, about the yeare 210. O…ig. in Joſ. hom. 7. Hom. 2. in. 37. Pſal.and ſo forward. Origen in his ſeventh Homily on Joſhua tells us, they excommunicated none but thoſe who were thrice admoniſhed and refuſed repentance; and in his ſecond Homily on the 37. Cypr. de lapſis Ser. 5. Tert. in lib. de poenitentia.Pſal. gives us ſome account of their order in publike penance. Tertullian and Cyprian do it abundantly. Gregorius, Thaumaturgus (if the Canonicall Epiſtle be his) doth not only tell us the ſeverall degrees, but tells us what places were aſſig…ed for them in the Church in their ſeverall degrees.
Qui vero excommunicati, Centur. l. 3. c. 6.aut non excommunicati, grav…ter out idolis ſacrificando, aut haereticos deficiendo, lapſi eſſent, non niſi poſt publicam poenitentiam, & confeſſionem debitè peractam recipiebantur, (ſay the learned Centuriators in this Century.) In this Century the time of their poenitence was appointed according to the nature of the offence; Cypr. l. 4. ep. 2.we learne out of Cyprian, that thoſe Chriſtians who had eagerly profeſſed the Chriſtian Faith, and in the time of perſecution fell away, had three yeares ſet them, all which time they were ſuſpended; when the time ſet them was expired, if the Church judged they had duly manifeſted repentance, they took their names, and enrolled them, giving them a Ticket to this purpoſe: Admit this man to the Communion, Ib. l. 3. ep. 15, 16. Cypr. ep. 52.who, having formerly fallen, hath ſhewen ſufficient ſignes of repentance, ſo Cyprian; after which, as the Magdeburgenſes prove out of Cyprian, they were examined and judged by their particular Churches after which upon their confeſſion of their ſins there alſo, they were admitted. It is more than probable, that Novatus his hereſie, which was broached about this time, gave occaſion to the Church to mitigate their Cenſure of Excommunication, and denying the Communion till death to ſome ſcandalous ſinners. For Cyprian tells us, that his Predeceſſors had refuſed to reconcile Adulterers at all to the Church, and, if I miſtake not, the ſame was determined concerning Apoſtates, I thinke Albaſpinaeus proves it. Novatus, ſay ſome, Albaſpin. Obſ. l. …. Obſ. 21.denied that any falling after baptiſme could be reſtored by repentance; Albaſpinaeus ſaith, it is a miſtake, for his Errour was, That he denied that Chriſt had given power to the Church to abſolve or reſtore any. In oppoſition to whom the Church remitted ſomething of her former ſeverity, and inſtead of Excommunicating, or denying the Sacrament till death, (which before were very frequent (enſures) they determined that ſcandalous perſons ſhould, being admoniſhed, and approving themſelves to the Church by theſe ſteps, be reſtored to a plenary Communion. And now I have given my Reader as good an account as I can find of this Primitive Diſcipline, from whence he may obſerve.
1. That we who deſire the Presbyterian reformamation, in the exerciſe of our Diſ…p…ine, require no more than the recovery of this ancient Cuſtome of the Churches of Chriſt. It is as cleare as the light.
1. That they admitted none to the Sacrament but ſuch as before had approved themſelves to the Church to be foreign, enlightened with the knowledge of the Principles of Chriſtian Religion.
2. Such as were free from all groſſe and ſcandalous ſins, and if they did fall into any, they required not only a verball profeſſion of their ſorrow, and a promiſe of their amendment, but, that according to the nature of their offence, they ſhould be kept from the Sacrament, till by an humble contrary walking for ſome time they had manifeſted their hearty ſorrow and repentance.
To which purpoſe they ſet 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 20, yeares for them, we plead not for ſuch a time, but for a convenient time for them to ſtand aſhamed, and to evidence their true repentance. And though as to every particular circumſtance we do not juſtifie our Fathers, yet in theſe two maine things we agree with them, and inſiſt on no more.
And for the point of examination (ſo much bogled at) it is only in order to the ſetling of our Churches, and the correcting the abuſes of corrupt Miniſters formerly, who ſhould have look'd to that, to have admitted no blind ignorant perſons to the Lords Table, which I have ſufficiently evidenced, was the Diſcipline of the ancient Church of Chriſt.
Secondly, From what hath been ſaid the Reader may judge how ſimply, or maliciouſly Mr Boatman ſpake, when he told his people, that it never entred into the heads of wiſer ages to determine for what ſins any ſhould be ſuſpended from the Lords Table. It is a ſigne he never read the Councils, nor any part of them, nor yet Baſils Canonicall Epiſtles ad Amphilochium, he would have ſeen there that for Manſlaughter, Adultery, Fornication, Perjury, Apoſtacy, and many ſins more Suſpenſion was determined.
I ſhall conclude this Chapter with that exclamation of Albaſpinaeus, with which he concludes the two and twentieth Obſervation of his ſecond book,
O mirabilem ſacroſanctae antiquitatis pietatem & religionem! — O veteris diſciplinae ſanctitatem mirabilem! &c.—
O the admirable piety and Religion of ſormer times! O the wonderfull holineſſe of the Church, and ſtrictneſſe of her Diſcipline then! In thoſe daies if a Chriſtian in the heat of perſecution to ſave his life had but bowed to an Idoll, or offered in their Temple, (though ſorely againſt their will) the Church did not only ſuſpend him from the Sacrament, but he could not be reſtored againe till his dying day, or till after ſeven or ten yeares ſtanding as a penitent: Now if Chriſtians give up themſelves to their luſts, and not to ſave their lives, but to ſatisfie their beaſtly luſts only, be drunke, uncleane, ſweare, lye, &c. yet if they will but wipe their mouths, and ſay they will do ſo no more, they muſt preſently be admitted to the holy Table, yea, and they uſurpe Chriſts authority that will keep them away (if we may beleeve all that is told us.) Baſil. ep. Canon. ad Amphil.Then the Adulterer might not be admitted till by fifteene yeares holy converſation he had evidenced his repentance; now we think fifteen months, Ib. Can. 58. Ib. Can. 59.yea, fifteene daies too much. A Fornicatour muſt abſtaine in thoſe daies eight yeares; two he muſt only beg prayers; other two he muſt only heare; other two he muſt mourne; a ſeventh he muſt ſtand and merely look on; in the eighth he might be admitted. If one had ſtolne and confeſſed it himſelfe, Ib. Can. 61.he muſt have been kept away a yeare, if he had not confeſſed it, two yeares. Now it is no more, but Let him that hath ſtolne ſteale no more, and come. Ib. Can. 64.If a man had ſworne falſly, and forſworne himſelfe, then he muſt have been kept away eleven yeares; now if he ſweares profanely, it is but a Veniall ſin, if he ſaies he is ſorry, our charity muſt ſhut her eyes and beleeve him a viſible Saint. Nay, and we muſt be made beleeve that all former ages were as mad, and as looſe as we are. No, no, Reader, the feare of God was more upon our fore-fathers hearts, they durſt do no ſuch things, they rather offended by too much ſeverity, yet ſinners in thoſe daies had ten times more temptations to ſin, and thoſe of the higheſt nature, from the danger of their lives, and ſpoyling their goods, &c. we may be as ſtrict as we will, and are not tempted but when we are drawn away by our own lusts, and enticed. O how inexcuſable ſhall the Miniſters and Elders of Congregations appeare before the Lord Jeſus Chriſt for the expoſing his body and bloud to profanation; Shall not the Lord ſay, Behold here my Servants Tertullian, and Cyprian, how ſtrict they were in furious times? Behold my Servant Chryſoſtome, who would rather have ſuffered his own bloud to have been ſhed than my Sons to be profaned. Behold my Servant Ambroſe, he was not afraid of the face of an Emperour, Theodoſius.but in a juſt cauſe he denied him the Sacrament; you were afraid of the face of a rich man, afraid of loſing ten ſhillings a yeare, afraid of loſing the love of thoſe who hate me; what ſhall we ſay? How ſhall we appeare before the Lord? Shall not bluſhing cover our faces that day? The Lord grant it be laid to none of our charge.
FINIS.