A Rejoinder to Mr Drake, Part 2 · Section 9
Sect. 9 THe ninth Objection is, The Ordinance is polluted if all be admitted. My anſwer was, Unto the unworthy Receivers it may be ſaid defiled, as all things are to the unbeleeving, Tit. 1.15. but not no others. If the heathen Husband bee ſanctified to the beleeving Wife, which is the neareſt communion that can be, 1 Cor. 7.14 ſo that ſhe muſt not ſeparate from him in the duties of marriage, as it is Gods Ordinance; I may reſolutely ſay, it is not the unworthineſſe of another (which is external to him) ſhould make a beleever ſeparate from the Sacrament. To the clean nothing is unclean, Mat. 5.11. Rom. 14.14.
Unto this p. 192, 193. Mr. D. conſents, and therefore he might have dealt more ingenuouſly to have joyned with me in ſtrengthening the weak, rather then to vilifie the ſuccors I brought them; but that like a troubleſome briar there is nothing can paſſe him without catching, renting; and tearing, while he brings his nettles to poſſeſſe our pleaſant places, and thorns our tabernacles.
Page 194. He accuſes me againe for excluding infants, (which is nineteen times) and becauſe I do not exclude others alſo, as he would have me, he bids me take heed there be not the Phariſee and Hypocrite in my heart, &c. Anſw. His adviſe may be good, (bleſſed is he that feareth alwaies) for though, if I belye not my own temper, I think it is free and open, a lover of truth and reality; yet when I come to the cloſer inter-views between God and my ſoule, it makes my heart bleed to ſee what a deal of infidelity, and ſpiritual unſoundneſſe there is in me; beſides the guilt of my life, which others may not know of me, but thou Lord knoweſt; Thou tryeſt the reins, and my ſin is ever before thee; Cleanſe thou mee, heale mee, make me upright with thee; and then ſhall my anſwer be alone in thy mercy. Nevertheleſſe I am perſwaded (though I am nothing) there are many good and worthy Chriſtians that are not altogether of Mr. Drakes opinion, and yet are no hypocrites. Who art thou that judgeſt thy Brother? who art thou that ſetteſt at naught thy Brother? wee ſhall all ſtand before the Judgement ſeat of Chriſt. The humble duſt will flye in the face of him that ſpurns it.
The two next pages (p. 195, 196.) he might have ſpared. It he does not teach it to be ſimply a ſin to receive with any viſibly unworthy, nor is againſt all mixed Sacraments, he knows who does, and might have let that alone that does not concern him. Nevertheleſſe, I cannot here wholly free Mr. D. for I think there is a deadly wound made upon tender Chriſtians, while he involves every ſoule under the guilt of participation with the Receiver, in his ſin of unworthy receiving, If they doo not their beſt to hinder him from receiving, which yet is not ſimply a duty (where ſtill lyes this ſad fallacy) but only ſeoundum quid, in reference to the parties amendment as the end, and excommunication as the means, whereby a man being caſt out of Chriſtian Communion in generall, is conſequently debarred the Sacrament: and otherwiſe to keep him from it, is amiſſe, as going upon this falſe ground, that unfitneſſe to the Sacrament is the formall cauſe of Excommunication; and I fear ſinful, becauſe it is ſimply our duty to exhort (and in our places to prepare) all our fellow-members both to come, and come worthily to it. To clear this, ſuppoſe a regenerate man deſerves to be excommunicate, and I do not complain of him, he comes and receives in faith; Now if I muſt partake of a mans receiving unworthily, when I ſhould endeavor his excommunication, and do not, then muſt I partake in this mans receiving worthily; and ſo my not endeavouring their excommunication ſhall be good in the one, and ſin in the other. It is apparent therefore that this ſin is to be ſingled by its ſelf, I am never the more or the leſſe guilty, whether he come or not come, receives worthily or not worthily, that is foreign, but this is one only continued guilt on me, that I do not my duty in admoniſhing and telling the Church of him, ſuppoſing the cale ſo, that it is my duty.
If it were my duty ſimply or abſolutely to keep away the unworthy from the Sacrament, (beſides that, no man then could keep himſelfe from guilt;) it would be my duty alſo to keep them from the Word and Prayer. For 1. There is the ſame morall pollution in the one, as the other, Tit. 1.15.2. The ſin is as abſtractible in the one as the other.3. The one is our duty as well as the other, unleſſe Mr. D. can give us any text that forbids it. And here indeed will come the iſſue of all. When Chriſt ſays, Baptize all Nations, thoſe that except Infants, muſt ſhew Texts for it. When the Scripture ſays, all the Congregation, the whole people, every man was to eat the Paſſeover, Exod. 12. When Chriſt ſayes, do this, drinke ye all of it, and St. Paul applys the ſame to the whole Church of Corinth, 1 Cor. 11.23. Thoſe that will except the unregenerate (which is likely the greater part) out of theſe, doe affirm a limitation, and muſt prove it. When you come together, ver. 33. does to mee plainly include, both a ſuppoſall they would come together, and an allowance that they might. Their manner of coming is reproved, but their coming together, and that to eate, is what they ought.
There may be here one caſe to be ſatisfied; Suppoſe I have not admoniſhed my Brother, and complained of him, is not the neglect of my duty a ſin? and how then ſhall I come to the Sacrament with this ſin on my Conſcience, but it ſhall be defiled to me? I Anſwer, if thy Conſcience tels there it is a ſin (for there is ſome prudence to go in to it) thou art to repent of it, by reſolving to take the next opportunity to perform thy duty thou haſt omitted; and upon this reſolution of thine (as in the like neglects) there is no doubt but thou mayſt come ſafely. 2. If thou haſt neglected one duty, I dare not ſay that omiſſion can excuſe thee from doing another duty, the Apoſtle commands us Jam. 1.21. to lay apart all naughtineſſe and ſo to receive the word: and the Pſalmist tells us, If we regard iniquity in our hearts, God will not heare us, Pſal. 66.18. Yet dare I not ſay, If a man doth not ſincerely lay aſide all his ſinnes (as he ought) that hee may not heare, nor pray. The caſe is the ſame in all duties, the perſon is to be reformed, but not the duty left undone.
Page 198, 199. He hath nothing more conſiderable; onelyonly that new argument from Children which wee have now had, no leſſe then twenty times over; and therefore I ſhall be content, ſeeing he argues ſo ſtrongly for them, that hee ſhould take them with the diſtracted into his company. It is a manifeſt teſtimony of the exceeding weakneſſe of his owne grounds, that hee is forced through his whole Booke ſo poorely to argue onelyonly from ſuch a Conceſſion, which yet the Primitive Church in St. Auſtins time, would not have granted him.