A Second Vindication of a Free Admission to the Lords Supper, Section 1 – Section 4
SECTION 1.
IT has ever been the gracious appointment and will of God, to have a Church upon earth, or a certain number of men and women to be in covenant-relation with him, in oppoſition to others, who are ſaid to be without God, and without Chriſt in the world.
Under the Old Teſtament it pleaſed the Lord to chuſe out Abraham, Iſaack, Jacob, and their poſterity, to be the lot of his inheritance, Deut. 9.26, 27. and 32.8, 9. and his peculiar people, Deut. 7.6. & 14.2. Pſ. 135.4. Under the New Teſtament he hath enlarged the tents, and lengthned the cords: ſo that herein now is his glory ſhown in having multitudes, people, nations, languages, to flow in to him, Dan. 7.14. Iſ. 2.2, 3, 4. Behold, thou ſhalt call a nation which thou kneweſt not, and nations which knew thee not ſhall run unto thee, Iſ. 55.5. there is Gods call of a Nation, and the Nations anſwer to that call, which being ſpoken of Chriſt under the Goſpel, Rom. 9.26. Rom. 10.19. is manifeſt proof for our national Churches, as others have obſerved.
For as the whole people of the Jews were the Church of God, and ſo accounted a holy ſeed, a choſen generation, a ſanctified people, Ezra 9.2. Deut. 14.3. Dan. 8.24. Gods vine, the daughter of his people, his children, Deut. 14.1. inſomuch that every man, woman and child of them, without exception, are taken into covenant, Deut. 29.10, 11, 12. There were many of them ignorant perſons, Iſ. 1.3. Iſ. 5.13. many of them wicked perſons, Pſ. 81.11. Amos 3.2. Yet are they owned of God for his people, and ſo called his people, children of the Kingdom, Mat. 8.12. children of the covenant, Acts 3.25. Deut. 32.6. in reference to this covenant-relation. Hear O my people, and I will teſtifie againſt thee, I am God, even thy God, Pſal. 50.7. I enter'd covenant with thee, and thou becameſt mine, Ez. 16.8. He came to his own, and his own received him not, Jo. 1.11. they are called his own ſtill, though they refuſed him.
So is it now with all thoſe Nations that having had the Goſpel preached, and anſwering to that Goſpel have received the doctrine of Chriſt, ſubmitting to his Ordinances in profeſſion of his name, they are hereby engrafted into the Jews olive or covenant, Rom. 11.17. with Rom. 2.26. and ſo to be reckoned, as they were, the people of God, 1 Pet. 2.10. Beleevers, Acts 8.12, 13. Diſciples, Jo. 6.66. Chriſtians, Acts 11.26. Saints by calling, 1 Cor. 1.2. the Church of the Gentiles, and Kingdom of Chriſt. Mat. 13.41.
And to this purpoſe doe ſuch texts as theſe, Mi. 4.2. Jer. 4.2. Zach. 2.11. Iſ. 65. 1. Rom. 4.17. Matt. 21.43. Pſ. 86.9. Iſ. 25.6. Pſ. 22.27. Pſ. 2.8. Zach. 14.9. &c. (See Mr. Hudſons Vind. p. 16. and Mr. Baxt. Inf: Bap: p. 339, 340. Edit. 3.) ſpeak of the Church very largely and magnificently under the Goſpel. The ſame covenant, ſayes Rutherford (Treat. Cov. p. 73. & 343.) that was made with Abraham, is made with the Corinthians, 2 Cor. 6.16. I will be their God, and they ſhall be my people. And as that is extended to the whole Jews, Lev. 26.12, 13. So are the whole Gentiles, Iſ. 55.4, 5. Iſ. 11.10. Iſ. 60.1, 2. All Nations, Iſa. 2.1, 2. All fleſh, Iſ. 66.23. Iſ. 40.5. Pſal. 65.2. All the kinreds of the earth, Pſ. 22.26, 27. The Kingdoms of the world, Rev. 11.15. From the riſing of the Sun, to the going down thereof, Mal. 1.11. (to wit, even as many of them as the Lord our God ſhall call, Act. 2.39.) ſaid to become the people of God under the New Teſtament.
SECT. 2.
I Know indeed, for all theſe many and arge expreſſions every where in Scripture, ſome eminent Divines do conceive the Church and Covenant ought to be reſtrained to the regenerate only, and that none elſe are really, but nominally & aequivocally Church-members. And ſo I remember Arminius expreſſes it for them, Diſp. pub. Theſ. 18. Sec. 15. Vocati, et non electi, ad eccleſiam viſibilem pertinere judicantur, quanquam Aequivocè, quum ad inviſibilem non pertine ant.
This doctrine enforces them to diſtinguiſh, between what gives right as to a mans own part unto Church-memberſhip and the Ordinances, and that which gives right to be admitted; whereas the truth is, theſe are Relata, quorum poſito & ſublato uno, ponitur & tollitur alterum; Beſides, there is this grievous inconvenience it runs do…nright into, that the Miniſter ſhall be bound to adminiſter the Ordinances (particularly the Sacrament) unto people, when they are bound upon pain of damnation not to take them. Upon this ariſes inextricable difficulties which as they encline men to ſeparations, ſo they leave the doubtfull Chriſtian in ſuch a caſe, that he can hardly ever act in faith upon ſuch foundations.
It is my opinion therefore, that the Covenant may be conſidered in the ſpecial grace thereof and in ernal adminiſtration, and thus it belongs only to the elect and regenerate: Or in the general grace and external adminiſtration of the Ordinances, and thus it belongs to the whole Church as viſible, and to the ſeveral members alike, whether regenerate or not.
My reaſons for this latitude are theſe:
1. It is manifeſt that the whole Nation of the Jewes, Deut. 29. were Gods peculiar people, in covenant with him, by the texts fore-quoted; and this is amply proved by Mr. Blake, Treat. Cov. p. 189, 190. but that moſt of them were only aequivocally ſo, is by others aſſumed gratis.
2. It is plain, that the Gentiles are ingrafted into the Olive of the Jews, Rom. 11.24. that is, into their external covenant, which covenant muſt be the covenant of grace, for elſe it could be no prejudice for any of them to be broken off, nor priviledge for any of us to be ingrafted in. And it muſt be as to the external adminiſtratiò, for elſe neither could any of them be broken off, not any of us ingrafted in.
3. It appears, that the Promiſe or covenant of Grace in the external adminiſtration belongs to all that the Lord our God ſhall call, Acts 2.39. To thoſe that are afarr off, (that is, the Gentiles) and their children, when the Lord ſhould call any of their parents, as it did for the preſent to the Jews, and theirs.
4. The called, no doubt, are many more than the elect; many are called, but few choſen. The called are ſuch, as Mr. Blake phraſes it, as are brought in covenant, The choſen, ſuch as are brought up to the terms of it. Now it is to be conſidered, The called contain the choſen. As there is an outward vocation, and an effectual vocation, yet that outward is real as well as the other; So there is an outward being in covenant, and effectual, (as we ſpeak for diſtinctions ſake,) Yet that outward is real, not aequivocally only.
5. The Scripture puts a real difference between the Nation of the Jews, as being in covenant, Rom. 3.1. and 9.4. and others that were alienated from the Commonwealth of Iſrael, without hope, without God in the world, Eph. 2.12. but if none but the regenerate are in covenant, there is no ſuch difference externally between a Jew and Gentile, Chriſtian and Heathen, but aequivocally onelyonly, in which manner methinks the Scripture ſhould not be made to ſpeak ſo abundantly.
6. For this latitude, as to Obligation and priviledge of Ordinances, it is evident, Gen. 17.10. This is my covenant ye ſhall keep between me and you, every man-child among you ſhall be circumciſed. Here I note, that the waiting on Gods ordinance, is the keeping the covenant it ſelf, in the external adminiſtration; And ſurely there is ſo much plain ſtrength in the inſtance of circumciſion, Gen. 17. Jud. 5. from this large right of Ordinances from covenant-relation, that it alone will hold againſt all can be ſaid againſt it.
7. Excellent Mr. Baxter in his Inf: Bap: p. 224. mihi Ed. 3. highly commending Mr. Blakes opening of the conditional covenant, and affirming that he hath fully proved, that the reprobate (meaning of profeſſors) is within the verge of it, he adds, And doubtleſſe this imereſt in the covenant is afruit of Chriſts death. Now if it be ſo, how can it be aequivocal only? that is, an interect or priviledge, which will become a lie, and diſſimulation for thoſe that have it, to aſſume; and can that be a fruit of Chriſts death?
8. If no unregenerate Chriſtian be in covenant but aequivocally, then muſt not ſuch a one bring his child to baptiſm, nor partake himſelf of Chriſtian communion, but it is a meer mockery of Chriſt (as ſome ſeem to me here to ſpeak harſhly) to avoid which, he muſt tenounce his profeſſion, and never come to the Supper, and to the other Ordinances, but only as an Heathen and Infidel.
9. Then thoſe that are diſciples of Chriſt (for ſo was Judas) muſt not be caught to doe all things Chriſt hath commanded, Mat. 28.20.
10. The Scripture (as Mr. Blake urges) ſpeaks of dealing falſly in covenant, breaking, and not being ſtedfaſt in it: but if the regenerate only be in covenant, there can be no ſuch thing really, but nominally only.
11. Chriſt ſaid expreſly to the twelve, Doe this, Drink you all of it, that was a command, and yet one of them was unregenerate; From whence it follows, that receiving the Sacrament is a duty of a diſciple, though unregenerate, and ſo the covenant, as to priviledge of ordinances, belonging to ſuch. For my part, I cannot but think thoſe titles of Diſciples, Beleevers, Chriſtians, Saints by calling, and the like, given to all within the Church, are titles of right, and not nominal only. We muſt diſtinguiſh (ſaies Timſon) of beleeving in a large ſenſe, and of beleeving in a ſtrict ſenſe, both to be accounted true beleeving in Scripture ſenſe: The denomination of a beleever, (and ſo Saint, Chriſtian,) is as well derived from a right object beleeved on, as from the holineſs of the ſubject beleeving. (Anſw. to Mr. Col: p. 153.) It is in my apprehenſion appoſitely ſpoken.
12. The covenant is founded upon grace. Gratia (ſaies Bullinger, Decad. 5. Ser: 6.) eſt favor numinis, quo Deus pater, nos propter Chriſtum complectitur, et donis inſtruct. Now in the Scripture there is two-fold grace; General grace, and Special grace; God is ſaid to love all, (that he would have all to be ſaved) yet elect ſome; Chriſt is ſaid to dye for all, and to dye for his ſheep; Both theſe are true, whatſoever men contend, the Scripture muſt be beleeved, and we muſt not argue from the one to the deſtruction of the other. To define this ſenſe orthodoxly how both are reconciled, who is ſo wiſe to undertake? One Cottier, a grave French-Proteſtant Divine, in an Epiſtle of his to one of their Provincial Aſſemblies, and well approved of by them, having ſtudied this point long, ſaies thus. Ad haec reſpondemus, non eſſe aſyſtata, quia gradu & modo differunt. Deum putamus poſſe magìs et minùs velle. Par eſt majora magìs, minora minùs velle. Quod verò de Deo dicitur, Chriſto etiam convenit, Pro omnibus mortuus, magis vero pro Electis. Doctor Twiſſe ſaies thus often, Fatemur et nos Chriſtum-mortuum eſſe pro: omnibus et ſingulis, hoc ſenſu, nempe ut inomnes & ſingulos per mortem ejus redundet ſalus, modò in ipſum credant. Lib. 2. Crim. 4. Sect. 6. For my part, I dare not be peremptory in determining this ſenſe of General grace, it ſuffices me that there is ſome ſenſe thereof according to the word of truth, and I ſhall only obſerve this one thing, that in the Scripture this General grace belonging to all in ſome Orthodox ſenſe whatſoever it be, is often appropriated to the viſible Church, who are ſaid to be redeemed, to be in Chriſt, and ſanctified with his blood: in way of diſtinction from the world; when ſome of them are reprobates, and periſh with it, 2 Pet. 2.1. Jo. 15.2. Heb. 10.29. And herein I do conceive we may ſee how the covenant of grace in this latitude to the whole Church may ſtand upon a real, and not an aequivocal foundation; and that will be, if we doe not reckon the unregenerate and non-elect to be in covenant in reference to ſpecial grace, as Chriſt is ſaid to dye for his ſheep and elect, whereof theſe cannot partake indeed, only in the account of men, which is nominally only; but in reference to General grace, as Chriſt is ſaid to dye for all (and that not nominally, aequivocally, in the account of men only; but really, ſo that the tender and offer of Chriſt to all is ſerious and real) as it is appropriated to the Church that receives it, with diſtinction of priviledge from the heathen or world, that doe not receive this grace and Goſpel, but deny it. And this by the way I ſhall humbly offer, for the removing ſome grand objections which ſtick with many. For inſtance, The Sacraments are ſignes of grace, inſtituted to teſtifie the being and having the thing, ſaies. Gilleſpie, Aar: rod bloſ. B. 3. c. 13. Therefore they belong to the regenerate only. Again, It is not credible that Chriſt ſhould ſay, This is my body broken for you, and my blood ſhed for you, if Judas were amongſt the other diſciples. B. 3. c. 8. Again, The Sacrament is the communion of the body & blood of Chriſt, with the like. I anſwer, The Sacraments are ſigns directly of this general Grace, as it is appropriated in Scripture to the Church and they do teſtifie to every nember the being and their having thereof, by way of advantage and diſtinction from the world; And thus, as it is credible that Chriſt ſhould ſay there are ſome branches in him that yet are fruitleſſe; that Peter ſhould ſay, ſome are bought by the Lord, that deny him; and Paul, that ſome are ſanctined by the blood of the covenant, that trample upon it, according to the texts fore-quoted; So is it credibſe that Chriſt ſhould ſay theſe words, This is my body broken for you, to Judas among the reſt, and in the ſame ſenſe is there a communion of Chriſts body and blood to all within the Church, (even as Moſes ſaies to all the people. Rehold the blood of the covenant which the Lord hath made with you. Ex. 24.8. Heb. 9.19.20.) though ſome of them be profeſſors only. Two things here may be demanded, 1. How can this General grace of the covenant be appropriated to the Church, which belongs to all the world? I anſwer. It belongs to the world only in regard of publication, tender, and a kind of potential intereſt if they come in; but it belongs to the Church by way of actual intereſt, as already come in (See my Rejoynd. p. 202.) ſo that one is ſaid to be in covenant, and the others yet aliens, from it, Eph. 2.12.2ly. What is that then which brings a man into this outward actual intereſt in the covenant, whereby this General grace thereof belongs to him by way of priviledge now, when as yet he is no more partaker of the Special grace thereof than before? I anſwer with Mr. Hudſon, Vind. p. 8. There are two Sieves which God uſeth, the firſt is to ſift the world into a viſible eccleſiaſtical body; The ſecond is to ſift this viſible eccleſiaſtical body, into a ſpiritual inviſible body. The one Sieve is managed by the hands of the Miniſter, the other is in the hands of God only: Into the one a man is brought by the outward call of the Miniſter, and his own anſwering that call in receiving the doctrine of Chriſt, and ſubjection to the Ordinances; Into the other a man is brought only by election and regeneration.
13. Laſtly, The covenant under the New Teſtament is ſaid to be better than under the Old, Heb. 7.22. & 8.6. But to account this priviledge of Ordinances which was in common to the Jews (as is proved before) to belong now only to the regenerate, is to make it worſe under the New teſtament than under the Old, which is injurious to doe. Arbitrari (ſaies Calvin, Inſt. l. 4. c. 16. Sec. 6.) Chriſtum adventu ſno patris gratiam immiouiſſe, aut decurtaſſe, execrabili blaſphemia non vacat. I know ſome do make this difference between the New and Old Teſtament, that the Jews were all called Gods people, and reckoned in covenant, though many of them were wicked; but it is not ſo now (ſay they) under the New. Againſt theſe I ſhall oppoſe only thoſe two plain texts, 1 Cor. 5.11, 12. there are ſcandalous perſons enumerated, a Fornicator, covetous, drunkard, yet within, (that is, within the Church and covenant) yet a brother. So 2 Theſſ. 3.15. There is the diſorderly perſon, yet count him not as an enemy; that is happily (conſidering the word in other places, as Rom. 11.28. Eph. 2.16.) count him not as one out of the Church, an Unbeleever or Heathen, but admoniſh him as a brother. And indeed, unleſs ſuch be looked on as brethren, and as within, how can there be any excommunication, for what have we to doe to judge thoſe that are without? I know that Cameroes authority is here quoted, but that grave and pious man Mr. Blake hath made it his buſineſſe to confute this difference, in the 27, 28, and 29 Chapters of his Treatiſe of the Covenant; wherein as I find Mr. Anthony Burgeſſe particularly in this point commending that Tract as ſolid and judicious, in his ſecond part of Juſtif: after he had ſeen what hath been put in againſt it; likewiſe Mr. Vines, and others; So doe I humbly judge his labours therein are worthy to be atteſted, as very ſerviceable to the Churches peace.
SECT. 3.
VNtoUnto the Church, under that notion, as his Church, or people, the Lord hath vouchſafed his ordinances by way of priviledge and diſtinction from the world. He ſhewed his word to Jacob, his ſtatutes and his judgements unto Iſrael, he hath not done ſo to any nation, as for his judgements they have not known them, Pſ. 147.19, 20. Pſ. 78.5, 6, 7. What advantage then hath the Jew? Much every way, chiefly becauſe that unto thē were committed the oracles of God, Rom. 3.12. To them pertaineth the adoption, the convenants and the ſervice of God, Rom. 8.4. with Eph. 2.12. Upon this account, do our Divines ſolidly (as I think) make the Ordinances, the right adminiſtration of the Word and Sacraments (under which, a profeſſion of the doctrine of Chriſt, prayer, and other worſhip is comprehended) to be the notes or marks of the viſible Church. It is true indeed, that the Goſpel is to be preached unto every creature to bring men in unto the Church, as the Jewes no doubt might uſe the Word to make proſelytes, nevertheleſſe the word of God as other ordinances, cannot be ſaid to pertain unto any out of the Church, in the ſenſe of the Scriptures now mentioned, until they receive the doctrine thereof, and externally ſubject themſelves to the ſame. For this ſame priviledge of ordinances, or this donation of ordinances by way of priviledge to the Church, in diſtinction from others, is a thing to be ſtood upon as a matter very conſiderable, both becauſe, if we let this advantage fall, we ſhall preſently level a Chriſtian with an Heathen, the Church of Chriſt, with the Pagan world: and alſo becauſe the Lord hath appointed theſe his ordinances (whereby the advantage of them does appear) to be the ordinary means of beſtowing his effectual grace, which he hath indefinitely promiſed in the uſe thereof.
SECT. 4.
VPonUpon this latitude of the convenant, and this priviledge of ordinances belonging thus to the Church, as a proprium quarto modo, or an eſſential mark thereof, it muſt follow, that every member in ſtatu quo, muſt have a right …evolved on him, or flowing to him from that relation as a member. Only here wee muſt obſerve two diſtinctions.
1. We muſt diſtinguiſh between a Right unto the effectual benefits of Chriſt held forth in an ordinance, as particularly the Lords Supper; and a Right to the external ordinance: The former right indeed, belongs to none but the regenerate; but the latter belongs to all within the Church, to all alike that are Members. Aliqui induunt Chriſtum (ſays Austin) uſque ad Sacramentorum receptionem, aln ad vitae ſanctificationem. I know ſome chuſe to diſtinguiſh here between an active …ight in the Church to conferre the Seals, and a paſſive right in a viſible Member to receive; a right in foro Eccleſiae, and in foro Dei. But for my part, I think this former plain diſtinction of mine, reſpecting an active and paſſive right in foro Dei & Eccleſiae alike, is rather (for theſe two reaſons, ſee Sect. 2.) to be uſed; and in other terms may, if you pleaſe, be expreſſed thus. The Sacraments may be conſidered either Complexly, with the entire fruits and benefits of the Covenant, unto which truth of Grace is neceſſarily required to the obtaining thereof: Or preciſely in the Ordinance it ſelf, and ſo it is Church-memberſhip alone, or external covenant-relation, denominating the ſubjects, Saints, Beleevers, Diſciples, Chriſtians, that gives men right unto the ſame. See reverend Dr. Worths Inf: Bap: p. 16. It is one thing what is required of the receiver in his coming or that comes to the Sacrament (as of the hearer, and him that prays in their hearing and prayer) and another thing what is requir'd to receiving: ſo that elſe he muſt not come.
2. We muſt diſtinguiſh between a Right, and uſe of that right; Though this right unto all the ordinances be in common, It muſt be acknowledged for the uſe and actual partaking of ſome ordinances, particularly the Lords Supper; there is a difference to be put between ſuch as are not of age or capacity, but want the uſe of reaſon (as Infants, Idiots, Diſtracted, with the like) and other members; the direct and immediate ground hereof lying herein, in that the uſe of a right, is not of ſo large extent, as the right is. A man may have a right to a thing, or to do a thing, when it is impoſſible for him to uſe the thing or to doe it, and the impoſſibility does diſoblige, and excuſe him from the doing. It is thus with infants and diſtracted perſons in point of the Lords Supper; it is not for want of a right they are not admitted, (any more than the infectious or ſick) they have a right, nay a full plenary right (let others uſe their own terms as they will) as appears convincingly by the other Sacrament of baptiſme, where there being only a paſſive reception, which they are capable of, they do, and muſt receive it: But it is becauſe they cannot uſe the ſame right here, where ſuch an activity is required, as they are not capable of; Even as in their eſtates they have a right to them, but they do not manage them. An heir in his infancy is Lord of all, in reſpect of the one, and yet differs not from a ſervant, in reſpect of the other, Gal. 4.1.