A Second Vindication of a Free Admission to the Lords Supper, Section 15
SECT. 15:
FIrſt then for ſome condeſcenſion in the former queſtion, how farre thoſe that are more tender in their ſpirits and practice may goe towards with-holding the Sacrament from ſuch they conceive unqualified, as ignorant or ſcandalous, before cenſure, I have touched at in my Rejoynder, p. 82, 83. 111, 112. where diſtinguiſhing between what is to be condeſcended to as prudential, and what to be yielded as neceſſary; between what is done by way of advice, and by way of compulſion; between forbearance and excluſion: I doe acknowledg it is a rule to be allowed in affirmative precepts, that though they doe bind ſemper, they do not bind ad ſemper, at all times. Upon which account I take it to be lawfull for a man that is obliged, and hath a right to an ordinance, to forbear the ſame upon a juſt occaſion; which (I think) may be, as upon other matters, Numb. 9.10. ſo much more upon pious ends regarding preparation, Mat. 5.24. Upon this ſame ground then I humbly conceive, that a Miniſter looking into the ſtate of his flock, and finding ſome ignorant and ſcandalous amongſt them, though he cannot take upon himſelf to exclude them the Sacrament before cenſure, he may proceed ſo far towards it, that beſides the rebuking of them ſharply, he may admoniſh or adviſe them to forbear the ordinance at preſent, ſo long as he judges it in prudence to be a means to make them come the more prepared to the next Sacrament; what hinders but the Miniſter may ſtretch himſelf even to the utmoſt end of his line of doctrin, when he ſtands there, and knows that he is ſtill without the line of juriſdiction? And this I conceive may ſatisfie the conſcientious in this thing, putting into their hands as much advantage as a ſingle paſtor can have to the following them with inſtruction for the good of their ſouls, which is that I ſuppoſe they only aim at in this matter; and if it were any thing elſe, it is fit they ſhould never obtain it.
Only I muſt adde here that I ſuffer not in my principles; It is not becauſe I think receiving is no duty unto ſuch, for this, I conceive, were evil to hold; Nor becauſe I think it not appointed for edification unto ſuch; for thoſe arguments that reverend Mr. Blake hath put in, to prove the Sacrament a means of grace to the unregenerate within the Church (Cov. Seal. ch. 7. ſect. 13.) muſt needs reach, and be cogent for theſe alſo, as they are Churchmembers, although he would not have them; Nor becauſe I think that ſuch are in an utter incapacity to be edified by it, as infants and the diſtracted are, (wherein the formentioned learned man places his whole ground of diſſent he hath from me in this point) ſeeing the Sacrament through the word (and the word goes along with it) doth teach as for the one, and convince of ſin as for the other, as is ſaid before, and granted by him. That it is a teaching Ordinance, mediante verbo, even at the preſent for the ignorant; I pray let me but propoſe this one thing, Were not thoſe words of our Lord to his diſciples [This is my body broken for you, This is the New Testament in my blood which was ſhed for remiſſion of ſinnes] teaching words, informing forming them of his death, and myſtery of our redemption? Who can deny this? And were not the diſciples ignorant at that time, of his death, and myſtery of our redemption? Compare Mar. 9.31, 32. Lu. 9.44, 45. with Lu. 24. 7, 8. Io. 20.9. and what then will follow for the ignorant, is cleer. That it is a ſin-aggravating Ordinance, and ſo a ſoul-humbling, heart-breaking Ordinance for the ſinner, Mr. B. and I ſo well agree, Rejoynd. p. 235, 236. with Cov. Seal. p. 204. that it needs no argument; and then what follows for the ſcandalous is as clear likewiſe. It is not therefore, I ſay, for theſe cauſes, that I allow thus much; but it is indeed, becauſe I think that no leſſe can be denied to belong to the Miniſter upon the ſcore of prudence only. That there is a poſſibility (upon what is ſaid) of edification unto all intelligent Church-members, though ſcandalous, (Cov. Seal. p. 240.) or ignorant (p. 233.) Mr. B. cannot ingenuouſly deny: and that there is not that moral probability or likelihood hereof, as upon their further inſtruction and preparation, I do grant; From both which then the plain reaſon will ariſe, why ſuch may in prudence be adviſed to forbear the Sacrament at preſent, when yet it muſt be held faſt, that there is no neceſſity on the conſcience, ſimpliciter, for the ir excluſion.
To ſpeak a little more my thoughts freely, I conceive it to be a Magnale in the wiſdom of the Church, which hath ever kept up ſome more ſolemn times for the putting in mind of her members to ſhrift or addreſſe their ſouls to God in a more peculiar manner at ſome ſeaſons above others, to make uſe of the Sacrament to this end; inſomuch, that though the primitive Chriſtians broke bread every week, and ſometimes daily, yet hath it been the uſe of after Ages to celebrate this Ordinance more rarely, that the ſolemnity and rarity (thoſe expreſſions in 1 Cor. 11. giving help hereunto) might have this deſired work upon the people. Upon this ſame ſcore I do conceive this condeſcenſion may take place in allowing that a forbearance of the Lords Supper be adviſed many times to unprepared, unfit perſons, when we judge it in Chriſtian prudence conducible through a more ſolemn addreſs thereunto, towards a farther improvement thereof for their ſouls; And ſo may the ſame be aſſerted happily (as I judge of it) Ex quadam conveniontia, Ob majorem reverentiam, as the School-men ſpeak in ſome other caſes about this Sacrament; When as I am perſwaded otherwiſe there is the ſame outward priviledge, aed the ſame inward qualifications held forth alike in the Scripture unto this and other Ordinances. And this for my firſt conceſſion.