A Second Vindication of a Free Admission to the Lords Supper, Section 5 – Section 6
SECT. 5.
FRom this conceſſion of mine about Infants and the Diſtracted, it cannot be argued, à pari, by my oppoſers, for an excluſion of all ignorant, unregenerate, and ſcandalous perſons.
1. Becauſe in the one they ſtand wholly on the point of Right, but in the other we look only on the uſe of that tight. The unregenerate (ſay they) have no right to the Sacrament, and if they be viſibly ſo, through ignorance or ſcandal, they muſt be excluded: We ſay Infants and the diſtracted, have a right, but only they have not reaſon to manage their right, as the other have; ſo here is no parity. The truth is, it is memberſhip (as before) that alone gives right, ſo that though a perſon be unregenerate he may have a right to the ordinance, and whether he be Infant, Diſtracted, Ignorant or Scandalous, it is all one for that, if he be a member, this external right is the ſame in the one as in the other; Now the right being the ſame, in the uſe of the right muſt lie all the difference; which between theſe is plain enough; the one have the exerciſe of reaſon, and are thereby able to act from a principle of reverence towards God, the other have not. The Corinths ſin of not diſcerning the Lords body, was more of careleſnes or prophaneneſſe, than bare ignorance; there is as much difference between Infants and Ignorants, (as I have ſaid otherwhere) as between a Doe not, and a Cannot, if the one does not, it is their fault; but the other cannot, and are excuſed.
2. Becauſe there is yet a farther thing here, moſt conſiderable, and that is this. The very ground upon which we are to do any thing, or leave it undone, is the conſideration of duty; The command of God, as it is our rule, ſo it muſt be the reaſon of our actions. Now there is a difference in the very point of obligation or duty, between Infants and Diſtracted perſons, and Ignorant and Scandalous perſons. The command of the Apoſtle is this, 1 Cor. 11. Let a man examine himſelf, and ſo let him eat, diſcerning the Lords body; Now as for Infants, and the Diſtracted, they are not bound to this command, it is impoſſible for ſuch to examine themſelves, and diſcern the Lords body; and there can be no obligation to that which is naturally impoſſible: But as for. Scandalous and Ignorant perſons, they are bound to examine themſelves, they are of capacitie, and are bound to get knowledge, and diſcern the Lords body, Who can deny that they are bound to do this, and that if they do it not, it is their ſinne? It is true, an ignorant perſon cannot examine himſelf, as well as a knowing Chriſtian; but he can examine himſelf though ſo farr that he is bound to it: He cannot hear and apply the Word, as a man of more knowledge; but he can hear and apply the Word after a ſort, though as an ignorant man, which he is bound unto; and ſo far as he can apply the word, he can examine himſelf, the doing of one, is a doing of the other. Likewiſe, an unregenerate man cannot diſcern the Lords body with that faith and love as the regenerate do; but yet nevertheleſſe, in point of dutie, the caſe is plain, every man muſt doe ſtill what he can, that God may help him to do what he cannot. That which is a ſin to neglect or leave undone, is a dutie to be done; but it is a ſin in Ignorant and Scandalous perſons not to examine themſelves and diſcern the Lords body, and no fin in Infant and Diſtracted perſons; and therefore it is a dutie in the one, and not in the other. And if it be a dutie, here comes in then this rule, which can never be taken off, that Mans impotencie in the manner of performance of a dutie, muſt not make void Gods authoritie in the ſubſtance; and ſo I cloze up this, if there be a dutie incumbent upon Ignorant and Scandalous members in reſpect of this Sacrament, which is not on Infants, and thoſe which have not the uſe of reaſon, then can there be no argument here from the non-admiſſion of the one, to the excluſion of the other. And this might ſuffice, but I will adde.
3. It cannot be reaſonably imagined that ſuch a ſtate of perſons (as Infants and Idiots) in the Church ſhould be admitted to actual receiving, that in the diſcretion of the Church are no proper objects of Church-cenſures in point of offending, which growen perſons in the Church are, though never ſo ignorant. As John Timſon hath put in to my aſſiſtance in his Bar removed, p. 6. I will add, it is as unreaſonable likewiſe that ſuch a ſtate of men in the Church as ignorant perſons, ſhould not be capable of a right of receiving the Sacrament, who are upon their miſdemeanour lyable to a cenſure of exluſion from it. Eadem eſt ratio contrariorum.
4. The non-admiſſion of Infants, and Diſtracted or Idiots, is the office of everie ſingle Miniſter, belonging only to the right adminiſtring of the ordinance; ſo that the precept alone, Let a man examine himſelf, and diſcern the Lords bodies, does ſuffice for the doing thereof: But excluſion of ignorant and ſcandalous perſons is an act of Juriſdiction, and belonging (according to the Presbyterians) to the Elders: ſo that there are other texts required, upon the account whereof that is to be done, to wit, thoſe texts which concern diſcipline, as Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5. Put away from among you ſuch a perſon. There is not therefore the ſame reaſon for the one, as for the other, as may be gather'd farther from what will follow. There is more required, and another ground, to an act which is eccleſiaſtically inflictive of puniſhment, than to a bare act of paſtoral diſcretion.
5. The Ordinances all are to be uſed only for edification: Now the work of the Sacrament on the receiver being only by way of ſign, as the underſtanding is exerciſed thereon, it is not poſsible, that thoſe who have not the uſe of reaſon to diſcern any meaning here of can be edified, or have any real grace wrought on them by it. But for ſuch as are of years & underſtanding, though ſpiritually ignorant and ſcandalous, though unregenerate (for the regenerate may ſometimes be ſuch) I do conceive they are capable through the grace of God to receive good by it, as by the word; the Sacrament being nothing elſe but a viſible word, or an appendix to the Goſpel.
As for the ignorant in the firſt place, I ſuppoſe ſuch as are of age and reaſon, let the Miniſter ſpeak of Mans miſerie, redemption by Chriſt, and tell the people plainly the meaning of the Sacrament they come unto, in as few plain words as they can and ought, who can deny that they may not receive inſtruction) and with inſtruction, conviction) now at this time they are here, as at another? If they do not, the fault will be their Miniſters or their own. The Sacrament, mediante verbo, through the word, will be granted a teaching ordinance, but the Word does accompany the Sacrament, and is indeed a part of it. The Novices of the Jews were inſtructed in the meaning of the Paſſeover and ſome myſteries of their Religion; at their eating the Paſſeover (Godwin, Jewiſh Antiq. l. 3. c. 4.) the Paſchal Lamb was appointed for a teaching ſign, and memorial in their generations, Exod. 12.26, 27. So doubtleſs is the Sacrament a teaching ſign alſo. I muſt confeſſe, if you will ſay that ſome are ſo groſly ignorant that they are not capable for the preſent to learn, or be inſtructed by publick teaching, then may you have the libertie for me to number them amongſt Idiots, and ſuch as have not the uſe of reaſon, and ſo deal with them accordingly; and if indeed there be ſuch, we had beſt happily, for avoyding cavil, to diſtinguiſh between theſe (excepting them, together with Infants and the Diſtracted) and thoſe whom I ſpeak of, that though they be ignorant, are of diſcretion and capacitie to edifie by the publick ordinances; and as for ſuch, it ſeems to me againſt ſenſe to deny that they may not receive inſtruction and edification by the Word that accompanies the Sacrament, (eſpecially in things of the Sacrament) as well as by that which goes before, or after it. And by the way, as for the younger ſort come out of their childhood, my judgement is with Aquinas, Quando pueri incipiunt aliqualem uſum rationis habere, ut poſſint devotionem hujus Sacramenti concipere, tunc poteſt eis hoc Sacramentum conferri, Part 3. Quaeſt. 80. Art. 4.
For the Scandalous in the next place, I would have ſome to know or conſider that the Sacrament is an ordinance wherein the curſe and wrath of God againſt ſin is held forth in the ſufferings of Chriſt, as well as pardon upon repentance, Herein is the joynt ſtrength of the Law and Goſpel applyed in power to the underſtanding, and a moſt high-aggravating of ſin upon the conſcience, ſaies Mr. Blake, in his late Book, called The Covenant ſealed, in reference to his former, The Covenant opened, ch. 7. Sect. 13. Arg. 3. & 4. A ſin-aggravating, heart-breaking, ſoul-humbling ordinance (as he calls it) is a means to reclaim even a ſcandalous ſinner.
Reader, I ſpeak not theſe things on the one hand, to hinder Catechiſm, Examination, and any means of private conference for the bringing our people unto knowledge; Nay, I am not againſt a prudential making uſe of this ſeaſon to this end; but only in regard that few Miniſters doe or can go to all their people, and their people will not come to them, I doe conceive it may be ſatisfactory to their ſpirits in doing their office, that though ſome perſons be ignorant, yet coming to the Supper, and hearing the nature and uſe of the Sacrament laid open, there is hope through Gods grace, that they may receive at the very time competent information to be edified and wrought on by it. I will ſpeak plainly, they may receive inſtruction for the knowing (according to their modell) the wretchedneſſe of ſin, that Christ is the Son of God, through whoſe name alone we can be ſaved, and that he is held forth as crucified in the elements, and tender'd to beleevers, which is as much as Mr. Blake ſaies, he dares require to admittance, Cov. Seal. p. 233. Again on the other hand, I ſpeak not neither to favour the ſcandalous, my doctrine is rather too harſh in the caſting them out, yet am I not ſo far gone, as to think that it is not poſſible for ſuch a perſon (not yet under cenſure) to be wrought on, or edified by this ordinance. No, let but a right application of what is held forth herein be made by every receiver, according to the ſtate of his ſoul, and what can be more effectual through the word to break his heart? Let the man which is moſt keen againſt ſin, conſider what I have propoſed in my Rejoynder, p. 37, 39, 40, 75, 76. 112, 113.235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 255. and he will ſee this is no looſe doctrine I have taught.
Neither may they ſay this is no means to work grace or repentance, but confirm it; this is not an ordinance for converſion; but for edification▪ For I ſay otherwiſe, It is a means of edification and ſalvation, and therefore unto ſome likewiſe of converſion. The whole exerciſe of Chriſts officers in diſpenſing the word, ſeales, and all other ordinances of Christ, ſay the London Divines, (in their Jus Divin. Reg. Ec. p. 36.) is for the edifying the Church of Christ, or the viſible body, Eph: 4.11, 12. with v. 4, 5, 6. & 1 Cor. 12.11, 12. From hence then I argue, If the Lord hath appointed all his ordinances within the Church for the edification of the whole, and there be ſome unregenerate within the Church, then is the Sacrament appointed for ſome unregenerate mens edification, and conſequently their converſion, for otherwiſe ſuch cannot at all be edified unto ſalvation. But the former is true, therefore the latter. Again, The ſolemn application of the covenant to a mans ſelf, according to his eſtate, to wit, of ſalvation through Chriſt, if he will beleeve and repent, and of judgement from Chriſt, if he continues in his ſinnes, and does not turn effectually to him, is the very onelyonly way whereby the Spirit uſually worketh conviction and ſincere converſion: But actual receiving of the Sacrament is a ſolemn means of ſuch an application. Ergo. I pray ſee what I have written in the fore-quoted places for the clearing of this, and compare it with the ſubſtance of what Mr. Blake hath put in ſince (and, it may be, more cautiouſly expreſt) in the ſaid place of his Cov: Seal. p. 204. & 240. which hath much confirm'd me; and I am perſwaded, when this matter is a litle more laid to heart, that many will not only be ready to confeſſe with him, (ibid. p. 240.) that there is more weight herein, than perſonally hath been acknowledged; but alſo, that though it be objected againſt my doctrine, that it ſtrengthens the hands of the wicked, Ez. 13.22. yet ſhall the godly find here a ſword put in their hands for the ſmiting the wicked, the ſecure, and hypocrite, up to the heart, with this Sacrament it ſelf; while they are but taught to apply what is held forth to them according to their condition.
Indeed I conceive a forbearance ſometimes for all this may be piouſly adviſed upon the account of prudence, and the ſolemnitie of the ordinance, to doe more good by it; (which I ſhall ſpeak ſomething of in the end, to yield what may be, to the ſatisfying the pious) but this will not come up to a neceſſity. All the diſciples of Chriſt were ignorant in the fundamentals of Chriſts death and reſurrection, and Judas was ſcandalous (See my Rejoynd. page 15.) yet Chriſt excluded neither of them at his Supper.
SECT. 6.
WEll now, let thus much be conſidered, that the Lord hath his Church in ſuch a latitude, to take into it whole Nations, regenerate and unregenerate; That the priviledge of ordinances belongs to this Church by way of diſtinction of it from the world▪ That every member thereof therefore hath a right unto the ordinances devolved on him from this Church-covenant-relation: While yet it is confeſſed, that there are ſome which through their incapacity of reaſon cannot uſe the ſame. The reſult of all will come to this, that there is no perſon of diſcretion within the Church can be debarred any publick ordinance, particularly the Sacrament, before he be turn'd out of the Church, with which, this priviledge of ordinances is convertible, and from it inſeparable. The Sacrament is the communion, or token of our communion in Jeſus Chriſt; But every Church-member in ſtatu quo, is in Chriſt, Jo. 15.2. and in ſome ſenſe partaker of his blood, ſo as to ſanctifie him, Heb. 10 29. and redeem him, 2 Pet. 2.1. and therefore his right is good to that which is in the ſame ſenſe the token hereof; So long as he is in communion, how can he be debarr'd the communion? while he is in the body, he may partake of the body; The Church is the body of Chriſt, and ſo long as we are one body, we are one bread, and partakers of that one bread.
I muſt yet follow moreover, if it cannot be proved that Jeſus Chriſt hath given order for the caſting out ſome from the Church, ſo far that for the preſent they are thereby cut off their external covenant-Church-relation, we muſt maintain a promiſcuous communion, in the largeſt way, as learned Muſculus, and others before Eraſtus have done; which yet I dare in no wiſe approve, ſo far as it oppoſes an Eccleſiaſtical government diſtinct from the Civil within the Church. It is my opinion therefore, that the Lord Jeſus hath ſet up a power of the Keyes under the Goſpel, diſtinct from the Magiſtrate, whereby he hath taken order, that if there be any perſons within the Church that are ſcandalous, and remain obſtinate after due admonition, that they are to be caſt out by the cenſure of Excommunication, which being ſuch as turns them out from the Church (Mat. 18.17. 1 Cor, 5.7, 13. Io. 9.22.3. Io. 10.) their right unto the ordinances muſt needs fall together with their Church-relation, and then they are juſtly to be kept from the Sacrament. So that I herein declare againſt an Eraſtian in-diſciplinary promiſcuous communion, though I ſtand for an orthodox diſciplinary Free-admiſſion.
And here I will advance this one argument againſt Eraſtus, which will ſtand, I ſuppoſe, when others will not; and it is this. If the Scripture does allow an excluſion of ſome from the Church in general, or from her ſocietie and communion in general, then may ſome be excluded from the Sacrament, becauſe the Sacrament is a part of that communion. But the Scripture does allow and command this, Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5. Purge out the old leven; Keep no company; Put away jrom among you ſuch a perſon; Let him be to thee as, an heathen. Therefore an excluſion from the Sacrament upon thoſe grounds as do reſpect it onelyonly as a part of Church-ſociety in general, is to be maintained againſt the Eraſtian by excommunication; as an excluſion upon other grounds, as particularly from the diſtinct nature of the ordinance is to be oppoſed againſt others that would have it without excommunication.